I'm trying also trying to figure out how to get the film look and I know lighting is important. Here a way to get great lighting under $40. Check it...

Grab three of those clip on lamps (you can buy them from most hardward stores for about 5 - 10 bucks. Then grab one 500 photoflood light bulb (the blue bulbs, you know, they're light small suns) and two 250 bulbs from any camera or video store and you're all set. Now you can arrange these however you want. It's good lightling.

-Vinson

those $5-10 clip on's are NOT rated for 500w lights and i don't think they are even rated for 250w ?? IMO using 500w lights in these clips on's are a hazard. use the rated watts for the sockets ... safty is always 1st ...

I recently heard a talk by George Kuchar on the subject of cheap lighting...and he recommended exactly what vinson was saying...my initial thought was "how the hell can a 100w capacity clamp lamp handle a 500w photo flood?"

I also recall Robert Rodriguez using the 250w photo floods on Mariachi...just screwing them into existing sockets or clamp lamps...

So far neither of the aforementioned filmmakers has reported lighting anything on fire that way...but as don says, safety first...proceed carefully ;)

<<<-- Originally posted by Casey Visco : I recently heard a talk by George Kuchar on the subject of cheap lighting...and he recommended exactly what vinson was saying...my initial thought was "how the hell can a 100w capacity clamp lamp handle a 500w photo flood?"

I also recall Robert Rodriguez using the 250w photo floods on Mariachi...just screwing them into existing sockets or clamp lamps...

So far neither of the aforementioned filmmakers has reported lighting anything on fire that way...but as don says, safety first...proceed carefully ;) -->>>

I too got the idea from Rodriguez. All I know is we had a 500 and two 250s going and nothing burned up or anything thing like that. We bounced them off the white ceiling and everything seemed to work. We lit up the bedroom like it was 12 noon at 8:00pm. Now I have to say though the metal does get hot just like using a prolight so don't touch without the glove.

-Vinson

I found clamp on halogen lights for $12 at Lowes with an extra bulb and they are 250 watt. The only problem was the cage has a bar directly in front of the bulb that throws a shadow, so this week, I will be removing the horizontal bar. They seem to throw good light, but I am now thinking about the 500 watt portable lights, they are little bigger and don;t clamp, so I may get opne of those to flood form the direction of the camera dn use the 2 other 250 watt lights to throw light form the sides. We'll see how that works...

Here is an alternative, building on what was said above,

1. Buy 2 - - 250 Watt Halogen Worklights. (appr. 10.00 each)

2. Buy 1 - - 500 Watt Halogen Worklights. (appr. 15.00 each) Or photoflood (you'll need housing if you get the photoflood)

3. Buy 2(+1 if your dealing with the halogen) House Dimmer Switches, that click off, not push on push off (unless you can secure the switch).

4. Remove the cages.

5. Subsitute the original switches on the lights with your newly acquired dimmers. Secure with heavy duty zip fasteners.

6. Rock N Roll... Buy a pain of heavy duty utility gloves. Those suckers get hot. BE CAREFUL and TELL your actors to be mindful.

Hope this helped.

Cheers,

Derrick

What kind of light do these generate? Is it that sort of greenish tinted light (that's what I think of when I think of halogen) or is that pure white light like a tota-light?

I'd also go and get proper CT bulbs for them so that you know the colour temperature. One thing also mentioned by someone else on a similar thread is that you can forget the dimmers. Just switch intensity's of lights and/or move them around. Dimmers will change the colour temperature and you'll have to white balance again. Anyone had experience with this, I haven't as I'm juts going to use swap in and out different wattage lights (Not bulbs ;))

Halogens adjusted to the lowest setting glow an yellow-orange, as you progressively add more juice the color changes from an yellow-orange to a slightly yellow-white. At least through my camera... It works very well for what I am doing and, but I white balance everytime I change the lights.

Flourescent lights, I think burn the green color, makes skin tones look drawn.

Cheers!

They are definately not a Totowa light... An improvisation light...

I have some cheap work lights that I use for lighting. Halogen lights that you can buy at Home Depot. It was mentioned that one should get CT (color temp) lights for these. I've never seen such a thing. Are they commonly available? Any sources for 500W CT halogen lights to fit these commonly found work lights?

