Electronic Variable... DIFFUSION

Yes, definitely cool stuff. Can really make things more efficient and quicker, plus (seemingly) having the ability to precisely dial in exactly how much diffusion. Do you think it will just be completely variable or also may have "pre-set" levels(i.e: 1/4 silk, full-stop, etc.)? I wonder what size(s) the panel will be available in? They were a little vague: "panel will affix to gel frames or precisely-sized Chimera soft boxes."
 
It has been continuously variable, so I don't see why that would continue. I've had various conversations with both Zylight and Chimera about this product but nothing I can really share here. I'm primarily interested in a 4x4 frame size myself.

The tricky part is that it is a tad delicate certainly compared to gridcloth as one would normally see in front of a Chimera. So it's something more like an expendable, like diffusion--but priced much higher, of course. It will be interesting to see how it finds itself in the marketplace.
 
I was hoping for a 4x4 myself. Use that a bunch for interview set-ups. It sounds like you can roll it up for transport/storage(release says "flexible"), hopefully.

Wonder how pricing is gonna shake out?
 
Really cool stuff. Gaffers wouldn't need a "set" of frames they could just have one per light. Of course styles of diffusion is where it gets really interesting, but density alone doesn't seem like that big of a deal? If an LED has the output and power draw isn't a concern, how is this better than dimming the light instead? I'm probably missing something pretty obvious!

I'm talking about the Zylight demo Charles linked more than the Chimera product. The man says cool lights only - big hot lights are where they could come in very handy. You could put up a frame in advance with clear in front of an HMI high in the air then diffuse when appropriate, no testing different frames etc. What if there was the entire rosco/lee catalogue of diffusion plus gels, along with nets etc.?

From the press release: "The adjustable opacity of the Active Diffusion panel eliminates the need for an assistant as operators can instantaneously dial in the diffusion from 0-100% through remote-control handsets." I'm unsure why Chimera are pushing this bogus narrative. I know budgets are shrinking and crew sizes are getting smaller but tacking on the "assistant eliminator" line as a selling point is unnecessary. I'm of course reading into it way too much but it's the type of thing producers latch onto e.g. demanding RED etc. It's in Chimera's best interest to push film/video production as being valuable so it seems counter to their stance of a company which is heavily reliant on the film/television industry.
 
rob norton said:
Really cool stuff. Gaffers wouldn't need a "set" of frames they could just have one per light. Of course styles of diffusion is where it gets really interesting, but density alone doesn't seem like that big of a deal? If an LED has the output and power draw isn't a concern, how is this better than dimming the light instead? I'm probably missing something pretty obvious!
Click to expand...

As the density of the diffusion increases, as does the softness of the source. I'm not sure if it's in the above video I linked or another one, but one of those early demos showed the shadows softening as the diffusion is dialed up. Of course, output will decrease at the same time, but that would be the case when changing out diffusion regardless.

What this gets into is really a bigger discussion, which is how do you pick the "right" diffusion in any instance. If the goal is to make a source as soft and large as possible, you go with the thickest diffusion you can which will provide maximum dispersion and the largest apparent source. If you start with a relatively small, hard, narrow source like a fresnel, you will need a substantially thick piece of diffusion to turn that unit into a big source. And there is a certain limit to how large you can functionally go. You can't put an 8x8 diffusion frame in front of a 1200 par and expect it to fill the 8x8; even with full gridcloth or muslin, you'll still get a hotspot in the middle. The fix is to use an intermediate piece of diffusion halfway inbetween the light and the larger frame (in a pinch you can even apply it directly to the barndoors, spread as wide as possible). Now however, you have to make two decisions; what type of diffusion for the primary frame and the intermediate? My usually formula is a 4x4 of 250 and a light grid 8x8 which will create that lovely large source look. But what if the unit was already slightly larger and softer to begin with, like a 1x2 LED? you may be able to back off the intermediate to something lighter like opal, or the 8x8 to 1/4 grid, which will give you more output. It's not an exact science!

Now if that 4x4 frame were Active Diffusion, you could dial the knob up and down while looking into the 8x8 and find the exact amount of diffusion required to fill the 8x8 and still deliver maximum output from the source. Or, you could turn around and look at the subject and do the same thing. It may just be that a little heat in the center gives you some snap to the look! (if you never tried it, put a hard source in front of a big soft source sometime--a combined key and fill, it's pretty interesting). Sometimes you need just a little taste of diffusion, like when working with a par or Leko and there's a little fringing on the edges of the beam--this would be another great use of Active Diffusion, finding the exact sweet spot.

Same thing with an LED array. We know that the dozens/hundreds of little point sources make for some serious ugly shadows, plus they are tough for talent to look into. With this material you can find just the point at which the shadows smooth out, or the talent can work without squinting, without killing more output level than you have to.
 
Thanks Charles, some great things to think about.

What if the tech was in an 8x8 and it let you add shapes or patterns and you could assign the diffusion accordingly? Could the hot spot be taken care of with a circle (or whatever is needed to cover the hot spot) that is more diffused than the rest of the frame? The density could drop off as it gets further from the middle? Would that let you get rid of the intermediate frame?

I'll try the simultaneous hard/soft source next chance I get.
 
I'm surprised this hasn't happened sooner, smart film technology has been around for a while as a product for adding opacity to windows/glass for privacy.
 
Rob:

The problem with modifying the center of the larger frame is that the hotspot will appear in the center if you stand in front of it directly, but as you walk left and right the hotspot will effectively travel to the edges. So doubling up in the center isn't really an ideal solution. That's why the intermediate works best--it is pre-diffusing the small source into a larger one, which then will spread more evenly with the full-size frame. Same principle as the double baffle in a Chimera.
 
I am fascinated by this diffusion, but completely unsure about how it compares to normal diffusion. Does it kill all directionality? Can it be used as a bounce? What is the transmission?

I'm still trying to find a good diffusion solution for cheap battery powered LED lights. They usually need one or two layers of diffusion to get a good quality of light despite being a broad source. I wonder if this could solve a lot of the problems.
 
I can only speak to the original version which I last saw demoed around the holidays at Zylight. Not sure what Chimera has done since. But that had a shiny surface so it wouldn't be suitable for bouncing (in fact I indicated a bit of concern about it reflecting backlights back into the shot). It's not really all that comparable to regular diffusion, it has a different quality due to the way it works. I hope to do some comparisons and measurements against traditional diffusion soon, to get a sense of it.
 
In the video, it appears that the diffusion is just varying levels of opaque. When the dial reached full diffusion, I couldn't tell if it was completely blocking the light or if it was creating a very diffuse, low intensity source. It did seem that there was some spreading of the light as it got more opaque.
 
I normally bounce into a white or silvered umbrella depending on the subject. If I need more diffusion, I add a sheet of Rosco Tough Spun in front of the LED. The output of the LED is variable. Makes for a small package and cheap.
 
I should probably indicate once again: I've only played with the original demo material that Zylight built; Chimera's production version may have changed along the way. I'll see it with you guys at NAB (but look for me in the promotional materials)!
 
I remember playing with this back when Zylight introduced it as a product idea years ago. At the ime there were concerns as to how rugged the material would be in the production world, but perhaps they got past that. It certainly has been a long development time. I like the idea of dialing in exactly the diffusion I want for a key light on talent. It's not always a question of make it as soft as possible. Some people look best with differing degrees of diffusion and it's always been a dance to move the key and a diffusion frame closer/farther higher/lower until the features really click. A few inches here or there can really make the difference with lovely portrait light, so I can see myself tweaking the density of the diffusion as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top