|
|
Studio EquipmentThe lesson here is that the lights are only the beginning. The BeginningI originally bought two Photogenic PL375 150 watt-second strobes, but within a week or two, I realized that two lights were too few, and that 150 ws was too little power, so I sold off the PL375s and bought three 600 ws PL06's. I've had these lights for about five years now. The Photogenic model PL06 has three characteristics that I believe are essential for any serious flash unit:
Don't bother trying to buy a PL06 based on my recommendation. It was discontinued way back in 1994, though occasionally one crops up on eBay. The PL06 model was superceeded by the second-generation PL375, PL750, and PL1500 models. Now those models are being also phased out. The new models are called the PL2 series, and consist of the PL 2500DR, PL1250DR, and PL1250 (without the DR). The PL2500 is a 1000 watt-second unit while the two PL1250 models are 500 watt-seconds each. The DR models support Photogenic's new wireless remote control system. Unfortunately, with the new PL2 models, Photogenic has chosen to muddy the marketing waters by making "effective watt-second" claims. Ironically they started doing this just around the time that Paul C. Buff came clean and stopped using "effective watt-seconds" in the ads for his White Lightning monolights. A real watt-second rating is based on science; it is simply the amount of power that a particular flash unit can store in its capacitors and discharge through the flash tube. An "effective watt-seconds" rating is based on wishful thinking. Basically the manufacturer is telling you, "These lights only have a 500 watt-second capacity, but because we're very clever and can design lights better than anyone else, we think that our lights are as good as a 1,000 watt-second light from some other manufacturer." Don't believe it. Just look at the real watt-second rating and ignore the marketing hype. My only real gripe about the PL06 is that it only has a 100-watt modeling light, a consequence of its not having a cooling fan. One hundred watts is barely bright enough to focus when used without any light-robbing accessories, but when you have a softbox and a red or orange filter on a lens with a maximum aperture of f/4, it's damn near impossible. I called Photogenic and asked whether or not I could put a brighter bulb in it, but they wouldn't give me any assurances that I wouldn't melt something down. The PL1500 was the first model with a 250-watt modeling light and a cooling fan. All the PL2 series models have 250-watt modeling lights. Monolights vs. Power PacksThe Photogenic lights are all monolights, which means that the capacitors that hold the charge for the flash are integrated with the flash head in a single unit. The other type of system is the power pack system (they're called "generator" units in the UK), in which the capacitors are in a box that sits on the floor while the flash tube and modeling light are in a separate flash head. These systems have some advantages and some disadvantages as compared to monolights. The main advantage of a power pack system is that you can fit a lot more capacitors into a unit designed to sit on the floor than you can in one that's supposed to sit on a light stand. Monolights tend to top out at about 1,200 watt-seconds, but power packs up to 6,000 watt-seconds are readily available. Power packs also give you more flexibility in distributing power between heads. If you have four 1,200 watt-second monolights, then you have 4,800 watt-seconds of power, but each head is limited to 1,200 ws. If you had a 4,800 watt-second power pack, then you could put it all into one head, or put 2,400 ws into one head and 1,200 ws into each of two others, or whatever combination suits you, subject to the limitations of your pack system. Power pack system can be further divided into two categories: symmetrical and asymmetrical. Many manufacturers make one or more models of both types. Symmetrical power packs divide the total power evenly between however many heads are attached. Asymmetrical power packs let you divide the power unevenly between the heads. Some of them only give you a very limited number of power ratios (e.g., Speedotron, Norman), while others will let you specify exactly how much power is to go to each attached head (e.g., Elinchrom Micro-AS series, Balcar Source series). Symmetric power packs and asymmetric packs with a limited number of ratios can't generally be used to power an entire lighting system; you must have more than one pack for maximum flexibility. Perversely, however, a single sophisticated pack such as the Elinchrom Micro-AS will set you back more than a small collection of symmetric power packs. Another advantage of power pack systems is that you can adjust your lights from the pack, without having to wander around the set, adjusting each light in turn. However this is becoming less of an advantage as more monolights