| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/19/2008 02:12:24 PM · #1 |
Strobe Lighting vs. Continuous Lighting
Which is better for portrait photography and why. Please help me, i am very confused.
Thanks in advance
|
|
|
|
08/19/2008 02:15:55 PM · #2 |
Well I can tell you some advantages of each. I think its personal opinion which is better. I think you can accomplish what you want with either in my opinion.
Constant lighting seems to be very hot. Ive tried using constant lighting and my subjects get sweaty and uncomfortable (just ask my dog) however you can see real time what you are doing so it is easier to control the light (even though they are making cold lights now)
Strobes you dont have the heat factor but I find that strobbing is much harder and takes longer to setup. But you can accomplish some neat things.
I am sure there tons more, but for me that is what I have found. |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 02:20:14 PM · #3 |
| Strobes. If my memory serves me , not likely though, a 160 watt/sec strobe puts out the equivalent amount light as an 8000watt continuous light. You can plug a strobe into a wall socket however an 8000 watt light would involve industrial wiring and alot of heat. |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 02:31:48 PM · #4 |
If you want to do studio portraits of people who will remain stationary, then go with the continuous light source.
With continuous lighting your subjects will look posed but with strobes you'll be able to catch them in motion and freeze the moment. If you want to catch people while they're laughing, playing or just plain moving around some, get strobes.
eta
I wouldn't even consider continuous lighting now that I know what the diff is. My 3 lights are gathering dust as we speak. I should sell them.
Message edited by author 2008-08-19 14:55:21.
|
|
|
|
08/19/2008 02:45:10 PM · #5 |
The two main advantage to the continuous lights hot-lights is that you can always see exactly what the lighting will look like, and they are cheap. But since they can't put out nearly as much light as the strobes you end up shooting at slower shutter speeds and higher ISO. I've used them a lot, and my only major complaint are the occasional blurred frames you get from having to use slow shutter (like 1/50th down to 1/15th). It depends on how much the model is moving and how good you are at holding the camera still, sometimes I only get a few blurred frames out of hundreds, sometimes it's over 10%.
On the other hand, if you go for strobes make sure you get the type that varies the modeling light with the strobe output, otherwise you won't have any idea what the relative balance is like (assuming you use more than strobe). |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 02:51:34 PM · #6 |
| I just got my first strobe last night and have taken exactly one portrait with it. That is all it took to convince me of the merits of strobes. The clarity of the shot, comfort of the not so willing model and control over the light blow away anything else i've tried. |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 03:04:16 PM · #7 |
One big advantage of continuous (hot) lights is you can heat up your lunch with them. It's much more difficult with strobes. :D
|
|
|
|
08/19/2008 03:23:37 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Mick:
One big advantage of continuous (hot) lights is you can heat up your lunch with them. It's much more difficult with strobes. :D |
Then you need the Sunpak 622 Pro, or Super Pro. Put your hand over the lens and fire that puppy on full power, along with the recoil of that bad puppy, you will feel a nice warmth also. Makes that hand glow really nice too. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/27/2025 04:38:56 PM EDT.
