| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/16/2006 04:51:31 AM · #1 |
Ok. I know this is probably a stupid thing, but I had this funny idea the other day about building 4 trouble light pots into a single chunk of wood and putting a metal reflector dish or umbrella behind them, with a mirror directly in front of them to prevent a hotspot with a difuser to make a really cheap studio light and softbox.
Am I insane?
4x 23W color corrected fluorescent bulbs each equivalent to a 120W tungsten would put out a rough equivalent to 450W of Tungsten light.
On the other hand, there simply might not be enough light... In generaly, I've found these lights to be a tiny bit more green than one would like, but they still do seem to be pretty good for color temperature and are generally quite consistent from bulb to bulb.
Does anyone have any comments on this?
I would probably power the whole thing off of a single power bar (23W x 4 isn't much more power draw than a 100W tungsten bulb anyhow) plugged into a single outlet.
I would probably make two (naturally).
I am thinking that I would angle the bulbs slightly inwards so the hot spot in the light fixture would be fairly centralized and would be easy to cover with just a small mirror fairly close to the bulbs still allowing a fairly even light distribution at the diffuser panel.
I'd love to hear any comments on this idea. |
|
|
|
10/16/2006 06:04:54 AM · #2 |
Getting the data from Ace Hardware's website (approximate pricing)
US$ 75 -- 4x Trouble Light
US$ 40 -- 4x Fluorescent Spotlights <-- closest search result, price may vary (but I doubt by much.
US$ 15 -- 1x Power Strip <-- cheapest
US$ 130 -- total price for 1 setup
US$ 260 -- for the two planned.
Not exactly cheap, and that is for just 450W of light.
3 main problems with the light they would produce.
1 - Low light level. With two of thes the subject will be in roughly EV7 lighting (maybe 8 depending on distance to subject). Look here (scroll down) for charts giving examples of light levels and exposure settings required for different EVs (Exposure Values). Even with 2 of them, anything that moves is going to take a fast lens -- and even then better not move very fast.
2 - constant light is blinding to anyone it is aimed at (even as dim as a flashlight). Anyone put in front of them will likely be squinting all the time.
3 - This one you can take with a grain of salt as I am just passing on what I have read, while the other two are from experience with halogen work lamps (heat problems added). Fluorescent lights flicker. Mostly faster than the eye is bothered with, but once the shutterspeed gets fast enough the light output becomes inconsistant. (One bulb may be flickering off while another is flickering on.) The eye may not notice, but the camera will at faster shutter speeds.
The last won't be a problem with the shutter speed possible at the light levels your talking about, but the first temptation when faced with the first problem is to put stronger bulbs in. :P
I think (no experience) would be better served spending the US$260 the two units would cost on one B800 from AlienBees. (Cheaper units are available).
Just my 2 cents -- the experience of building it may be worth it to you. It sounds like a fun project even knowing its functionality would be limited. ;D
David
|
|
|
|
10/16/2006 07:55:42 AM · #3 |
i would suggest not using flourecent because of the flicker factor
(they do make them for photo use but they run at 10kHz or higher and are $$ more) for static items & if you shoot at slower than 1/30sec it might be ok
i think shipping AB's overseas would make that to much as well
i would suggest a couple of old vivitar 283's with a safesync might be better route to go ... probably less than 50$ a crack ,,,
|
|
|
|
10/16/2006 10:58:28 AM · #4 |
Actually, I knew about the flicker factor and just totally neglected to think about it at all.
:) 60 Hz on the bulb I have here.
Dang. I was really hoping to figure something out that I could afford.
I live in Taiwan and you might be surprised how cheap some things can be purchased for. The only real expense there would have been the bulbs themselves. Everything else could have been purchased for under 3 bucks apeice max. The light pots could have been purchased for probably under 10 bucks for all 8 of them. I'd probably just sabotage stand and table lamps in the local garbage sale spot down the road from my place.
Shipping Alien Bees overseas would be expensive and a pain in the arse and a half.
Also thanks for the link on exposure. It's rather surprising how bright sunlight really is!
I'm a little surprised at how little light would come off 450W of bulbs on both sides of a subject... I kinda thought that most studio lights were around 500-800W.
If I were to set something like this up, I'd probably leave it for a good while down at the school where they keep the photography club gear, but I'd want to share it with those who are just getting their feet wet, therefore constant lighting would be better. I don't have money for meters and with multiple shooters, flash control would be a serious PITA.
There is another option... I just don't know what the power requirements would be... The fishermen around here use these INSANEly bright lights that you can literally see 25 kilometers away. I've seen them in use for lighting night markets and things. They are so ridiculously bright, but they also appear to be consistent in color temperature. I might have a look at that.
A reflector dish would be a tricky thing as the bulb is fairly large.... bigger than my head by about 50%. Heat is probably an issue too. They often run a string of them off of a single power line, so I could imagine that their power consumption (and therefore heat waste) wouldn't be as bad as a typical halogen or tungsten.
Message edited by author 2006-10-16 11:06:11. |
|
|
|
10/16/2006 12:00:18 PM · #5 |
Workmen's lights can often be had for very little. I have one that gives 2x1000 watts of halogen light - super bright (daylight inside a dark room bright) - but v hot. Cost about GBP 30 (USD 55).
|
|
|
|
10/16/2006 02:56:34 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
... Also thanks for the link on exposure. It's rather surprising how bright sunlight really is!
I'm a little surprised at how little light would come off 450W of bulbs on both sides of a subject... I kinda thought that most studio lights were around 500-800W. ... |
I wish I had saved the link when it was posted a while back (last year I think) of a comparison of how much continuous light is needed to equal the output of a single strobe. It seemed a smaller watt-second strobe equals a much larger wattage continuous lighting. I seem to recall it would require a stadium full of light to equal a strobe a faster shutter-speeds.
/edit: Found the link I reffered to -- Why use strobes? Aren't incandescent lights cheaper and easier?
David
Message edited by author 2006-10-16 14:57:52.
|
|
|
|
10/16/2006 03:43:48 PM · #7 |
there are some cheap chinese strobes on ebay - friend bouught a set - 3 or 4 lights, stands, sofboxes, umbrellas - the whole thing for $220. yeah, the feel of everything made erector sets seem downright robust, but the price was good and they did work just fine.
Since you're about 37 feet from china you should be able to find them down some alley for 50 yen or something, right? LOL
|
|
|
|
10/20/2006 03:25:35 AM · #8 |
Good news. Apparently the local photo club actually has their own set of strobes and a light meter. Apparently the strobes kinda suck, but I'm sure we can work something out.
Things are moving along! |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2026 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 01/07/2026 06:01:24 AM EST.
