Are you thinking about buying nets, flags, or larger silks too? I see you are in LA, I know I would be keeping my eye out for used tungstens. I know I did not see any here in Phoenix after searching for a few months. Though with used maybe folk are pricing them too high. I know in my experience a 2k was extremely useful. Great for bouncing off ceilings. I am not so sure about getting 4 of the 150w because my own experience with those is when they are used there are cheaper options (like PAR38s with black wrap or china balls with 150w bulbs). Personally, I would be looking at something like 1 -2k, 2 -1k, 2-3 - 650w, and 2 300w. I also had thought of the PAR64s, but as you can see their use is must more limited. Though there is a good probability they would work well gelled and shining through windows and as lights for gobos.
About PAR 64 lights
- Thread starter jamani
- Start date
Actually I'm set for nets, flags and silks - I bought a bunch of DJ gear, because when they are on sale or in promotion ($100 off if you buy $X etc.), it's a good bang for the buck:
1) 2 of the 8x8 butterfly kits
2) 2 DJ Flag Pro Kits (24" x 36") plus a bunch of flag screens
3) DJ Flag Kit Standard (18" x 24") plus a bunch of flag screens
4) DJ Luma Pop (came free with the butterfly kit in a deal)
5) 2 DJ Diffusion Gel Kits plus a bunch of diffusion gels
6) 2 DJ Color Correction Gel Kits plus a bunch of color gels
Plus a whole bunch of reflectors and umbrellas of all sizes and kinds from other places. So, like I said, I'm not looking for light shaping gear at all, nor for other grip stuff like c-stands, light stands, tripods, clamps, sandbags, gear bags etc., etc., etc.. I'm set. Of course, if something nifty comes up, I might buy, but only if I need it.
But I have no lights (except LED lights, where I'm set). So, just as I systematically bought grip and light shaping gear, I am going to buy lights. The reason why it's hard for me to buy used, is because I do a ton of research, and then have very specific lights/gear in mind, and that usually rarely comes up on ebay, or if it comes up it's like 10% cheaper than getting it from B&H, at which point it's not worth the aggravation. So ebay just doesn't work for me, unless it's new stuff.
Anyhow, thanks for your advice wrt. the fresnels. My problem with 2K lights is that a lot of shorts I do is in my apartment which is in a building from 1928 (and very old wiring) - basically, I'm experimenting and learning cinematography (so I don't have to ask anyone for any favors). I've been very careful to not use anything but batteries on my LED lights, but obviously I'll have to graduate to tungsten and AC lights - only I'm afraid the wiring won't take 2K lights... actually before I even buy lights, I'm thinking of hiring a licensed electrician to come out and give me a thorough report on the wiring and all the outlets and what can take which and how much.
But given that I'm interested in keeping the overall wattage down, that is one reason why I was looking into Source 4 lights, because they put out hard light much more efficiently than f.ex. some fresnels. Here's a case in point:
Source Four 750 Watt Edison Plug Black 5° Ellipsoidal Spotlight : I can blast this from outside of my window gelled for daylight (or moonlight) and it's still bright enough even with the CTB gelling that I can get decent output, and since it takes only 750 watts, I can still put plug other lights inside - what would I do if I had a 2K light? I'd have exhausted my home wiring capabilities just with that one 2K light (if the wiring can even take 2K). That was also my thinking behind this: Source Four 750 Watt PARNel : again, I'm getting more footcandles out of this and still only using 750 watts, so I can still use other lights.
The reason I was looking at having several 150 fresnels, was that again, I can use these and have multiple light points for fairly small overall wattage draw. So my key concern is that I don't want to use more than about 1500 watts at a time, so however I break down the lights, I'm looking for most footcandle bang for watt buck and still have some control.
paulears
Veteran
Source 4 5 degree luminaires (horrible EU word) are really a very specialist piece of kit. Very bright, near parallel beam - but really a special effect, so perhaps best hired in? In your power limited space, do you have the physical space to move it far enough away. I'd have thought that at the furthest distance, getting a beam wide enough would be tricky. In the UK, we call your ellipsoid style LX kit profiles - because of their superior ability to project shapes and patterns. While I'm sure a great gobo pattern on a wall or floor, with some haze can look stunning, it's hardly everyday stuff - hence my video preference for Fresnel lenses. I'm a fairly late convert to LED for theatre shows, but video for me at the moment is still tungsten, although if money wasn't an issue, I'd happily use LED now, even though I still don't think the light 'quality' as yet makes it a swap out for tungsten - but the heat reduction would be nice!
