 Rachel Larson |
Suggested Color Temp of Studio Lights I am looking to purchase continuous studio lighting. One of the many questions that I have: What is the suggested color temperature? Also, which is better, fluorescent or tungsten? Thanks!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
Daylight and the color temperature of that is about 5500 degrees Kelvin. You won't get that with incandescents (including tungsten). And the problem you'll run into, aside from the cooler temp of about 3600 degrees or so K., is that as they burn they change temp. which requires adjustment for as you shoot and the lamps age. Stick with strobes. Flourescents are a whole separate headache in themselves. Take it light. Mark
|
|
|
|
||
- Carlton Ward Contact Carlton Ward Carlton Ward's Gallery |
Hello Rachel, I use Alien Bee strobes (made by Paul C. Buff). I often adjust my raw images to around 6000 - 6500 Kelvin which is about where the "cloudy" white balance setting is on your camera. This is a nice warm tone that I tend to prefer for many types of images. John Siskin teaches a 4 week course (Understanding the Tools of Lighting) that I recommend to everyone with lighting questions. He covers a lot of ground for a 4 week course and you will save $$ either with some of his tips for putting together a lighting system inexpensively or preventing you from purchasing a light kit that will not suit your needs and ends up unused & taking up space in the corner of the room - like one I bought before taking his course. I do love my Alien Bees as they are made by aliens hiding out in Tennessee ;) You can start with a single light and build as you go or opt for some of the other multiple light kits they offer if you have the $$. Capturing light in a box, Carlton
|
|
|
|
||
|
Pete H |
Rachel, I will echo the above advice. As Mark correctly points out, they will change color temp with time. 2) Many digital camera's are indeed able to compensate for WB inaccuracies, however, they often suffer when attempting to correct too far. (i.e) from 4,000K to 5,600K. What ever you decide on, make sure you get enough power..as much as you can afford. There is nothing worse in a studio setting than NOT having enough light. I'll butress Carlton's comment by going one step further..in my opinion, it is better to have one quality strobe w/ a quality umbrella for maybe $300-$400 than a kit of 5 lights with stands and umbrellas for the same money.
Pete
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alan N. Marcus |
The color of light emitted by a light source can be defined using a temperature scale proposed by Lord William Kelvin 1824 – 1907 England. This scale starts at absolute zero (-273°C) thus no Kelvin value is ever expressed using a negative value. Consider a “black body” such as a hollowed-out cannon ball. If heated its interior radiates light which can be seen peering through a peep hole. The color of the radiated light relates well to temperature i.e. red hot or white hot or blue white etc. This scale is embraced by the metallurgy industry. Lamps with metal filaments correlate well, others judged. The lamp industry and the photo industry adopted this scale. Standard tungsten bulb 2600 K Alan Marcus (marginal technical gobbledygook)
|
|
|
|
||
|
Rachel Larson |
I was told the continuous lighting was better than strobes for the reasons of seeing the lighting arrangement results before taking the shot, and sync problems. Any thoughts?
