DSLR on camera light

[Jacques E. Bouchard]

Originally Posted by Stephen J. Williams

I agree that going off camera is the better option. I've been a one man show until recently and with a very little amount of pre planning you can have your lights setup in an ideal location.

I did a North African wedding last month. About 200 people in a large church basement. Every once in a while, the bride and groom would get up and lead the entire assembly on an impromptu procession snaking through the hall and in between tables. Think the Hokey Pokey but with beating drums, the rattling of ceremonial swords and women hooting. The clear instruction was to precede the bride and groom on their procession and keep rolling while walking backwards.

I'd like to hear any realistic alternatives to a camera-mounted light in the setup described above.

J.

[Stephen J. Williams]

Originally Posted by Jacques E. Bouchard

I did a North African wedding last month. About 200 people in a large church basement. Every once in a while, the bride and groom would get up and lead the entire assembly on an impromptu procession snaking through the hall and in between tables. Think the Hokey Pokey but with beating drums, the rattling of ceremonial swords and women hooting. The clear instruction was to precede the bride and groom on their procession and keep rolling while walking backwards.

I'd like to hear any realistic alternatives to a camera-mounted light in the setup described above.

J.

Come on J... Cant you see that we're trying to steal your thread to what is better, on camera or off camera.. :-) You made a great point and I would agree that in that one particular scenario on camera lighting would have an advantage... Good luck in the search!

[Jacques E. Bouchard]

Originally Posted by Stephen J. Williams

Come on J... Cant you see that we're trying to steal your thread to what is better, on camera or off camera.. :-)

Not my thread. But I'm sure the original poster had legitimate reasons for asking about on-camera lightning. As I was attempting to illustrate.

J.

[Susanto Widjaja]

Originally Posted by Jacques E. Bouchard

I did a North African wedding last month. About 200 people in a large church basement. Every once in a while, the bride and groom would get up and lead the entire assembly on an impromptu procession snaking through the hall and in between tables. Think the Hokey Pokey but with beating drums, the rattling of ceremonial swords and women hooting. The clear instruction was to precede the bride and groom on their procession and keep rolling while walking backwards.

I'd like to hear any realistic alternatives to a camera-mounted light in the setup described above.

J.

I'd use two lights from the corners to flood light the whole thing. Planning where I would be most of the time and place the lights accordingly i.e. not placing the lights directly behind me. Bouncing the lights of the roof is also an option with a 800w or something like that. There's always a way. On camera light is a big no no for me. It will only make the faces brighter but won't help me achieve a better image overall.

[Warren Kawamoto]

Hey guys, you're going to kill me for saying this, but the answer is actually pretty simple. Get your 3 point up and running where most of the action will take place, AND always have a light on your camera as a prepared backup. That way you're prepared for anything that happens, no matter where it happens. With a wedding, you don't have time to re-set lights if something happens outside your triangle of lights, so be prepared ahead of time.

[Jacques E. Bouchard]

Originally Posted by Susanto Widjaja

I'd use two lights from the corners to flood light the whole thing.

It's a 40,000 sq^2 hall. And fill lighting isn't the problem, it's highlights and faces.

[Michael Simons]

I just shot 2 weddings this past weekend and it was near impossible to set up light stands that wouldn't have been in the way of the guests. 330 guests and the room was packed. The hall had a many different color disco lights and the room looked like a night club. Once I turned on my light stand, every head in the room turned and looked at me!! The maitre D asked me to turn it off. I was sooo embarrased. Glad I had an on camera light in my bag.

[Jacques E. Bouchard]

Originally Posted by Michael Simons

I just shot 2 weddings this past weekend and it was near impossible to set up light stands that wouldn't have been in the way of the guests. 330 guests and the room was packed. The hall had a many different color disco lights and the room looked like a night club. Once I turned on my light stand, every head in the room turned and looked at me!! The maitre D asked me to turn it off. I was sooo embarrased. Glad I had an on camera light in my bag.

Reminds me of a new year's eve rave I covered last year. I could use the on-camera light only for interviews, the rest of the time it was extremely disruptive to the guests - I believe the term "buzz kill" was used several times. Tripod-mounted lights would probably have gotten me lynched in an ecstasy-fuelled frenzy. ;-)

BTW I use a diffuser with my on-camera light to cut harsh shadows.


J.

[Randy Panado]

It's obvious that those who prefer on-camera lights aren't going to switch so there's no point in even trying to offer up solutions.

If you like your on camera light because off camera lighting is too obtrusive for you, carry on. I've found the exact opposite in my experience but again, everyone's market is different I suppose. Posing questions in which you propose an impossible situation to properly light isn't doing anybody any good, it's pretty much just baiting. How do I handle LARGE halls with talent who don't like to stay in one place? I TELL them that I'm lighting for a specific area and to stay in that general place if they'd like to look good in the film. 99% of the time, the talent cares about having a good film for their friend so they stay in that area. This is also discussed PRIOR to the day with the couple because I've been in those situations before and I share with them how we light so it's no surprise when they dim up at the start of the program. Again, lots of these situations can be averted and you may find capturing the WHOLE (insert event happening in little to no light here) may not even matter to the couple as they will understand and are happy with just portions. Client's are very understanding when you explain the situation and options. I've had a client opt to have me turn off my off camera lights because they felt it was ruining the "mood". I told them that if they are fine with how the film will look (either with on camera light or a bit muddy), then I have no problem doing so as they're the bosses. Communication with them helps tremendously.

I have a dimmer on my arri 650 and my LED256 cool lights have dimmers built in. Again, you're not supposed to "flood" the room with light but paint and craft it. I usually have my 650 at 60-75% strength while the LED256s are full blast as I'm trying to balance the lighting in the room. I shot a wedding on the beach where the dance floor was creatively lit, but still setup an LED256 to act as a key and also turned on a (gasp) on camera light for fill. Footage turned out great as I wasn't just blasting the dance floor with light. The small led helped fill the faces and the LED256 gave a nice hair/rim lighting.

