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 :)

LED vs. Fluorescent Lighting

Mike P. said:
We need links. So you can't balance them out with filtration, huh? I haven't tried, but I kind of assumed (hoped) that you could.
Click to expand...

Use this link - bit.ly/luworkshop - and follow the table of contents for "High Output AC LEDs" for a demonstration with frame grabs why CC gels don't work on LEDs.

Paul Dean
 
I used to think Kino Flos were too synthetic a quality of light - "great for spaceships and submarines" but didn't really care for them in general purpose lighting. Then I learned a great trick from a gaffer I really respect. He suggested to push them through unbleached muslin. That solved all of my quality of light issues immediately, but I found myself going bigger with Kinos to make up the for the light loss. Now Image 85's are my goto Kino. I love how they are all self contained - I always hated Kino coffins gobbling up all my truck space - 4X4 kinos with their goofy mount and ballast issues are just a big PITA


As for LED's its the same issue all over again. Great flexibility, DC powered etc. But very hard contrasty synthetic quality of light. I've seen some great units from Zabo and others that are larger panel sources (almost like a 2K zip) but almost everyone is diffusing them, making Croney cones, or chimeras to soften these things.

Go to your local fabric store and buy a bunch of unbleached muslin. If it works for kinos it should work on LED sources too. :yesnod:
 
Since nobody has mentioned them yet, I'll give a plug for the Kinoflo Celeb 200 LED fixtures. Have a couple of them and I like them very much. 95 CRI, so they too have a very good color rendition. Great fixtures for what they are and do.
 
Thanks for the link Paul. Going to read that over ASAP.

Muslin warms up the light a bit (unbleached more so), so I'd imagine it'd help quite substantially.
 
I think you have to take all the CRI ratings and marketing hype pushed by the major lighting manufacturers with a huge grain of salt. These are not individuals without a vested interest. They are corporations that push their own products in order to make a profit. They are not your good buddy, their goal is to separate you from your money. They have a vested interest in designing tests that yield positive results for their products. They have no interest in promoting knowledge that is critical of their products. So you get very skewed information, very one-directional. The best you are going to get from them, when confronted with facts that portray their products less favorably, is s statement like, "different lighting sources are useful in different situations and everybody needs to decide which is best for their needs." A complete dodge.

I personally doubt all of the LED CRI ratings. I think they are marketing hype. Somebody realized that low CRIs gave you bad images and, the race was on to out-CRI the other guy in order to sell you their fixture over the other guy's LED, or over a competing technology like HMI, fluoro or tungsten. Paul's link is a perfect example on one company bashing the others. I bet the other companies could either poke holes in the test's design parameters or reproduce that test and come up with different results. They also don't show you results from HMI lights, or CDM lights, or LEP lights. Nor do they show you the color shifts that happen as the LED's age.

They also have in interest in getting you to abandon your existing lights. Lights that could easily be serviced and their lives extended for less money. I can buy a used HMI on Ebay for a fraction of the cost of what are considered to be the best of the LED fixtues (which cost thousands) and, even after spending a few hundred for a new bulb and some servicing, I will have a much cheaper light source (and one that has a better light spectrum graph than an LED's). But they don't make their money in the used market.

A year or so ago, the AMPAS Science Committee conducted a study on solid state lighting (LEDs) http://www.oscars.org/science-technology/council/projects/ssl/index.html
I would call that group an impartial source. The conclusion was that LEDs were not yet ready for primetime. You can see the results for yourself.

True, there have been advances in LED technology since then, and perhaps there will be an update soon. Until then, the only objective source says LEDs are not quite there yet.

I personally think people waste too much time researching the latest, greatest, newest, greenest and, most importantly, cheapest alternatives to tried and true lighting sources. You could take all of that web search/reading time and better yourself by learning your craft; learning about why you do have all sizes and shapes of fixtures and light modifiers. They exist because there is no one light to rule them all.

And while we are here, I'm going to mention LEP (light emitting plasma) technology. By the specs, the quality of light from a LEP fixture is the closest you will get to the sun. LEPs should be dominating the new lighting technology discussion. But its not. Its not because, unlike LED technology, and notwithstanding Litepanels dubious patents), one company owns the LEP patent and there aren't a million Chinese factories cranking these out. Licensing fees are not cheap, but light manufacturers are. Its cheaper for them to build and promote an inferior techinology than it is to use the licensed LEP techonolgy. It also gives them a bit more control over their own destiny, notwithstanding the Litepanels type of fixture. In XX years, when the LEP patents expire, you will see a rush of new products from the established companies. They will be promoting LEP as the latest, greatest, technology out there....just like they are doing now with LED.

OK, rant over. On to the Oscars.
 
