Hot Tungsten vs led tungsten now?

[rob norton]

Quality of light in terms of the shape of the source...a little tough to match a fresnel unit, but then again not much in modern lighting relies on fresnels any more.

Yeah, I struggle to see much difference with lights like the Prolycht 675. It might be mostly nostalgia, but some Gaffers like tungsten because of the simplicity with no electronic interface, easily replaceable lamps, no charging batteries, not working with photo reflectors, and smaller lights. But these tools feel more inappropriate with each generation of LEDs.

In our lighting package is:

1x 5/2k Fresnel
4x 750w Source 4
2x 2k blondie
2x 1k parcan (par64)
2x 750w arri open face
2x 650w arri fresnel
2x 150w dedos

I'd love to replace all of these with LED equivalents but despite a huge outlay, an increased rental rate might not be guaranteed since many people expect the same pricing even though the equipment gets upgraded.

 

[ahalpert]

Scanned it, saw the section at 9:36 where the exposure levels, fill and contrast were markedly different between the tungsten source and the LED source, don't need to see any more. That is always going to psychologically affect the results. The sources need to be both pushed through at least a double break but better still a book light, inspected looking back from subject to diffusion to make sure they are both equally uniform, then carefully metered or scoped (I'd do waveform, parade and vectorscope myself) to ensure the color and intensity are exactly the same. Anything less isn't apples to apples.

I dunno, man. I've had a lot of "wow, what is that" moments with the subject passing through a light in doc scenarios. It's always a tungsten source. Never had a moment like that with an LED. Candlelight looks great, too.

But hey, whatever helps you sleep at night

 

[morgan_moore]

Scanned it,

I scanned it. Seemed to be waffle.

My feel is that the very dark red of a skin will turn to black (and create 'bad skin' therefore) and this is important.

So the SSI score of 90 might be completely useless if the final red patch is at 70.

The SSI could be a good 'scene evaluator' but the zone of interest is the nose shadow of 50 year old men or skin challenges of a mid teen and the SSI may do nothing for that.

Any valuable skintone video would be filling the frame with a face as an ECU

 

[markfpv]

I dunno, man. I've had a lot of "wow, what is that" moments with the subject passing through a light in doc scenarios. It's always a tungsten source. Never had a moment like that with an LED. Candlelight looks great, too.

But hey, whatever helps you sleep at night
View attachment 5711981

Wow. Right. Perfect Anecdotal evidence.
I wish I had put all my Arri & Lowel Tungsten kits up for sale to many of you in this thread... it's sounding like I could have gotten lots more $ now then I did back then.

I'm not here to argue. But to Charles point - I sure am glad I can use my Forza 720B with a 3x4 soft box as close as I want to talent without heat being a concern. And don't even get me started on having to use 1/2 or full CTB gels on those hot tungsten units when trying to match in daylight 4500 - 5600 or higher ranges.

 

[ahalpert]

Wow. Right. Perfect Anecdotal evidence.
I wish I had put all my Arri & Lowel Tungsten kits up for sale to many of you in this thread... it's sounding like I could have gotten lots more $ now then I did back then.

I'm not here to argue. But to Charles point - I sure am glad I can use my Forza 720B with a 3x4 soft box as close as I want to talent without heat being a concern. And don't even get me started on having to use 1/2 or full CTB gels on those hot tungsten units when trying to match in daylight 4500 - 5600 or higher ranges.

yeah, anecdotal evidence. combined with charts that illustrate why. the only question is if I'm suffering from confirmation bias. And my feeling is that you have a reaction to something without knowing what the source is then the bias is removed.

I'm not advocating using hot lights. I'm saying I use LEDs even though the color reproduction is inferior. I've considered keying interviews with a hotlight and letting the rest be LED. but the hassle factor is still beyond my tolerance. But that's essentially what John Brawley does on his shows, as I understand it. He brings in hotlights just to key CUs.