Final backtrack - the PARnell is a nice bit of kit. A bit fiddly with the lenses, but useful. Here, they never became that popular. I suspect simply that the fixed lenses just made a normal Fresnel more convenient. I had two, and lost the lenses, sold them, then found the damn things!
Final backtrack - the PARnell is a nice bit of kit. A bit fiddly with the lenses, but useful. Here, they never became that popular. I suspect simply that the fixed lenses just made a normal Fresnel more convenient. I had two, and lost the lenses, sold them, then found the damn things!
Moseph
Veteran
That crazy narrow 5° lens is probably unnecessary. Nobody really uses those for film work. All I ever see are 19°-50° lenses. For a more intense, narrower beam, 2k beam projectors are usually used (which is a VERY expensive light). If the 19° lens isn't intense enough for blasting through your window from afar, you can always bench focus the light so that it has more of a hotspot in the middle of the beam rather than being completely even.
Then again, for shooting through a window from a great distance, a 1200w firestarter would provide even more light than a 19° S4, S4 PAR, or a PAR-nel, and it would work just fine since that's not a situation where you need the precise control of an ERS. Even a standard 1000w VNS PAR64 lamp would probably be brighter than a 19° S4.
paulears
Veteran
The source 4 par is just a clever idea to go up against a traditional can. One housing, and lenses to match the common PAR 64 beam angles. It's smaller, and you can get more in the same space. The 575W version does pretty well what a 1K PAR64 does. It's more expensive of course, but the lamps are a bit cheaper, so over the lifespan, it may work out cheaper. The PARnel was a good idea - just take the same unit and fit a Fresnel lens. However, the beam width was fixed, so he great blending ability and very wide spot-to flood beam angle was lost. This is why you can now buy an ETC 'proper' Fresnel. Much more useful as a tool. ETC get very waspy about the common remove the pin technique - although it is very common. I'm still just uncertain about source 4 products as practical everyday video lights - even ETC don't make much in the way of this industry for their products.
paulears
Veteran
No - you've misunderstood what they are. If you consider the usual PAR 64 lamp - usually CP60, 61 or 62. They're quite expensive - in the UK equivalent price around $25. The Raylight style reflector has the two pin connector, like the sealed beam lamps, but takes conventional plug in tungsten halogen lamps, which are much cheaper. The 'quality' of light isn't so good, the beam width different and it lacks the oomph the CP range has. So when you fit the reflector into a par can, you have a cheaper to run, but dimmer light source. To be honest, I hate them. They don't look good, they're not bright - but they are cheap!
paulears
Veteran
In the crazy world of PARs, The main 3 are narrow -
CP60 12° - Very Narrow (produces a very tight beam with a very hot centre)
CP61 14° - Narrow (not so tight as above but kind of splodgy)
CP62 24° - Medium Flood (but still rather narrow - and the most even)
Then there is
CP95 70° - Wide Flood (and much less used because by spreading the beam, the punch is lost, and the can itself gets in the way. You really need the short nose can version to get all the light out, and it's just a bit useless. A Fresnel is better because the beam spread can be adjusted, and the light quality, on the edges is better. So personally, I never go wider than MFL CP62 - there's just no point. If you only had a pile of PAR cans, then being able to swap out a lamp would perhaps save the day, but for wide angle, there are so many better products available. At 5m distance, you can feel a CP62 on your face, and with your eyes closed, know you are lit. That's a lot of output.
CP60 12° - Very Narrow (produces a very tight beam with a very hot centre)
CP61 14° - Narrow (not so tight as above but kind of splodgy)
CP62 24° - Medium Flood (but still rather narrow - and the most even)
Then there is
CP95 70° - Wide Flood (and much less used because by spreading the beam, the punch is lost, and the can itself gets in the way. You really need the short nose can version to get all the light out, and it's just a bit useless. A Fresnel is better because the beam spread can be adjusted, and the light quality, on the edges is better. So personally, I never go wider than MFL CP62 - there's just no point. If you only had a pile of PAR cans, then being able to swap out a lamp would perhaps save the day, but for wide angle, there are so many better products available. At 5m distance, you can feel a CP62 on your face, and with your eyes closed, know you are lit. That's a lot of output.