It is actually a good rant Michael... ;)

I have been buying and or just testing just about every single type of LED fixture I could get my hands on ever since 2008, and form the brightest to the highest RCI, Bio colors, multi colors, 3, 6, 9, 16, lamp units, or with unidirectional light but with multi shadow, to the more traditional and more used lines or rows of mini bulbs, much better for our work on set and on the filed, Kinoflo like, to the square ones, to the 16x9 ones, 3200k to 10000k and so on, stopping at last to the ones I have just been testing, which are 5600k, no multi colors no multi levels of Kelvin to adjust to what ever, because I don't believe in any of that, I only believe on choosing your lights and that is it, the more options you put in to it the worst your lights will end up performing, and that has been my experience, apart form the fact that I don't use Tungstens, and I only shoot Daylight at 5600 day or night interior or exterior no matter what other lights might be present, I simply adjust the amount of my fixtures I'll use to dominate the scene in a sway that pleases my eye.

Any ways, I am very happy to say that I'll never again use Kino's, which they are a true hazard on any set or location, neither will I ever again use any type of HMI's below 4k as I now have plenty of strength from LED fixtures, and can't wait as technology brings us ever stronger LED lamps to allow for Spot fixtures to replace all but the very largest HMI's.

Any way, back at one of your pints, one must be careful with the CRI and how the releasing manufacturer might measure it, and same goes for the clarity and the purity of the white color in their Daylight 5600k fixtures, as I have come across some surprising results despite what the sellers were advertising.
 
I agree with that last point Ketch.

I created a spreadsheet that would take the lux, candlepower, or whatever format the manufacturer reported light intensity for their fixtures and created a formula that would set the values to a common one. I had to do this because some manufacturers reported values in feet, some in meters, and most often, even if they gave the same units, the distance marks were not the same. Same with light readings, some in FC, some in lux, etc...

So I created a massive data entry project and, my conclusion was that the manufacturers are all F'ed up in their reporting. I can find many many examples of data points within the table for a single fixture that violate the Inverse Square Rule. Apparently, so and so's fixture can violate the laws of physics. Ha!!

So the data values are not to be trusted. I also found radical differences for fixtures of the same wattage and size/design. Apparently a 650 fresnel is not always a 650 fresnel.

I also conducted my own tests using several calibrated light meters and, got very different readings compared to published stats for that identical fixture. So either there are major manufacturing variations, or the published values are hyped.

Now, the standard approach if you confront the light manufacturer is the reply that you are an amatuer and these results were conducted by some lab that they hired, blah blah blah. Basically, its the same strategy that corporations use anytime they are confronted with conflicting facts, whether its in a court or in the media.

Of course, light intensity is something that can be readily measured by us so-called amatuers. Can you imagine what the manufacturers are doing with their reported CRI and color temperature data?
 
Group buy on lights was mentioned earlier -- I'm definitely interested.
 
KETCH ROSSi said:
Any ways, I am very happy to say that I'll never again use Kino's, which they are a true hazard on any set or location, neither will I ever again use any type of HMI's below 4k as I now have plenty of strength from LED fixtures, and can't wait as technology brings us ever stronger LED lamps to allow for Spot fixtures to replace all but the very largest HMI's.
Click to expand...

There is NO led lite than can replace a 2.5 k or 1.2 hmi.
 
That is what you think, but is not what it is, which of course are two different things, fact is that there is already a equally powerful 1.2k HMI equivalent LED lamp, and I have tested it, and love it, reason I say nothing below a 4k HMI will be used my me is because I don't see the need for it, of course as I said, when a stronger punch is needed nothing so far can replace a 4k+ HMI... ;)
 
KETCH ROSSi said:
That is what you think, but is not what it is, which of course are two different things, fact is that there is already a equally powerful 1.2k HMI equivalent LED lamp, and I have tested it, and love it, reason I say nothing below a 4k HMI will be used my me is because I don't see the need for it, of course as I said, when a stronger punch is needed nothing so far can replace a 4k+ HMI... ;)
Click to expand...

That may be, would like to know which one is as strong as a spotted up 1.2 hmi par, and as any Gaffer will tell you, a led light is still not as versatile as most hmi's.
 
I've been using no-name LED's from ebay for a year or so and they are awesome (1000 LED from PROtog and a smaller one somewhere from HongKong). These two shots are predominantly lit with them:

Softened:

MatthewScott_DOP_06 by [MTS]Films, on Flickr
Harsher:

MatthewScott_DOP_02 by [MTS]Films, on Flickr

The color is good at the daylight end, but not amazing at the 3200 end....nothing to freak out about though.
 
Steve G said:
That may be, would like to know which one is as strong as a spotted up 1.2 hmi par, and as any Gaffer will tell you, a led light is still not as versatile as most hmi's.
Click to expand...

Very true.

One must not confuse their own style of lighting as being the only way of doing things and try to lead others down the same path. Unless of course, they are trying to match that specific style.
There are many tools available for us to work with - the best solution is not to start with a bias against others, but to work with the strengths of each fixture or source. Sometimes, that means working with just a bounce. Sometimes practicals. Other times, painting the scene with lights involves a number of different types working together - HMI, plasma, fluorescent, LED's - even some tungsten fresnels, china balls, rotating gobo's, flexible pads and / or theatrical fixtures (just a few of many choices). Each has a role in the right situation.
The best in the field know better than to dismiss a category of lighting sources by simply comparing the lumen output. The way a reflector or lens shapes the light before the gaffer even begins to modify the pattern or texture can be important to the look of a particular shot.