Are the bulbs used in Omni and Tota lights compatible with these work lights?

The work lights are sure a bargain -- for $60 a pop, I bought two, 2-light kits with a very heavy tripod stand. The lights are all 500W, so I can get 500 or 1000 from two directions. Including extension cords and some supplies to make scrim holders and the like, my outlay for these cheapo light "kits" ended up at about $210.

But now I'm wondering if I shouldn't have invested that money toward a pro kit. I'm having terrible trouble building the accessories. For example, my mounts for scrims and diffusers, made out of PVC water pipe, are cumbersome, inflexible, and difficult to attach to the stands. Because the work lights aren't designed for studio work, they don't conform to any of the standard sizing present in pro lighting stands, clamps, and holders. When I tried to configure some pro equipment to work with my lights, the awkward combination of parts drove the price out of reason. Worse, this has all been an incredible waste of time.

Now I'm eyeing kits like the Smith-Victor K77, a 2200W, 3-light system (B&H $600) or the SV K70 1800W kit, a 3-light system with many accessories (B&H $650).

After having gone through all this hassle, $600 doesn't seem all that expensive any more.

THis is excellent advice. With some blackwrap , dugalteen and bounce cards, I can light a scene like a pro with those cheap halogen work lights and aluminum photofloods.


Don't forget a white umbrella. Bouncing the halogen into it can make a spectacular soft light source - if it doesn't catch on fire!

John says the things I want to hear. What is dugalteen? For bounce cards, can you just use foam core or matte board or whatever it's called, possibly with aluminum foil wrapped around?

Oops.. i meant to say Duvetyne!

http://shop.store.yahoo.com/cinemasupplies/duv54rolx50y.html

for example.

Does anyone know what the color temperature of these work lights is? Even roughly? Can we assume that the bulbs are made well enough that the CT is the same buld to bulb?

The color temps of the work lights are between 2900 and 3100 K. You can spend a few bucks more on Ushio or GE and be sure of the color temps.
Generally the closer to 3200K you get the shorter the bulb life. Using a dimmer reduces the color temp also.

http://catalog.gelighting.com/

http://www.ushio.com/

It's been a very productive week since I first posted in this thread because I've become quite a bit more educated. The tips in Photon Management have been excellent and informative.

I'd especially like to thank Bryan Beasleigh, with whom I've had a lively and informative off-line discussion, and Wayne Orr, for his diligent study of the JTL Everlight Kit.

Nonetheless, I'm still stalled. I seem to have three choices.

1) From comments here and my brother: Suck it up and make the cheapo worklights work! A little bit of foamcore here and black cloth there and I should be okay. (My brother adds, lovingly of course, "Don't be so lazy.")

2) From Bryan: Expand the worklights by buying a good softbox setup as the key light. He has recommended a Photoflex Silverdome on a Lowel Tota light. The worklights would be used for fill and back light as needed. I also have an old 600W quartz light, manufacturer unknown, that I can use, reducing my need for worklights to one stand instead of two.

3) From me: Buy a cheapo kit ala the Smith-Victor K70 or the JTL Everlight.

My lighting requirements are pretty simple -- static set with waist up or head shots, computer product shots, and hands demoing things shots. My studio requirements are a bit tighter. My studio is my basement, so I must strike the lighting when a shooting session is complete. My quarters are not spacious, so compact storage is helpful.

So here is how I currently view the three options:

1) I've tried several cheapo methods of controlling the light from the worklights. The results are okay, not great, but the mechanical aspects remain a problem. The mounts I made are cumbersome and difficult to store; the same goes for the "scrims" I created. In addition, the work lights don't store well. If I break them down, assembly is time-consuming. I have considered buying pro mounting equipment, but buying the parts individually puts me in the "good money after bad" category, another $200 or so.

2) From all I've read, there's no doubt that the Photoflex softbox and Total light will give a great result. But the package costs $380 from B&H, not including storage (I have a stand). From my budget el cheapo point of view, this is a lot for one light.

