Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Getting the Look of Flash Photography!

Evin Grant said:
I just bought one of these...
PLM-Only.jpg

http://www.alienbees.com/plm.html
86" silver parabolic umbrella for $75!
Even if it's not a Briese I'm sure I can make it look very similar, and at that price it's a no brainer!
plm-reflector.jpg

_m0k5641.jpg
Click to expand...

The umbarella appears much deeper than the drawing. About how deep is it ?

thanks,

Dave
 
yeah that photo looks like a normal para and the alien bees look like a normal softbox in terms of arc... too bad about them if they don't have a deep dish... as much as the description goes against the benefits of a deep dish the advantages are pretty easy to understand.
 
I don't have any expirience with these devices and the other manufacturers seem darn expensive. Is this PLM reflector (or other parabolic reflector) any more suited to producing lighting for motion picture work than any other system can/cant do.
 
Evin,

"You could also use a mogul base and 1000W tungsten bulb for the same effect. "

I instantly perked up to that possibility. Here is a bulb like that:

http://www.filmtools.com/usjt10mobala.html

Would that work directly with line voltage, or is some kind of ballast required?

Would 60Hz flicker be an issue?
 
Joe G. said:
Evin,

"You could also use a mogul base and 1000W tungsten bulb for the same effect. "

I instantly perked up to that possibility. Here is a bulb like that:

http://www.filmtools.com/usjt10mobala.html

Would that work directly with line voltage, or is some kind of ballast required?

Would 60Hz flicker be an issue?
Click to expand...

That's the one. No ballast required.
Jarred I think your right that photo may be a different Para. But until I try it I'm not sure the deep para is any better.
 
A real Para will send a beam of light instead of just spilling light off into nowhere ( which isn't necessarily a bad thing) .. the deeper the dish the more direction (but still soft) light you get (naturally). There are front diffusers you can get to go over the front of the box.. but when you do that you eliminate any benefit to the parabolic.

1250941909.jpg
 
Jarred Land said:
A real Para will send a beam of light instead of just spilling light off into nowhere ( which isn't necessarily a bad thing) .. the deeper the dish the more direction (but still soft) light you get (naturally). There are front diffusers you can get to go over the front of the box.. but when you do that you eliminate any benefit to the parabolic.

1250941909.jpg
Click to expand...

Correct Jarred..

also a Parabolic system should not have anything at all protruding in front of the trajectory of light, not even a single cable, the light should be controlled from a telescopic system coming form the center of the rear of the parabolic Umbrella.

This system should allow for the light source be arranged closer to the center of the Parabolic, hence closer to the center circle of light spread, and or further away, in order to create different light quality, harshness and strength of the light beam direction trow.

In order to do this the Parabolic needs a very strong center support system, not cheap to achieve, and the strength of the inner shel in it self must be also strong, as the deeper it is the stronger it needs to be, when locked in to position.

What I absolutely love about the Briese Focus system is that they are build with all of this in mind, and their system travels extremely well, everything is very Robustly build, the inner tubing system were the also large Bulb fits to, is just Huge, this is what it is used to focus the light spread, by pulling in or pushing it out, I also find the Bulb cover/Cup very efficient in guiding the light spread toward the center of the Parabolic, instead of in the eyes of the Subjects.

Any way, the Parabolic, does in deed need to be deep in order to give the best performance and possibility of containing the spill, while giving a very centered and controlled strong yet soft trow of light.

Okay now in off, cause I just can't buy them for a while so I don't want to start crying, especially after seen how many RED/Jarred have :(

PS: I know were to go when I get a big job assignment :)

ciao
 
PLM may be adjustable though, it may be possibly to achieve a deeper parabola than what the diagram shows. The Briese center tube may aid in lamp placement but it makes no difference to the light quality, it's just a bare bulb in a tube. If you get any specular source in the right position it will work in the parabola. As far as the cables go that only matters for eye lights in extreme close ups. Even then you could probably hide them.
Honestly, the Briese is a great light, but it's analogous to the F23 Vs. Red. Great product way over-priced for what it can accomplish Vs. alternatives, but the PLM may not be there yet. I'll let you know when I try.
 
Evin Grant said:
PLM may be adjustable though, it may be possibly to achieve a deeper parabola than what the diagram shows. The Briese center tube may aid in lamp placement but it makes no difference to the light quality, it's just a bare bulb in a tube. If you get any specular source in the right position it will work in the parabola. As far as the cables go that only matters for eye lights in extreme close ups. Even then you could probably hide them.
Honestly, the Briese is a great light, but it's analogous to the F23 Vs. Red. Great product way over-priced for what it can accomplish Vs. alternatives, but the PLM may not be there yet. I'll let you know when I try.
Click to expand...

True but not.... the Base Briese/B2pro isn't really just a bare bulb.. it has a carefully proportioned front exit ratio and side ratio. If you don't do that, you get some of the funky rays that Mr. Bluff is talking about in his little write up for his new lights.

Plus there are about 60 different modifiers for the bulb cover alone..

I do agree with the price though.. it is pretty expensive. But, I havn't found an alternative that can compete with them yet. Someone is gonna hafta change that. Seems like everyone is trying now which is a good thing.

Good find on the Cowboy Evin.. Im gonna get one of those and check it out.
 