I will never argue that each of us has their own way of approaching a scene - and that includes how we choose our favorite illumination sources as a starting point.
Or, in some cases, by removing light that is already there.
My point is that the selection of fixture - and how it is used - is a matter of personal preference. What is right for one is not the bible for all.

Experiment. Learn what works for you - and then refine it to create great images.
 
Brian F Kobylarz said:
Very true.

One must not confuse their own style of lighting as being the only way of doing things and try to lead others down the same path. Unless of course, they are trying to match that specific style.
There are many tools available for us to work with - the best solution is not to start with a bias against others, but to work with the strengths of each fixture or source. Sometimes, that means working with just a bounce. Sometimes practicals. Other times, painting the scene with lights involves a number of different types working together - HMI, plasma, fluorescent, LED's - even some tungsten fresnels, china balls, rotating gobo's, flexible pads and / or theatrical fixtures (just a few of many choices). Each has a role in the right situation.
The best in the field know better than to dismiss a category of lighting sources by simply comparing the lumen output. The way a reflector or lens shapes the light before the gaffer even begins to modify the pattern or texture can be important to the look of a particular shot.

I will never argue that each of us has their own way of approaching a scene - and that includes how we choose our favorite illumination sources as a starting point.
Or, in some cases, by removing light that is already there.
My point is that the selection of fixture - and how it is used - is a matter of personal preference. What is right for one is not the bible for all.

Experiment. Learn what works for you - and then refine it to create great images.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. I've mentioned before about the LEDs I use that they are great, "for what they are". They're kind of a one-trick-pony in my book, but are perfect for what I use them for. Beyond that, not much use, but I'm very open to seeing how this and other technologies continue to broaden the spectrum of lighting possibilities.
 
Brian F Kobylarz said:
Very true.

One must not confuse their own style of lighting as being the only way of doing things and try to lead others down the same path. Unless of course, they are trying to match that specific style.
There are many tools available for us to work with - the best solution is not to start with a bias against others, but to work with the strengths of each fixture or source. Sometimes, that means working with just a bounce. Sometimes practicals. Other times, painting the scene with lights involves a number of different types working together - HMI, plasma, fluorescent, LED's - even some tungsten fresnels, china balls, rotating gobo's, flexible pads and / or theatrical fixtures (just a few of many choices). Each has a role in the right situation.
The best in the field know better than to dismiss a category of lighting sources by simply comparing the lumen output. The way a reflector or lens shapes the light before the gaffer even begins to modify the pattern or texture can be important to the look of a particular shot.

I will never argue that each of us has their own way of approaching a scene - and that includes how we choose our favorite illumination sources as a starting point.
Or, in some cases, by removing light that is already there.
My point is that the selection of fixture - and how it is used - is a matter of personal preference. What is right for one is not the bible for all.

Experiment. Learn what works for you - and then refine it to create great images.
Click to expand...

Your words are golden. More please!! Thanks for your input :)
 
KETCH ROSSi said:
fact is that there is already a equally powerful 1.2k HMI equivalent LED lamp, and I have tested it, and love it, .. ;)
Click to expand...

Dear Ketch,
i love your work and specialy your lighting and I do take note of what you have to offer on the reduser.
i love the versatility of the LED lights but so far I'm having problem finding strong enough fixtures to help me out in out door scenes.
could you please let me know about the strongest LED fixtures tat you know of?
thank you
 
Brian F Kobylarz said:
Very true.

One must not confuse their own style of lighting as being the only way of doing things and try to lead others down the same path. Unless of course, they are trying to match that specific style.
There are many tools available for us to work with - the best solution is not to start with a bias against others, but to work with the strengths of each fixture or source. Sometimes, that means working with just a bounce. Sometimes practicals. Other times, painting the scene with lights involves a number of different types working together - HMI, plasma, fluorescent, LED's - even some tungsten fresnels, china balls, rotating gobo's, flexible pads and / or theatrical fixtures (just a few of many choices). Each has a role in the right situation.
The best in the field know better than to dismiss a category of lighting sources by simply comparing the lumen output. The way a reflector or lens shapes the light before the gaffer even begins to modify the pattern or texture can be important to the look of a particular shot.

I will never argue that each of us has their own way of approaching a scene - and that includes how we choose our favorite illumination sources as a starting point.
Or, in some cases, by removing light that is already there.
My point is that the selection of fixture - and how it is used - is a matter of personal preference. What is right for one is not the bible for all.

Experiment. Learn what works for you - and then refine it to create great images.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. All tools have their place.
 
Shapour Daneshmand said:
Dear Ketch,
i love your work and specialy your lighting and I do take note of what you have to offer on the reduser.
i love the versatility of the LED lights but so far I'm having problem finding strong enough fixtures to help me out in out door scenes.
could you please let me know about the strongest LED fixtures tat you know of?
thank you
Click to expand...

If you want to balance out the daytime sun in California, there is no led that is strong enough. You are going to need at least a 6k hmi, which you can bounce to soften it up, or use mirror boards which reflect sunlight, put them through a silk... Hey presto. When I shoot in countries with consistent sunlight, mirror boards and silks are a key part of my lighting package.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top