3) With either the K70 or Everlight kit, I get three sources, stands, and light control. The kits seem quick to set up and strike. Storage is compact. I can get rid of the space-hogging work lights and their stands. I can get the K70 for $660 and the Everlight for $500. $660 is more than I want to spend but not out of the question.

You will conclude that I'm settled on 3) and you're right. Unfortunately, I have heard nothing but complaints about Smith-Victor equipment so far and Wayne Orr is telling a cautionary tale regarding the Everlight kit.

Your opinions, even ridicule and smacks up side the head, will be most appreciated.

"Wayne Orr is telling a cautionary tale regarding the Everlight kit."

I would like to hear more about this, being on a tight budget myself.

Will-
I would just like to recommend that you first get your hands on a Lowell Tot light before you buy one.

Having seen all of the ads, I shopped around and bought the VIP go kit. I was happy at first, but then I started using them. The knobs are flimsy plastic, which prevents you from cranking them too much. When you use an umbrella, the light will drop after a few uses. Also, the stands are rather flimsy, and definately need sandbags. After spending roughly $800 on this kit, I feel I would have been better off buying some $20 worklights with stands from Sears. I could have used the rest of the money on other things.

The biggest problem, is actually finding these items so that you can scrutinize the quality before you bite the bullet. Around here, the closest shops I could find were photo supply stores. They didn't have any Pro video equipment, nor did they have a clue about this field. I had to mail order everything, which meant crossing my fingers and hoping I didn't buy junk.

Will, I think the Everlight kit will work just fine for the applications you indicated. For shooting interviews, one light can be your key, a second can be a 3/4 back light, and the third can be a fill for the entire scene, or just a stand-by. The use of bounce cards opposite the key side will provide nice soft fill also.

The soft boxes are excellent for the product shots you mention. The possible lighting set ups for this are numerous. I will be happy to give you suggestions for specific shots, if you like.

What would be very cool, would be the addition of a LTM Pepper light in the 350 watt area. I believe these are available for around $250.00. This could give you a more "punchy" light source, since it is a fresnel. The combination of soft light and harder light can work wonders, but it is not absolutely necessary. You will have plenty to learn with the three soft lights. And don't always try to use all three at once. Sometimes one or two lights and a bounce card is sufficient.

Thanks to Keith for pointing out just a few of the problems with Lowell lights. I cannot advise you against their low end product strongly enough. The end.

In regards to the "problem" with the Everlight Kit. It appears that the original information from the company regarding the use of high wattage bulbs is incorrect. The Kit ships with 500 watt bulbs, that will be very adequate for the uses that Will has indicated. They will not work with 1000 watt bulbs, as advertised, and you will not be able to locate the lower wattage bulbs below 500 watt that the advertising shows. They simply are not made in those wattages. So, you basically are left with the 500 watt bulbs that ship with the kit. Not a serious problem. If you need to lower the wattage, you can add a sheet of diffusion, such as 216, over the supplied diffusion material. This works great. Also, be aware that manufacturers, such as Roscoe, sell their gel material in 24x20 sheets that will work well in the 24x24 Everlight soft boxes. Other manufacturers soft boxes are 24x32, which requires using gel material from rolls, which gets very expensive.

The Everlight Kit from JTL is a three light soft box kit that comes with wonderful air cushion stands and bulbs in its own nylon carry case. It is not the rugged gear that Chimera and Photoflex make, and will require a bit more care on your part. But the light output is just as good, since a soft box is a soft box. And for $500 (or less) it is a good buy for an entry level kit that will allow very professional results, and won't burn your fingers. I will get out a more detailed review in the near future.

the jtl lights look great for the price and at some point I may pick them up, but until some of this equipment begins to pay for itself or presents further opporunities for same, I'm looking to find a way to diffuse my hot work lights. These are standard work lights with the cage that I'll be removing. The set I currently have uses two 500w lights on a single stand. I'd like to connect a diffuser plate out in front of the lights. Any thoughts on appropriate materials that won't melt?

Wayne, thanks for the tip about LTM lights. I hadn't bumped into them before. A 300W Pepper is $210 at B&H plus $25 for the lamp, so your pricing is right on target.