I don't know why people need to feel like the choices they make are optimal in every way. Life is full of trade-offs. LEDs are great. Just not in every way.

 

[rob norton]

And don't even get me started on having to use 1/2 or full CTB gels on those hot tungsten units when trying to match in daylight 4500 - 5600 or higher ranges.

Mark, this isn't directed at you, but most people using tungsten lights were extremely unorganised when it came to gels. No one would have fond memories of tracking down a handful of randomly sized, unmarked gels that looks like a dog's breakfast. I made sets of gels for each size barn doors in their most open position. This means the dedo dlh4s have their own set, 650 fresnels have another, 2k has another etc. Too many people used a one size fits all approach and watching people sort through countless sheets is enough to give you a panic attack. I rolled up each gel, taped closed, then each set got its own tubular case, with each case using a carbiner/strap to live on a lighting stand. Just like today's LEDs only manual and in steps.

I can't remember but I'm pretty sure the original source 4 with 10 degree lens and some hugely inefficient party colour like a deep green, was still brighter than the prolycht 675's equivalent colour and beam angle. So in a larger environment, there are still instances where the cheaper tungsten lights can "free up" your LED workhorses for other purposes. Yes, LED everything with dedo optics, all wirelessly controlled would be amazing, but in terms of access to tools, I'd rather have access to them as an option. So I think the actual results aren't as important as some other behind the scenes benefits.

 

[markfpv]

Mark, this isn't directed at you, but most people using tungsten lights were extremely unorganised when it came to gels.

Ha. No offense taken, Rob - as every production company I worked for early in my career fits this description. It taught me to be more organized when I went out on my own. You're method is / was better than my own - keeping all CTO in one tube - and all CTB in another (and using perm marker to write the strength on each gel).

 

[CharlesPapert]

I developed a pretty good system with CTO/CTB--used a hole punch on opposing corners. One punch for 1/4, two for 1/2, three for full.

 

[Doug Jensen]

I use a large zippered artist's portfolio case to carry my gels, sheets of diffusion, and cookies. Everything stores nice and flat which I find makes them easier to use when I take them out. The case can be unzipped and opened flat on a table or floor to easily access all the contents. The gels aren't arranged alphabetically or or anything anal like that, but it's a pretty easy way to organize stuff and keep them in good shape. I've got some stuff in the case that has been serving be for more than 20 years. I rarely use the gels anymore but the cookies and diffusion come out all the time. The flat case fits better in my truck and on my magliner than a round tube would.

 

[rob norton]

I developed a pretty good system with CTO/CTB--used a hole punch on opposing corners. One punch for 1/4, two for 1/2, three for full.

That's really smart. And potential for confirmation in the dark!

The flat case fits better in my truck and on my magliner than a round tube would.

Ahh flat vs. cylindrical, that's an even bigger debate. I sort of want to lay dozens of gels out on a table now on a paid shoot to see how they're received, not as much wow factor as controlling via phone.

 

[Doug Jensen]

Ahh flat vs. cylindrical, that's an even bigger debate. I sort of want to lay dozens of gels out on a table now on a paid shoot to see how they're received, not as much wow factor as controlling via phone.

Okay, I didn't understand that having gear that provides a "wow factor" when you pull it out was part of the job. I kind of thought clients judged me more by what they see on the screen, rather than the gear I bring into the room. Got it. I'm sure that using a phone to run your lights from the other side of the room almost seems like magic to the civilians in the room. Do they gather 'round and try to touch it like the apes in 2001? Do you have your phone programmed to play Also Sprach Zarathustra when you power up?

Seriously, about the only time gels come out are when I want to change the color of my Fresnels. They are all daylight-balanced with no color control. But the portfolio keeps stuff nice and neat, and the cookies protected from damage.