|
|
|
|
||
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
That is true, you get to see what you get. Being better isn't something that's definite. They can work better for situations, but may not be better for you personally for a longer period of time. The person who told you that they are better may have been thinking in terms of learning how to use lights. So within that context, and to that person, they're better. But photographically, that's a narrow context, and you may not stay there for long. Continuous, the light you shoot by is the light you see. Adding movement is a creative aspect. Initial price may be lower than strobes. Strobes, you learn to anticipate what you'll get. More power in strobes. More versatility, I think. So many have modeling lights, some guess work is taken out. Both ways are usable to anyone starting out in photography or someone who's been doing it a while. Sun light is continuous, and so is a flash light. Either one can get you a picture you like. Strobes are the same way. You learn how to use them to get pictures you like.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alan N. Marcus |
In the early years, continuous tungsten lamps were the norm. Two types were produced. One 3400 K and one 3200 K. Additionally two types of “indoor” color film were produced color balances to affect an exact match. Tungsten systems are inexpensive to purchase, you can fabricate them using common supplies from the hardware store. Tungsten lamps are inefficient. The consumption of high amounts of electricity generates 6 ~ 8 % light and over 90% heat. The heat is radiated will overheat the subject, they become unconformable, soon they are soaked with perspiration. Not a good thing. Color films balanced for tungsten are available but not plentiful. Tungsten bulbs are quite compact thus they can be mounted in small fixtures. Additionally the small size causes the light to behave nicely thus reflectors and focusing lenses and diffusers work well with tungsten. They are best when it comes to pre-viewing light and shadow. Their main drawback is heat thus fire is a potential from both heat and electrical overload. Florescent lamps are more efficient, they use electricity sparingly. They work by generating UV light inside a tube coated on the inside with phosphorus. The phosphorus converts the UV to visible light. They are more efficient thus they generate far less heat. Makers blend of different phosphorus to adjust the color of the light. The problem is, the light outputted in interrupted as to its spectrum thus they never output a precise color temperature. Additionally as they age the character of the light changes. However, modern digitals can reasonably adjust (white balance) however; most would say the results are substandard as to color balance. Thus fluorescents main drawback is color balance. Often the tubs are large thus the use of reflectors and accessories to focus and restrict and diffuse are complicated. Banks of fluorescents are ideal when highly diffused lighting is desired “broad source”. Electronic flash has been the de facto standard for 50 + years. Their light output replicates daylight. Most films and digitals are optimized as to color balance for 5500 K (daylight). Quality electronic flash units designed for the studio feature “modeling lights”. These are built-in tungsten lamps that bath the subject with continuous light prior to the flash. Modeling lights quench during the flash, thus they allow the photographer to visually adjust direction and quality of the light. Modeling lights provide a pre-visualization so the studio photographer can envision the finished art during the set-up. You can choose continuous and likely you will manage to endure. If you pursue serious studio photography, likely you will decide that electronic flash is superior. Alan Marcus (marginal technical gobbledygook)
|
|
|
|
||
|
Rachel Larson |
Hey Alan, Do you have any suggestions as to lights I should look at. I've been shopping around online, and I am becoming a little overwhelmed. I'm open to suggestion. Thanks, Rachel
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alan N. Marcus |
I am not a pro photographer so what I have to say can be considered as a thimble full as compared to the Pacific Ocean. Color temperature, in the modern age of digital, should not be considered a major factor as most digitals cope well. That being said, don’t mix and match in the studio. Stated another way, your camera and your imagining software can’t deal with tungsten mixed with electronic flash or ambient lighting. If you are a beginner and you want to hone your portrait skills, you can get what you need at the hardware store. I am talking about a home-built tungsten lighting lash-up. You could invest $100 or so and learn a lot. You could set your camera to black-and-white mode and not concern yourself with color balance. You can shoot color with household lamps and allow the camera to auto color balance. In fact, my recommendation is: first the hardware store – learn a little – then buy three moderate priced studio electronic flash units. What you need to start: At the hardware store buy a strip extension plug set. These have a built-in thermal cut-off (circuit breaker). Always use a strip because they mitigate and electrical fire. Buy three metal pin-up lamps with porcelain sockets. Buy three R-40 150W flood lamps. You can substitute 150W PAR lamps (outdoor floods). You will need two stands to clamp the lamps on. Coat trees work just fine as does an old pole lamp stand. One lamp is mounted high shining down on your sitting subject. This lamp simulates mid-day sun. This lamp is called the main. It is generally positioned off to the side however its location is a variable based on the subject’s features. Its position is anywhere from right above the camera to far to the side. Fat face – main far to the side – normal face main midway – thin face – frontal lighting. One lamp at camera height near the camera lens. This is the fill. It fills shadows cast by the main as seen from the cameras prospective. It is subordinate to the main. To reduce its intensity it is located 1.4 times the distance main-to-subject. If main is 5 feet, fill is 7 feet. This math establishes a 3:1 lighting ratio. One lamp is placed behind the subject, aimed at the background. Its distance to the background controls the intensity of the background on the finished work. Proper placement results in white or gray or dark gray background. This may all seem confusing, nobody said it’s easy. Others on this site will advise as to more complex and lighting i.e. electronic flash with umbrella diffusers and the like. Meanwhile the hardware store stuff will really work and you can start your learning curve on the cheep. Alan Marcus (marginal technical gobbledygook)
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
You get what you pay for. Studio strobes in the range of 500-1000 w/s will run you about a buck per watt second for a quality lamphead. If you want cheap, you'll pay for it over and over in replacement lighting as your skills grow and you need to grow into your lights. Bowens, Traveler from Calumet, Alien Bees, used Norman packs and lampheads, Speedotron, are all good quality lights, made in the U.K. and the U.S.A. (until recently). They're all very serviceable to the extent they ever need to be serviced, which IMO is pretty rare from my own experience. You can also do a lot with a single portable flash head say a Nikon SB600 or an 800, a Quantum with a good battery pack, or something similar including a Vivitar 285HV (used) and a power pack and an umbrella or light modifier for portraits. Mounted on a lightstand away from the camera and use a fill card to bounce light around. In other words, if you get a small, portable unit, learn to light with it, and THEN later on, you can get a studio light (and system to grow into) and keep using both. Hot lights ain't the answer really, especially because products and people tend to melt under them. Now, does anyone know where I can get a refill on my flash powder? Alan??? Anyone?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
Here's a recent link Rachel, that basically covers what I think you're trying to figure out. M.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alan N. Marcus |
Flash power, discontinued long ago, was made using a mixture of powered magnesium plus an oxidizing agent. Flash ribbon replaced it then the flash bulb. A tray was used to hold the flash material. It was held overhead. The mixture was explosive, it was setoff with a gunpowder cap. My old boss in the 50’s still had, hanging on a coat rack, an old duster, covered with burn holes from the sparks. He taught me to make glass plates and lots more beside. I worked after school. Old photographers never die, they just loose their developer. Alan Marcus
|
|
|
|
||
|
Rachel Larson |
Hey Mark, What was that link that you suggested? Thanks, Rachel
|
|
|
|
||
|
John H. Siskin |
Hi Rachel, Many of my students have purchased the Alien Bees, particularly the B1600. They are a good value, a little cheaper than a buck a watt-second. www.alienbees.com Ansel Adams used to talk and write about pre-visualization - the process of looking at something out there and deciding how you want the finished image to look. That process is very important in photography; it means that the photographer has creative control of the image. Without pre-visualization, most of what you do is taking pictures, but with pre-visualization, you will soon be making pictures. Continuous light allows the photographer to use the same process used in taking pictures: you shoot what you like. While I would say that any shot where you set-up the light is a made photograph, continuous light requires less pre-visualization. Strobes require you to see the light in your mind first, and then create the light for the subject. They depend on a talent for pre-visualization. I also refer to this as beginning your shot in the studio in your mind, examining what you can do there first, and then you move lights. Clearly, strobes require more experimentation and practice. Others in this discussion have already discussed the advantages of strobes, but I would like to add one more. Strobes are instantaneous light. The duration of a strobe is generally around 1/1000th of a second. As a result, you do not need a tripod, and you do not need to worry about your subject moving. If you work with continuous lights, whether they are fluorescent or quartz, you will often find yourself needing to work at a shutter speed longer than 1/60th of a second. Which can cause a lack of sharpness due to movement. Regarding your original question about color temperature. Years ago, I used to do a lot of very critical color work. One of the problems I had was that some of the material I shot had optical brighteners. These work like the phosphors in fluorescent tubes that Alan mentioned earlier. They absorb ultraviolet light that we can’t see and emit light in the visible spectrum that we do see. The strobes I had back then had a higher color temperature and a high UV yield. This caused color shifts in my subjects as the UV changed the color balance when it hit the optical brighteners. You could not filter this out at the lens, since the light was shifted to the visible spectrum by the optical brighteners at the subject. As a result I got strobes with UV covers and a color temperature of 5000ºK, and have used these warmer lights ever since. Most modern strobes do not have this problem, but I get strobes that match the balance I’ve been using. Thanks, John
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
OOPs. Sorry Rachel. It's http://www.betterphoto.com/forms/QnAdetail.php?threadID=32829 Mark
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||