I do have several other quartz lights that I can put into service. I have a 20-year old light of undetermined origin that has an acceptable stand, a 6" aluminum reflector, a good set of black barn doors, and a DYH 600W bulb. It provides pretty hard light but obviously will not focus like the Pepper. I also have two 150W Asahi Research Corporation (ARC) lights intended for on-cam use, one of my better eBay purchases. These are variable intensity. I thought they might be useful as backlights, especially to backlight a head.

Despite all the lighting experience I got spending 4 years on a stage crew for summer stock theatre in the '60s, I really don't know what effect one gets from a fresnel. Why does it deliver "punch?"

"Despite all the lighting experience I got spending 4 years on a stage crew for summer stock theatre in the '60s, I really don't know what effect one gets from a fresnel. Why does it deliver "punch?"

Will, if you have two lights of equal wattage, say 500 watts, and one is a fresnel, you will find the fresnel lamp delivers more footcandles to the subject, because the glass lens focuses the light on the subject, whereas the non-fresnel (or, "open faced") light is spraying light everywhere. So we say the fresnel is more effecient. Additionally, a quality fresnel will offer a "flood to spot" control on the fixture to pinpoint the light even more. Besides providing more light where we want it, the fresnel will help to keep the light from spraying everywhere. This also means that a fresnel will allow us to light from farther away from the subject, which is very important in drama, where we need wider shots. BTW, fresnel is pronounced fre-nell. The "s" is silent.

In your stage experience, you probably worked with a lot of ellipsoidel lamps, which is another type of fresnel that is an extremely focused beam, similar to a spot light, but at much lower intensity. Ellipsoidel lights are also used to project patterns, on walls, floors, or just about anywhere.

So why a fresnel and not just another soft box? If you use a soft box for a backlight or 3/4 backlight, you will get a nic soft effect. Sometimes it is almost too soft. Go to a fresnel, and you can create something a bit harder with a sharper edge that will really separate your subject from the background. Also the narrower beam from the fresnel will be easier to keep from hitting the lens and causing flare.

Bud:

That's exactly the point -- it's not all that easy to make something.

My first effort was a frame made of PVC water pipe, easy to work with and cheap (I think I spent $20 on everything, enough to make frames for two stands). The frame was about 40"x24" to cover the two lights on each stand. I built the frame with Ts so I could build a stand-off to get the frame out in front of the stand, and this is where I've had trouble. The PVC is round, the stand is round, and it's difficult to hook the two together. I'd hoped to use some strong plastic clamps, but the whole thing has collapsed several times.

I used 2'x4' diffusers for suspended ceiling light fixtures as one kind of diffuser; these cost $3 each and soften well without tremendous loss of light. I also tried old t-shirts (white), which work quite well but lose a lot of light, even with one layer.

My second idea was copper tubing. 1/4" copper, like might be used for an icemaker connection, is pretty light. It can be bent into any shape, so it would be easy to make 4 frames 12" or 16" square. It's strong enough to hold gels or scrims or t-shirts or even the ceiling diffusers. It's easy enough to solder. But I'd still be faced with the problem of getting the stand-off to connect to the stand or light. Just last weekend I spent an hour at Lowes trying to conjure something up, but left frustrated.

The last alternative was building these little copper frames but mounting them on their own stand. But that means I'd need the stands! Good money after bad...

I've always been inventive about things like this and I'm reasonably handy. Nonetheless, I admit that my attempts so far have been pretty feeble and not very clever. I'm out of time, which is why I'm back to thinking about buying rather than building.

Thanks, Wayne, good explanation. Oh, by the way, I did remember how to pronounce fresnell. I am forgetting lots of other things, though.

Some one commented that the Lowel v light was crap. Yes it is. I told Will that the Tota was a sturdy little light that would fold down around itself and it will. For the money the lights a good buy. The Tota , photoflex medium kit, speed ring and bogan 3086 stand is the way to fly.

He could make do with what he has and eventually add a prolight, an arri 300 watt fresnel , a collapsable reflector, one piece at a time.

If some one wants to knit a softbox and build gear from pipe and two by fours great. Glue on a set of mouse ears and away we go.

That's my op[inion and I'm entitled to it.

