Photographer's lights

Philip Howells · October 6th, 2009, 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Polster

I think this is kind of a generalized statement.

People want stuff that looks good. Period.

And a lot of people hire professionals to get stuff that looks great. That is why they hired them.

In my view, I do not like dim, grainy, gained up, available light images. Still or video. (snipped)

With respect Tim it's being a professional that enables you to achieve quality effects without destroying the ambiance by bashing in huge lights. Silhouette effects, pools of light separated with total darkness are just two devices which can be used to capture a moody video without destroying the live ambiance. Years ago I lit a 400yd by 25 yd quayside (for a police drama) at dead of night with about eight 2K blondes, each forming a pool of light into the which action moved and then became a silhouette. Just let your creative instincts flow.

Tim Polster · October 6th, 2009, 02:57 PM

I don't disagree Philip, but are we still talking about wedding receptions?

Half the time you can barely get there on time much less have creative lighting.

Dana Salsbury · October 6th, 2009, 03:58 PM

Heh heh LOL! Oooooh how true is that!

Philip Howells · October 7th, 2009, 12:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Polster

I don't disagree Philip, but are we still talking about wedding receptions?

Half the time you can barely get there on time much less have creative lighting.

Tim, thank you for bringing my attention back! I wandered off topic too far, sorry. And as for the rush you couldn't be more correct.

Yang Wen · October 7th, 2009, 07:36 AM

I never understood why folks on either side tend to think so narrow minded when it comes to this "turf war" mentality

Both videog and photog are there for the client. Photo and Video have tremendously different requirement when it comes to lighting.

Video:
- needs continuous lighting.
- Motion blur can be acceptable(lower shutter speeds) in order to get the exposure we need.

Photo:
- Do not need continuous lighting but continuous lighting is being used more and more nowadays as an easy gateway to off-camera lighting since it offers realtime preview of what the light looks like and especially useful for inexperienced photogs who can't deal with adjusting flash on the fly.
- Motion blur is unacceptable in all but the few artsy shots where motion blur is desired. They need ALOT of light(relative to video) to freeze motion, hence the "bright" flash that you guys allude to. Holding a puny 3W LED light from above and shining it down on your subject is not nearly enough light to freeze dance floor motions.

So stop wasting time bitchin' about the other side and just recognize the fact that two artists are trying to capture the same event in two TOTALLY DIFFERENT way. Since it's always a one time shot at the event, it's imperative that the two sides agree on a working style so that proper compromise can be made to allow both to do the best job they can.

October 6th, 2009, 03:58 PM	#18
Dana Salsbury Major Player Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 859	Heh heh LOL! Oooooh how true is that! __________________ www.LegacyHDV.com Weddings \| Corporate \| HMC150s \| FCPX \| Encore \| Lion

October 6th, 2009, 02:57 PM	#17
Tim Polster Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Arlington, TX Posts: 2,231	I don't disagree Philip, but are we still talking about wedding receptions? Half the time you can barely get there on time much less have creative lighting.

October 7th, 2009, 07:36 AM	#20
Yang Wen Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 991	I never understood why folks on either side tend to think so narrow minded when it comes to this "turf war" mentality Both videog and photog are there for the client. Photo and Video have tremendously different requirement when it comes to lighting. Video: - needs continuous lighting. - Motion blur can be acceptable(lower shutter speeds) in order to get the exposure we need. Photo: - Do not need continuous lighting but continuous lighting is being used more and more nowadays as an easy gateway to off-camera lighting since it offers realtime preview of what the light looks like and especially useful for inexperienced photogs who can't deal with adjusting flash on the fly. - Motion blur is unacceptable in all but the few artsy shots where motion blur is desired. They need ALOT of light(relative to video) to freeze motion, hence the "bright" flash that you guys allude to. Holding a puny 3W LED light from above and shining it down on your subject is not nearly enough light to freeze dance floor motions. So stop wasting time bitchin' about the other side and just recognize the fact that two artists are trying to capture the same event in two TOTALLY DIFFERENT way. Since it's always a one time shot at the event, it's imperative that the two sides agree on a working style so that proper compromise can be made to allow both to do the best job they can.