incorporate remote control systems. The main advantage of monolight systems is that they're generally cheaper than power pack systems (even simple symmetric systems). Also you have a bit more flexibility in positioning your lights because you can use cheap extension cords to attach the light to a wall outlet, while heads in pack systems have to be tethered to the pack with an expensive high-voltage cable. Given the premium that manufacturers charge for pack systems, if you don't need more than 1,200 ws per head, you're probably better off with a monolight system. If you want to hedge your bet, then buy a monolight system from a manufacturer that also makes pack systems, so if you decide to buy a pack system later, you can use the same accessories. StandsI put my lights on Manfrotto (aka Bogen) model 3086 stands. These are 3-section collapsible stands that extend to 8 feet. They're cheap (about $40), so you can afford to have a bunch of them around. In addition to supporting lights, they're also useful for holding backdrops, reflectors, gobos, light meters, and even cameras. Pretty soon you're going to notice that with the lights on the Manfrotto 3086 stands, you can't put a light directly above the camera or above the subject. For that you need a boom arm. I decided long ago that I was going to stick with Manfrotto for my camera stands, so when I decided that I wanted a boom stand, I bought the Manfrotto "Heavy Duty Boom," model 3087, and the 3071 stand that can be purchased with it. The 3087 boom is just a long arm with a light mount at one end and a pivoting mount that attaches to the 3071 stand (or any other stand with a 5/8" mount). It also comes with a counterweight. The 3087 is a sturdy boom, but it's a little annoying because it's just a simple arm, so changing the height of the light also changes its orientation relative to the floor. (It's hard to explain, but just take my word for it.) Manfrotto makes two other more expensive booms which each have geared cranks at the end to allow you to adjust the orientation of the light at the other end, but I think that if I had to do it all over again, I'd get the Red Wing boom. With the Red Wing boom, you can adjust the height of the light independently of its orientation. It's pretty slick. If you put your lights on stands, you will trip over the cords occasionally, no matter how sure-footed you think you are, so wrap the cords around the stand legs a few times, close to the base, before you plug them into the wall (or the power pack, if you're using a pack system). The rationale for that is that when you do trip over the cord, the cord will pull on the bottom of the stand rather than the top, making it less likely that you'll pull the stand over. If you have a shooting area with a high ceiling, and you know that you're going to be there for awhile, then just ignore everything that I've said so far and go for a ceiling-mounted system. Ceiling systems are more expensive and require more equipment to mount any given number of lights, but since it's all on the ceiling, you can walk around without having to worry about tripping over cords and pulling your lights over. Manfrotto makes a ceiling system as do a few other manufacturers. Figure on spending about two grand and a weekend or two getting it all installed. BackgroundsIf you're always shooting on location then maybe you don't need a background, but if you have a studio then you'll need backgrounds and also some way of suspending them behind your subject. I use the Manfrotto Autopole 2 system. If you're using seamless (that's seamless paper), then you can buy an Autopole 2 package that will let you suspend three 9-foot seamless rolls near the ceiling and roll them up or down like window shades for a relatively small amount of money, about $350 from B&H. If you want to use muslin or canvas backdrops then you'll also need some way of suspending those. Following the advice of a salesperson at B&H, I bought two Autopole 2 extension poles, fitted them together, then attached them to the Autopoles using inexpensive Manfrotto Superclamps and U-hooks. Manfrotto makes a long pole just for suspending cloth backdrops, but the two Autopole 2 extensions are actually cheaper, and you can always use them for their original purpose if you find yourself in a place with a very high ceiling. I also have a bunch of Manfrotto Mini-Poles. These are dirt cheap (about $35 each) spring-loaded poles that you can brace between your floor and ceiling and use to mount whatever. I've hung paper, muslin, lights, and mirrors from Mini-Poles. The same Autopole 2 extensions that (if you are following my advice) you bought to hang muslins and canvases can be attached to the Mini-Poles as well as the Autopoles. I've written more about Mini-Poles and Autopoles on Ellen's page. To be continued (as if you weren't sick of reading already). All contents copyright 1999 by Willis BoyceLast updated November 19, 2001 |