1. Walter Graff is a lighting god. (His articles are extremely interesting and very worthwhile reading. Many thanks to Jay Gladwell for the link in the "Back Lighting" thread.)

2. I've yet to hear a bad word about the Lowel Tota light, here or elsewhere.

3. Entry-level Lowel kits tend to skimp on things like stands, yet are a bit pricey. Not recommended.

4. Anything PhotoFlex gets high marks.

5. Arri is top-flight.

6. A softbox works well as a key light.

7. I can get good to excellent results using almost any equipment if I learn how to light. (Also a Walter Graff maxim -- "Although the more expensive hammers have their appeal, in the end the person who's using the hammer, not the hammer itself, is going to determine how well a project turns out.")

Will wrote: "5. Arri is top-flight."

You left off the part about Arri being top dollar, too! ;o)

That's because every time I think about Arri pricing, I faint. Please try not to mention it again.

So you "go out like a light." Interesting! Wonder what Dr. Freud would have to say about that?

<<<-- Originally posted by Will Fastie

2. I've yet to hear a bad word about the Lowel Tota light, here or elsewhere.

7. I can get good to excellent results using almost any equipment if I learn how to light. (Also a Walter Graff maxim -- "Although the more expensive hammers have their appeal, in the end the person who's using the hammer, not the hammer itself, is going to determine how well a project turns out.") -->>>

2. OK. Just to be ornery. Here is a bad word about Tota Lights. "Ouch." Totas are Lowell's original Home Depot work light: a bare bulb, usually a 1K, in a mediocre fixture that simply blasts light everywhere. This will work fine in a soft box, except you are left with the other Lowell shortcomings.

Here is a short list of bad experiences with Lowell gear:

Lowell uses a funky method for keeping the light where you aim it, so, eventually you find the lights "go to sleep" on you. That is, they start tipping down on their own, especially with additional weight from an umbrella or soft box.

Lowell stands from their kits are so rickety they fall over easily, especially with additional weight from an umbrella or soft box.

They burn your fingers!!!

The cheesy barn doors that attach to the Omni lights eventually will fall off the head.

Eventually the barn doors themselves become loose and the blades start slipping out of position.

The spot/flood adjustment on the Omni is a joke, compared to a real fresnel.

Eventually the bulb in the Omni will come loose and short out on you just when you need it.

They burn your fingers!!!

I'm sure others can add to this list. On the plus side, they are cheap. The end. These are my opinions, based on experience, you are welcome to yours.

7. Walter Graff's comment about tools is absolutely correct. But I notice he is not using any cheap tools in the photos where you can see his kit. No Lowell lights in evidence. It's a lot easier to concentrate on the craft when you don't have to worry about your tools.

Will, I lost your e-mail address. Send me a message wayorr@hotmail.com. And anyone else is welcome to send me a message also.

I own Lowel Omni's and Tota lights as well as Arri fresnels. Fundamentally, it is a mistake to lead people to an A-B comparison of the two. They have very different priorities for design and functional objectives. There are also some misstatements in Wayne's post which I'd like to correct.

The Lowel lights discussed here are designed for extreme lightweight, compact portability, something important for the typical 1-man crew found with many amateur video projects. A good 3-light Lowel kit with stands, filter frames, barndoors, etc. will generally weigh in th 20-30 lb range. A comparable Arri or Mole-Richardson fresnel kit will easily top 50-60 lbs.

2. OK. Just to be ornery. Here is a bad word about Tota Lights. "Ouch." Totas are Lowell's original Home Depot work light: a bare bulb, usually a 1K, in a mediocre fixture that simply blasts light everywhere. This will work fine in a soft box, except you are left with the other Lowell shortcomings.Lowel's Tota is, indeed, an open-faced light which accepts double-ended tungsten lamps. It does not use "1K" lamps; in fact it only accepts lamps up to 750w.

Lowell uses a funky method for keeping the light where you aim it, so, eventually you find the lights "go to sleep" on you. That is, they start tipping down on their own, especially with additional weight from an umbrella or soft box.I've never had one "go to sleep"; on the contrary, as it heats up I sometimes find it a bit harder to rotate. But I agree that the Omni really needs a better rotational tension adjustment that does not require needle-nose pliers.