Joel Kaye said:
I get a relatively good feeling from this FLO shot. Comb of kino style and CFL's plus a tungsten hairlight. Continuous lighting... no hmi's. Sorta cool really.
Click to expand...

CFL's and Fluros are great.... the light falloff is pretty severe but for price/performance they are a no brainer.

I got a bunch of 12 bank CFL "brutes" -I guess you could call them that - and they do wonders just blasting up the overall light level or using to light backgrounds/BGscreens. They were $150 each without bulbs and now you can get daylight CFL's from almost anywhere.

LED's are probably the way of the future... but i don't think they are really there yet.. once they get the efficiency up one more 2fold, interesting things are going to happen.
 
I don't know anything about the cowboy studio umbrella that Evin linked to, but I have some of the cowboy studio soft boxes -- These ones:

http://www.cowboystudio.com/product/c16/p16-01.php

They're really good for as cheap as they are. The stands are flimsy junk and the soft box itself is a pain to assemble sometimes, but they work good. They come with 5000K balanced CFLs, which the RED loves, and are only $11 to replace. So far they have held up well. I definitely wouldn't put them out on rental anywhere, but as extra lights to have around they have been handy. ...Makes me curious about some of their other products. I bought them new off ebay for even cheaper than the cowboy studio site -- 2 kits, 4 soft boxes, for about $400 shipped. No complaints.

I've looked at the info on some of the B2Pro lights. They look nice... and expensive. Hopefully I'll get to check them out in the near future.
 
PLM - big umbrella or deep parabolic reflector?

PLM - big umbrella or deep parabolic reflector?

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2560/3833901041_6cc650430b_o.jpg

Thanks all for a good and informative thread. The above image and more here show the "flat" umbrella shape of the PLM.

Buff et co try to argue themselves away from the need of deep paraboles.

http://www.alienbees.com/images/deep-para.jpg

"Parabolic reflectors are often misunderstood by photographers. A common response to the PLM™ system is: "That looks like an umbrella - it can't possibly perform the function of those gigantic deep parabolic reflectors offered by other manufacturers." In a conventional deep parabolic reflector (see fig. 1) only a portion of the available light is directed to the parabola and is directed as a focused beam toward the subject. The remainder (shown in red) escapes as unfocused spill light. In the PLM™ system (see fig. 2) the special 7" reflector directs all of the light onto the 16 segment parabolic surface in an exact 180° field. 100% of the light is focused by the parabola and none escapes as direct spill light. The result is higher output than a deep parabolic system, virtually no spill light, extremely even coverage..."

Can anyone share some science on this? What is it that gives the uniqueness to the deep paras?

Some good side by side comparisons would be precious, as I am curious to know before I buy.

Thommes Ulfeng.
 
While I did plenty of side by side shooting, and not to see any differences from one to the other, but instead using them as simply complimenting one to the other in large shoots, I can say that the differences are many and very noticeable.

Like any type of light shaping tool, you will use the one that fits best to achieve the desired look for any given shoot, there is absolutely no one do it all here, not in Photography, and definitely not in Cinema.

The use of a wide and shallow Umbrella style Parabolic such as I know now the PLM to be, is not bad, it just offers very limited shooting possibilities, and the control of light is far less then the Deeper and far more expensive ones, cause to build a deeper Parabolic reflector it simply needs a more expensive and complex parameters of structural design then it does for shallow Umbrella style ones.

As for deep Parabolic reflectors vs. other Deep Parabolic reflectors, as they are more then just few manufacturers that produces them, even so some are almost a fake copy of the other, there is a large difference in Photometrical results of light strength, reach, control of spill and so on, depending from what material they are constructed, and how the material stretches, thanks of how the rib system is built.

I have worked with several different ones, including Profoto, Broncolor, and off course Briese Focus system, and I can say that the Briese Focus system it simply out performs them all by large, yes, by large, it is simply a matter of work configurations, adaptability, transportability, variations of looks achievable thanks to the light shaping tools available with the system, and far more important the absolute fantastic way to achieve focusing of the light spread, strength and reach via the focusing Tube, which in it self is very sturdy, well designed, and simply spectacular by its results.

Unfortunately not all great things come inexpensively like RED :), and further more just like with RED, is not just about having a camera body, you need lenses, camera support, lights, and so on, for a good Parabolic Reflector System, is not different, what makes it so special is not just IT, but what comes with and the possibilities it offers once paired with the various light shaping tools.


ciao
 
Thanks for spelling it out Ketch, this is what I love about this forum. Reading precious experience and getting answers way beyond my novice questions. :) Thx.

PS. I did find some "science" related to light and parabolas. It could be of interest to some. http://mscir.tripod.com/parabola/ There is a little calculator to find the focus point and define shape etc.
 
So I did some testing at Dixon photo studios earlier this week with 650 Fresnel and an Elenchrome. But just didn't have the power as I expected. At PS Production Services Toronto I did some more testing with Joker 800 + 400 and the Elenchrome. After a crappy photoshop stich I felt a little more confident with the lighting setup. I used digital fill, but would use a kino on the shoot day. Seems like a pretty solid setup. I also like how I look like a deformed avatar.

Original Shot at PS:
scottPS.jpg

PS Stiched (with Digital Fill)
scottPSstich.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top