But your comment does remind me of a client back in the '90's who had me produce about 80 medical videos over the course of ten years. The doctor loved to feel like he was on a Hollywood film set, so we used to bring lots of extra c-stands, flags, reflectors, etc. and scatter them around so the production looked far more complex that it really was. The previous production company he hired used to bring in a 3-camera OB truck, so I had that to compete with. The client wanted the "wow factor" and I gave it to him. If only he could see me running lights with a phone now, he'd probably piss his pants with excitement.

 

[CharlesPapert]

Keeping my nose in here and DVInfo back in the day, I got the sense that a lot of smaller jobs especially for "civilian" clients seemed to incorporate a notable amount of wow factor. During the DSLR era I remember reading how a lot of people "dressed up" their cameras because the client might have dismissed them for not having a serious enough camera to justify their rate. I think a lot of matteboxes got sold at that time to people who never used them for filters or attached an eyebrow (and maybe weren't even aware of those capabilities). Honestly, I get it. In the era that I was shooting that kind of stuff, you simply wouldn't be using a camcorder to shoot a job that required a Betacam because the footage wouldn't hold up. Now that a tiny camera can produce stunning results, that's all over--but I can see where a client might be perplexed if you were shooting on a pocket mirrorless or phone and think "why am I paying this much for that?"

your comment does remind me of a client back in the '90's who had me produce about 80 medical videos over the course of ten years. The doctor loved to feel like he was on a Hollywood film set, so we used to bring lots of extra c-stands, flags, reflectors, etc. and scatter them around so the production looked far more complex that it really was.

I am reminded of my era shooting corporate work for a production company in the early 90's. We regularly shot at the corporate headquarters for a large international concern. The owners of the production company were convinced that these mid-level executives we were shooting would be impressed by the opposite of what Doug describes, so after setting up we had to go around taping all the cables in neat parallel lines, moving all the dead cases out of sight, making everything as minimalist as possible. It was all very buttoned-up and it was always entertaining to watch my bosses ass-kiss these largely indifferent executives. One day we had a prompter operator come up from the city, a really colorful middle-age guy with a lot of rings and a hilarious non-stop patter. You know the kind of person who talks out loud about their process--"let's see, I'm gonna need to plug this in over here, and then this, OK that's looking good". Always funny to me. Anyway, after our boss came to him with his nervous handwringing intensity to make some changes in the copy, the prompter operator muttered "jeez, last week I was working with DeNiro--this is just some mid-level shmuck working in an office, the way this guy is acting around him you'd think he was the King of England".

 

[Doug Jensen]

I think a lot of matteboxes got sold at that time to people who never used them for filters or attached an eyebrow (and maybe weren't even aware of those capabilities).

SO TRUE!!!
99% of the time I see a mattebox being used by a solo-shooter, there is no glass in it. And coming in a close second is the obligatory follow-focus. Often seen on a $200 consumer lens.

 

[paulears]

I am part of an official museum collection in the UK, and we have a huge collection of British, European and American lighting gear, donated by people who cannot stand the idea of scrapping them, but dont actually wan5 to use them. So imagine a range of theatre and TV lighting by the greats and the dirt cheapies, going back to Brutes. I have rewritten my own likes and dislikes. In my studio now it is all LED and I have worked out that my love of tungsten, is NOT the tungsten or tungsten halogen lamps, its the optics and the lenses. Popping an LED source behind the same lens that worked fine before just doesnt work properly. The only old tungsten light that I'm keeping is an old Mole that has lovely soft edges, and is on a castor pneumatic stand. We've also had visitors from the firms who made some of the kit, years back. One elderly gentleman identified one as a prototype he had made when colour TV was new. We discovered the reason it found its way into many TV studios here was that it was terrible as a theatre light, it’s intended purpose. It leaked light like a seive, and it was obvious on a stage set with lots of close scenery. However, hanging from a pantograph, nobody noticed! Many units we get donated have cracked lenses and when we take ones from others with damaged casings, for example, we discover the lenses are subtly different on both PC and Fresnel types. Deeper ridges, or ridges with darkened surfaces to reduce spill, but clearly not the same design. This explains perhaps why some people love theirs but others hate them? Lots of the TV lights seem designed for convenience or speed of focus by pole or poking stick, but this is not an age thing. We have follow spots too, and my favourite of 40 years is simply NOT the best. Without doubt, the carbon arc ones are! Quality of light is paramount, I'm no longer convinced its the actual lightsource. I’ll post some pics later. I need to resize them.