Lowell stands from their kits are so rickety they fall over easily, especially with additional weight from an umbrella or soft box.Lowel's kit stands are designed to be light-weight and are more than adequate for the Omni and Tota. All light stands will become top-heavy with accessories added. That's why you generally see sandbags used as counterweight ballasts on most sets. If you plan to use a softbox I recommend that you invest in a heavier light stand, such as one from Manfrotto, that has a wider leg radius.

They burn your fingers!!!All tungsten lights get very hot. But actually, I'm much less prone to be burned by the Lowels than by the Arris. Lowel Omni lights have a flip-down handle which makes adjustment, and even holding, very comfortable. Arris have no such facility and the only cool spot on those lights is the small focus adjustment knob. That's why grips wear leather gloves.

The cheesy barn doors that attach to the Omni lights eventually will fall off the head. I've not had that happen to me in 2 years. Actually, the Omni barn doors have a more flexible design than Arri's, with 2-part side wings that can act as extended flags.

Eventually the barn doors themselves become loose and the blades start slipping out of position.Also, I've not had that happen to me.

The spot/flood adjustment on the Omni is a joke, compared to a real fresnel.It's not a "joke"; it's just not a fresnel. The spot/flood adjustment on the (open-face) Omni does have limited abilities. It repositions the the lamp with respect to the reflector to slightly narrow or broaden the beam. In contrast, a fresnel repositions the lamp/reflector assembly with respect to the fresnel lens to vary beam width. Other manufacturer's open-faced lights either offer no beam adjustment or the same as Lowel's Omnis.

Eventually the bulb in the Omni will come loose and short out on you just when you need it.Never happened to me. The basic ceramic socket on the Omni is no different that any other such light I've used. I've long suspected that there's one factory in China that supplies the whole world. But I do wish that Omni's has an easier lamp insertion/removal design. It takes patience and finesse to avoid breaking the lamp.

In the end, how you use lights is infinitely more important than what lights you use. A good Lowel 3-light kit will serve most people very well. Forgoing the use of lighting until you can afford that $3,000 kit is a bad mistake that limits your exploration of videography. Light is the paint of the medium. Get the best lights that fit your budget and your honest needs. Getting a wonderful set of fresnels that are too heavy to schlep on 1-man-shoots or too powerful to use on many of your sets is not a good solution.

One last suggestion. B&H Photo has just published their first professional Lighting Catalog. If you don't have one, call them to order it (they might charge you $10). It provides the largest collection of lighting equipment information I've ever seen and will be extremely instructive to most folks shopping for lighting.

Wayne:

Lowel info noted. Thanks. As an aside, I went to the DV show in NY last month and stopped at the Lowel booth for a visit. Unfortunately, my mission at the show focused me elsewhere and I didn't explore the equipment like I should have, thinking I wasn't buying anyway. But here's what I did note -- the booth pitch was all about HOW to light, not what to use, despite the equipment being in evidence. That's all I know about Lowel.

Mr. Graff looks like he has serious stuff in his kit, but he mentions the use of hardware store equipment many times. The 20W flourescents are one example. In one of the other articles, he mentions trips to the hardware store to solve several problems. So I think he practices what he preaches. At the same time, he's on the move a lot a clearly has invested in stuff that will last. His real point in the quote is that I should know something about lighting and worry less about the lights.

In looking through Graff's articles, I haven't yet seen a softbox.

Ken:

You know, I appreciate the reminder about the B&H pro catalog. I've had it for months and used it to find some parts I needed, and of course I browsed it. But I'll haul it back out to browse in the light of the things I've learned in the last month.

I got the catalog for free, if free means dropping $4 grand at B&H last year. It just showed up in my mailbox, along with a dirty look from the mailman. It's huge.

Indeed, B&H is sending the catalog free to many customers; I received it, too. I've no idea what their criteria is.

Two other points about Lowel worth making.

1. Lowel's primary objective with the Omni, Total, V-light, andd many of their other products is to make good lighting more financially-accessible and logistically practical for amatuer videographers and photographers. Professional crews with big budgets will rent truckloads of gear or be able to afford to own a staple of good lights. They also do not look down their nose at the amatuer. I shorted an Omni (my fault) and Lowel treated me as if I was Spielberg. They turned-around the repair (no charge) within 5 business days. Very impressive service.