If you prefer the reality TV look of on camera lighting, there is nothing wrong with that. Just please respect those who have a difference of opinion rather than trying to argue about why on camera lighting works the best and off camera isn't feasible in an event environment. It's a pointless argument as both ways have been done and both ways "work".

Santo - I'm sorry, I don't know the comparison between the two. The LED256's put out close or maybe a little more than the 250w Pro Lights if that helps bro.

Cheers

[Jacques E. Bouchard]

Originally Posted by Randy Panado

Posing questions in which you propose an impossible situation to properly light isn't doing anybody any good, it's pretty much just baiting.

Let me remind you the title of this thread. The "impossible situation" I and others offered were not "proposed", they were ACTUAL situations where we had no choice but to use on-camera lights. That was in response to the numerous (and, let's face it, patronizing) posts saying there was no excuse to use on-camera lights.

Again, let's keep the title of the thread in mind. It's one thing to SUGGEST alternatives, but quite another to dismiss the original question.

J.
.

[Randy Panado]

I'm referring to the conga line example, NOT the original question.

No one is patronizing anyone, nothing is wrong with on camera lights if that's what YOU and YOUR COUPLES prefer. Let me remind you the reason why we're off topic. The issue of not using on camera lights came up when the mention from Glen that on camera lighting was not flattering which lead to the discussion of raising production value in order to gain higher paying clients or clients who were discerning enough in their choices for videographers/cinematographers to notice the difference between an on camera light and off camera light shoot then into how feasible it is for one man shows to do so.

The original question was asking for suggestions for on camera lights, the thread has technically spun off topic. To ask to keep to the original question is to dismiss all the posts that don't include suggestions on a brand of on camera light. This is a discussion forum. Discussion stems from discussion.

To answer the original question, I use a Z96 LED light with a minus green filter. I mentioned in my previous post that I have used an on camera light before and still do. According to Jacques, I'm patronizing myself, which is ridiculous. My opinion there is a time and place for on camera light, it's not the end all, be all solution. Your opinion is different? Great, nothing wrong with that. :)

Stop being so defensive (again). I'm bowing out of this thread as it's headed into arguing and I'd prefer to not participate in that. Cheers everyone.

[Jacques E. Bouchard]

Originally Posted by Randy Panado

I'm referring to the conga line example, NOT the original question.
No one is patronizing anyone, nothing is wrong with on camera lights if that's what YOU and YOUR COUPLES prefer.

The "conga line" was in support of the original question: that in some cases, there is no other choice than on-camera light. Asking 200+ guests to change a traditional dance so they can remain within a restricted triangle of light is ridiculous.

Calling this a "preference" is, indeed, patronizing. It shows that you haven't really been paying attention. Please re-read the previous posts. I, and others, have presented real-life (not hypothetical) situations.

The fact remains that in some cases, on-camera lighting is the only way to go. Why is this concept so offensive to some people?

J.

[Randy Panado]

Originally Posted by Jacques E. Bouchard

The "conga line" was in support of the original question: that in some cases, there is no other choice than on-camera light. Asking 200+ guests to change a traditional dance so they can remain within a restricted triangle of light is ridiculous.

Calling this a "preference" is, indeed, patronizing. It shows that you haven't really been paying attention. Please re-read the previous posts. I, and others, have presented real-life (not hypothetical) situations.

The fact remains that in some cases, on-camera lighting is the only way to go. Why is this concept so offensive to some people?

J.

I'm only going to mention this once and leave, promise promise :). I AGREE with you but you are too "defensive" trying to defend your point to see that. I mention that on camera lighting is a tool I use when applicable :

Originally Posted by Randy Panado

To answer the original question, I use a Z96 LED light with a minus green filter. I mentioned in my previous post that I have used an on camera light before and still do. According to Jacques, I'm patronizing myself, which is ridiculous. My opinion there is a time and place for on camera light, it's not the end all, be all solution. Your opinion is different? Great, nothing wrong with that. :)

You like to quote portions of answers rather than address the whole post as a whole. I've been paying attention to the entirety of the answers. Maybe if you would do the same you wouldn't feel the need to keep defending your point as by the sound of your posts, the only person offended here is you, Jacques.

To spell it out:

1) I use on camera light at times when it's needed so therefore I can't be patronizing you or anyone else about on camera lighting.

2) On camera lighting is not my first choice so therefore it is my preference to not use it first. If you deem that patronizing then that's on you and your defensive manner. It is not said in an offensive or condoning way anymore than saying I prefer to use liquid detergent over powdered detergent as my first choice.

3) Everyone here is trying to help each other. They are giving their precious time to chime in on a subject to HELP the community. Not make others look bad. If you put your guard down and realize that, it'll make things a lot less tense and the thread can move past this on camera vs off camera bickering and onto something more productive, like other solutions for on camera lighting ;). To be honest, the way you are pretty much attacking me in your replies makes me just want to forego contributing anymore and lurk. I'd be offended if not for the fact that I understand the interw3bz is not srs bisnizz. :)

That's it. Have a good night all.

[Michael Simons]

soooo..can anyone recommend a good on camera light for a DSLR?

[Randy Panado]

Originally Posted by Michael Simons

soooo..can anyone recommend a good on camera light for a DSLR?

Originally Posted by Randy Panado

To answer the original question, I use a Z96 LED light with a minus green filter.

HDV-Z96 96 LED Light Fr EOS 5D II 7D 550D Lighting bh48 - eBay (item 300482531727 end time Nov-17-10 02:04:03 PST)