Feedback on new CoolLights Flo

blake2404 said:
Hi @ eco_bach. Just wondering if you ever posted any of the Interview Footage with the "cool lights" flo's that you purchased and what you thought of them so far?
Click to expand...

I know you were not asking me, but I have posted some pictures of shots with my great set of Cool Lights flo's. I've had great success with them and Richard as well. I wouldn't hesitate one second when it comes to buying more lights from Richard.

Take a look here if you want. You can see some shots of my set up and the results.

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.102671214207.90102.645759207&type=3&l=e68061c109
 
You won't be unhappy with whatever Cool Lights product you choose. Also, I have been, and still use the Cool Lights flo bulbs with no sign of any green spike or color issues.
 
The 655P would be closer to a 1200w tungsten behind a softbox. Would also be equivalent to about a 300w HMI behind a softbox. The reason I say behind softbox is because a fluorescent is considered a "soft light" can be directly compared to a hard light such as a tungsten or HMI instrument.
 
hey Richard, thanks for chiming in!.....yeah, well i guess i'll just give you a specific example. One shoot i had we used a 1k hmi i believe. We were shooting all day in one room and wanted to basically have the same amount of "sunlight" coming through the one window, also to totally blow-out the window with light, so we used the hmi outside the window. I know its a ridiculous thought, but i'm assuming i cannot acheive this with the "655".

Regardless of budget it was just an idea to keep my entire kit fluorescent as opposed to be mixing sources.

I might also add that I am no lighting guru especially when talking hmi....lol
 
This is where the "soft" and "hard" comes in I was talking about before. You can't really simulate the sun very well with something that is inherently a soft light like a flo. Soft light is diffused, has limited throw, wide beam, etc. Hard light comes from a point source like a tungsten or HMI bulb. It has a longer throw. Strength is directly related to the size/wattage of the bulb along with the mirror and lens that are paired with it to increase its efficiency. The hard light is used as a spot light to produce a strong beam. The soft light is very wide and is more what we would consider a "flood" with no way to turn it into a spot beam.

Imagine you took the "1K HMI" (there isn't a 1K so it was probably a 1200w HMI) you used in that scenario before and you added a bedsheet or silk frame in front of it. Would it continue to work shining in through the window or would it have been so weakened by the diffusion in front of it that it was now too wide and scattered to do much good. Think also about the shadows from such lights as well. The 1.2K shining in the window would produce a certain kind of shadow. Add the diffusion and see what that does to the shadows cast along the path of the beam. You will see they are now undefined shadows, very weak. Not at all like typical sunlight coming in a window on a non-cloudy day.

Thus the same thing happens with the 655 trying to use it in the place of the 1.2K. First of all, its nowhere near that strong, its more like a 300w HMI as I was saying, next its inherently a large and diffused source so its throw is limited and can't be increased (you can make a hard light soft by adding diffusion but you can't harden a soft light ever). Shadows are undefined with the 655's soft light as well so it's just not the right instrument to use in the scenario of simulating sunlight. Its more used in cases where you'd use a hard light with diffusion in front of it like an interview where you want the light to be flattering or for lighting a green screen very wide and evenly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top