2. The Omni and Total can be used with 12v (battery) power sources (using different lamps in the lights, of course). That's not true of the Arri fresnels which would require other power management equipment.

Have fun!

Speaking of financially accessible, does no one use Smith-Victor? Except for the JTL Everlight kit, the SV stuff seems to give a pretty big bang for the buck. I'm just surprised that I'm the only one who has ever mentioned SV in these forums, especially in this "El cheapo" thread.

I've called my 30-year-old SV lamp junky, but that's mostly the head. The 2-section stand, while not as compact or light as today's models, seems strong and serviceable to me.

I suppose I could take DVi's member's silence on SV in these forums as a strong, negative indication. I just wish I could get something concrete on SV, especially because it's so hard to find the equipment to look at. Ah, well, maybe the thread I started will catch a fish.

Ken-
I like you, and respect your comments and experience. However, I still have to stand by the prior comments made about Lowell light kits. They do tend to dip, and the stands are extremely flimsy, even without the extra stuff. The barn doors are also a little flimsy, but serviceable.

It is a nice setup for under $1,000- but if it is too wimpy to be practicle, what good is it? Again, it comes down to the same old song and dance... If you didn't spend at least $x,xxx on it, it is junk. I spend $300 on a Bogen head and tripod. It sucked. Then everyone says " The GOOD Bogens are at least $1,000". The same goes for the Lowell kits.

It isn't a bad deal, unless you expect professional quality. In that case, you need to spend the big money and buy Pro equipment. If you don't have several grand to spend, you might as well buy from Walmart and Home Depot, make do, and save a butt-load of money.

OK. Seems there is a "War of the Words" starting with Ken Tanaka, who has accused me of making "misstatements" with regards to Lowell lights. The only real misstatement I made was with regard to the wattage of the Tota light. Lowell says this light can be used with wattages up to 800 watts, not the 750 watt that Ken indicated in bold. So, we are both incorrect. As a practical matter, I have seen Totas with 1000 watt bulbs in them, but obviously this is beyond their rating and should not be used. OK?

My additional comments were all clearly stated as my opinions based on experience. Ken Tanaka may have different experiences, but that does not make them facts either.

"forgoing lighting until you can afford a $3000.00 lighting kit" was never my suggestion. I have always attempted to lead people to what in my opinion represented the best value for dollar, while investing in equipment that would provide years of service, at a professional level. I do not believe it makes good sense to buy low end "professional" gear, that still costs considerable cash, that will not perform as expected over time. That is my opinion of the low end Lowell products. Certainly, a Lowell Tota light in a Photoflex soft box with a speed ring, with a Manfrotto stand will make an excellent piece of gear. But, at a cost of over $400.00. The JTL Everlight Kit will provide 3-500 watt soft boxes in a nylon carry case for just under $500.00, with the caveats that I mentioned. There is nothing in the Lowell kit line for this price that I would come close to recommending, based on my rather extensive experience.

Sure, you can create "home made" gear for less money, but to the novice who has next to zero lighting experience, it is rather difficult to build a wheel, if you don't know what a wheel is supposed to do. But hey. To each his own.

BTW, Ken, "grips" don't focus the lights, the lighting crew does. The grips set the flags and cutters and such.

Ken said:
-----
Arris have no such facility and the only cool spot on those lights is the small focus adjustment knob. That's why grips wear leather gloves.
------
Just to clear it. Grips wear gloves not to touch the cool part but to touch the hot. therefore they dont focus the light. I know sometimes when there is alot to read I always read things the wrong way. I guess it is a bad habbit. Anyways thank you all for the good information. I really dont know squat about lights and this has help to dip my interests.


Rob:D

There are a lot of theories as to what level of gear to buy.
There are only two absolute facts:
1) Not everyone has the same needs.
2) You get what you pay for.

Pretty well everything Ken said was right on.

If everyone had the same requirements and the same expectations kits would be a no brainer.

I still think that the newbie is better off building a kit based on his perception of need as it happens.