 

[morgan_moore]

Its interesting. I often shoot with
1) canonn r6
2) nikkor 50mm

I expect people to be impressed that I have refined my art to such an extent that this is all the gear I need. They are not.

 

[CharlesPapert]

In my studio now it is all LED and I have worked out that my love of tungsten, is NOT the tungsten or tungsten halogen lamps, its the optics and the lenses.

This is very much on my mind right now as I am prepping a film noir short film that is set in the 1940's and will be emulating the period look of the day using hard light. We'll bring in tungsten at least for the keys, but given the budget and having to use house power, nothing bigger than a baby. But the arsenal used back in the day would have gone up to a big eye 5K, which is a different look due to the much bigger lens. So, sort of wrapping my head around the plan of attack in this regard.

 

[rob norton]

This is very much on my mind right now as I am prepping a film noir short film that is set in the 1940's and will be emulating the period look of the day using hard light. We'll bring in tungsten at least for the keys, but given the budget and having to use house power, nothing bigger than a baby. But the arsenal used back in the day would have gone up to a big eye 5K, which is a different look due to the much bigger lens. So, sort of wrapping my head around the plan of attack in this regard.

And LEDs are out because there are no Fresnel lenses larger than 10" under 1,000W? The fiilex q10 is the "modern day 5k" but diameter is probably too small https://fiilex.com/products/Q10_Color.php

Could an array of frensel-ish lenses get you the 5k effect? https://fiilex.com/products/QUAD_Color.php

Otherwise, can you put a dimmed down 2k lamp in the 5k Fresnel?

 

[paulears]

Gets very orange - although power in our collection (housed in 3 large barns and 2 40' containers is limited. What you can do though is see if there is an alternate lamp that uses the same socket style - as long as the centre filament height is the same, this works pretty well. Or you can make up a conversion kit if you don't want to go back to the full power. We've been experimenting with COB LED sources, and generally they are not remotely good, mainly because the need for the reflector goes away, which radically changes the beam quality. Oddly, one Strand stage light, universally hated when introduced in the 70s, mainly sold to schools - us now great with the COB, it was terrible for light output with a 500W original lamp. We've also got quite good at downrating 225A Brutes with smaller carbons - running at around 80A or so, with really nice light output because of the huge lens. I've attached a few pictures of what we have, in various stages of restoration. You can see the colour of the things running at 25% - A 2K on full instead of the same sized 5K lamp is fine.

We even tried a bat signal - but no low clouds that night.

 

[CharlesPapert]

And LEDs are out because there are no Fresnel lenses larger than 10" under 1,000W? The fiilex q10 is the "modern day 5k" but diameter is probably too small https://fiilex.com/products/Q10_Color.php

Could an array of frensel-ish lenses get you the 5k effect? https://fiilex.com/products/QUAD_Color.php

Otherwise, can you put a dimmed down 2k lamp in the 5k Fresnel?

All good questions...it's a black and white project so dimmed down isn't a problem for color. I'd still be anxious powering a 2K off a 20 amp circuit though, even with low power draw from the dimming (in case at some point it gets dimmed back up). It's all in the shadow quality--the look of period film is fresnel light direct on faces, and the resulting shadow is so specific. Truth be told I'm not shooting this, "just" directing, so I'll let my DP figure this all out!

 

[Doug Jensen]

All good questions...it's a black and white project so dimmed down isn't a problem for color.

Charles, are you shooting in B&W or just going to convert in post? I've been thinking about doing something in B&W.