In my opinion the kit stand is too light for a tota and softbox so I bought the heavier manfrotto. The master 04 stands won't win prizes for being small and compact but they'll hold a softbox and light like the Rock of Gibaralter . I'm happy, that's all that matters.

For some one that has to lug his kit through airports and accross country, lighter is better. A little more care has to be taken in the set up and balancing. A few sandbags and everything is fine.

The lowel won't win any prizes for beauty but it's functinality is well theought out. It can be serviced easily and parts are abundant. you also don't need a second mortgage to buy it.

I do have arri fresnels and while they are certainly prettier they cost a fair bit more.

Keith (and All),

I really did not mean to sound like a spokesperson for Lowel. I like their lights' flexibility and lightness.

But, as my profile notes, my experiences with their gear are those of a hobbyist, not a professional. I can certainly see how Omnis, et.al. might not withstand daily heavy crew use for long. My intention was to simply share my personal experiences with, and knowledge of, this equipment.

So for those reading this thread and considering lighting alternatives, please take my remarks for whatever they may be worth, if anything, to your search. As I said earlier, the most important thing is that you are thoughtful about the aspect of lighting in your shooting. Experiment with anything financially or logistically available to you.

Today I continued my education in lighting equipment by visiting all stores in my neck of the woods that sell any continuous lighting. This gave me the ability to do a little touching and feeling. I thought I would share my impressions. Maybe I should call this my mediocre adventure; Baltimore is not exactly on the cutting edge of video and my options were few.

Store #1: My first look at a piece of contemporary SV gear, the only continuous lighting sold by the store. They only stock the Smith-Victor 710 focusing head. Not beautiful, not terribly rugged, but not as cheap as I had been led to believe. The store sells these for still work and could not speak to video. Store #1 is the best known and most loved camera store in Baltimore.

Store #2: Except for used equipment, this store only stocks Lowel and only the Tota light (no stands, lighting control, etc.). They rent the Totas and sometimes sell a few. The store personnel knew very little about continuous lighting and admitted it. The fact that the Tota is rented says something about reliability, but I was not particularly impressed. The main lamp housing seemed sturdy, but the rest of the unit seemed flimsy.

Store #3: Lots of lighting here, mostly strobes, but more continuous equipment than the other two put together. On display, nothing but SP Studio Systems including strobes, floods, and quarts. The quartz offering was a 2x600W kit (B&H item SPFLKQ2), $300 for the pair with stands and lamps. El cheapo applies; these lamp heads are really flimsy, open face with 2 thin barn doors. The salesman offered to order Arri or Photoflex, but couldn't make any specific recommendation when asked. Strangely enough, I thought this the best photo store of the three.

The only opinion I can draw from today's 70-mile drive is that Smith-Victor equipment may deserve more respect.

Respectfully submitted,
Will

Will,
Thank you for your follow-up. You would think that a city the size of Baltimore would have more to offer, eh? You would certainly think that a city the Chicago has alot to offer. But it doesn't.

If you're so inclined (which I certainly would not be after a 70 mile multi-hour quest) you might consider looking at a local equipment rental shop. They often have the most professional equipment and the best knowledge of its capabilities and use. Since they're in the rental business they will often show you the equipment (if it's on-hand) and you can sometimes see how well it withstands hard use.

Just a thought. Good luck on yor ongoing quest.

Store #2 does rentals. There are no other rental places close; I'd have to expand my visits to DC.

I have decided to buy the JTL Everlight kit. It's in short supply, I had to pay list, and it will take a week to get it. I will report on my experience with the kit in the "JTL Everlight Kit" thread.

Have any of you guys heard of rigging a regular flourescent light to be used handheld? Someone told me about this. I'm too looking for cheap lighting solutions. I've heard about the plastic white globes to be used as Chinese lanterns, but what goes inside?

Josh, if you go back a page in Photon Management you will find a thread entitled Chinese Lantern that will offer you some suggestions. Basically, you can put anything in the Chinese Lantern that won't cause a fire. Certainly you can use 150 watt with care.

Josh... see also Constructing a Simple, Reusable Chinese Lantern (http://www.dvinfo.net/articles/lighting/clantern1.php) on the dvinfo.net main site.