Misunderstanding expensive lighting

[SDub]

First of all, some definition: by my standards, any light fixture that is $500 or more a piece is "expensive" relative to what I know.

Say you have someone who is making youtube videos in their basement. They need to cost effectively light their subject and also a little set around them (maybe ~4 lights would do the trick or less). Some of the biggest reasons why certain light fixtures cost more than others is because of CRI, brightness, quality of parts, functionality (switching from warm/cool), throw(?), etc. If you can take any light you want, say the Ikan PL90 and you take the time to gel it to balance it's color accurately, how is that different, from a value standpoint, compared to something more expensive? The ikan has a CRI of 89, whereas something that costs $400 or more is ~93+. Would anyone really know that you were using less expensive light fixtures? Once gelled to be close to color accurate, what separates an Ikan PL90 from a Dracast LED 1000? Simply brightness?

Or how about buying something old, say like a Mole Richardson light off of ebay. Are these economical ways to light for video without really skimping on quality? Am I misunderstanding something about "expensive" lights?

 

[Run&Gun]

Just my .02 from someone who has been doing this for close to 20 years: When I can and the situation allows, good 'ole tungsten is my 1st choice. There are only two full spectrum light sources: the Sun and tungsten. Everything else, Fluorescents, LED's, HMI's are all lacking(and I own fixtures of ALL OF THE ABOVE). Natural Sun light and tungsten are the best looking sources on skin-tones, period. If you're in a completely controllable environment like a basement(no windows, don't have to worry about mixing/working with various sources and color temps), get some used tungsten fixtures off of eBay. I'm not getting into energy savings of heat or anything else, just quality of the final image.

 

[CharlesPapert]

If one is making Youtube videos in the basement, you could be lighting them with any number of inexpensive things so yes, 4% CRI won't make a difference. The one point you made that needs clarifying is that gelling a low CRI instrument doesn't fix it--with discontinuous spectrum lights there are spikes and dips in their color profile that no gel can fix. That is opposed to more accurate units such as HMI's, where a particular globe may have a color temperature shift due to age, but applying the appropriate CT gel can successfully wrangle it back around.

 

[egproductions]

Correct me if i'm wrong but my understanding is that most camera sensors are daylight balanced making the best color fidelity and cleanest channels occurring when ~5600k lighting is used. Also tungsten lights dish out lots of ir pollution which some cameras have trouble with.

 

[Moseph]

Correct me if i'm wrong but my understanding is that most camera sensors are daylight balanced making the best color fidelity and cleanest channels occurring when ~5600k lighting is used. Also tungsten lights dish out lots of ir pollution which some cameras have trouble with.

The difference is pretty negligible in common practice. Color temperature is almost universally selected based on the time of day at which a scene takes place (tungsten for night, daylight for...day). Except for on a stage, in which it's just about always tungsten for either case.

To the OP's question of the difference between an 89 and 93 CRI LED after the 89 CRI LED has been gelled to be color-accurate - well, that's the thing. You'll be hard pressed to even gel it to be "color accurate" at all. You can't add colors that are missing from the output of an LED with gels. So what you're paying for when you buy more expensive LED's with higher CRI's is more advanced phosphors in the emitters that won't leave certain wavelengths of the visible light spectrum in the dark. Will anyone notice the difference? I guess a better question might be "will anyone care?" but barring a side-by-side comparison, it might be difficult to see that a more expensive fixture was used. Or it might not be, not all LED's of an equal CRI are really created equal.

 

[Josh Bass]

Some lights that have the option of 5600/3200 switchability apparently perform better with daylight selected (talking LEDs, Kinos). I am seeing many DPs in town, especially within the last few years, lamp their Divas with all daylight tubes even in controlled/windowless environments. I believe I heard you get more output from the daylight tubes and the color temperature is less "weird" on skin.

 

[SDub]

Just my .02 from someone who has been doing this for close to 20 years: When I can and the situation allows, good 'ole tungsten is my 1st choice. There are only two full spectrum light sources: the Sun and tungsten. Everything else, Fluorescents, LED's, HMI's are all lacking(and I own fixtures of ALL OF THE ABOVE). Natural Sun light and tungsten are the best looking sources on skin-tones, period. If you're in a completely controllable environment like a basement(no windows, don't have to worry about mixing/working with various sources and color temps), get some used tungsten fixtures off of eBay. I'm not getting into energy savings of heat or anything else, just quality of the final image.

Awesome advice. Thanks very much!

To the OP's question of the difference between an 89 and 93 CRI LED after the 89 CRI LED has been gelled to be color-accurate - well, that's the thing. You'll be hard pressed to even gel it to be "color accurate" at all. You can't add colors that are missing from the output of an LED with gels. So what you're paying for when you buy more expensive LED's with higher CRI's is more advanced phosphors in the emitters that won't leave certain wavelengths of the visible light spectrum in the dark. Will anyone notice the difference? I guess a better question might be "will anyone care?" but barring a side-by-side comparison, it might be difficult to see that a more expensive fixture was used. Or it might not be, not all LED's of an equal CRI are really created equal.

I guess I misunderstand gelling then. I thought if a light had like a "green cast" you could gel it with a 1/4 or 1/8 (or more) magenta gel to bring it back in line but if it changes like CharlesPapert says, then no gelling is going to save it.

If one is making Youtube videos in the basement, you could be lighting them with any number of inexpensive things so yes, 4% CRI won't make a difference. The one point you made that needs clarifying is that gelling a low CRI instrument doesn't fix it--with discontinuous spectrum lights there are spikes and dips in their color profile that no gel can fix. That is opposed to more accurate units such as HMI's, where a particular globe may have a color temperature shift due to age, but applying the appropriate CT gel can successfully wrangle it back around.

When I paint I use an Ottlite 25W CFL bulb for light. It's *rated at a 90+ CRI and 5850K. I feel like one of these inside a big China ball would serve as a great key light. It may not have enough output, however.

 

[David W. Jones]

Try going up to say an 85 or 95w CFL in a Chinese lantern.

 

[CharlesPapert]

Some lights that have the option of 5600/3200 switchability apparently perform better with daylight selected (talking LEDs, Kinos). I am seeing many DPs in town, especially within the last few years, lamp their Divas with all daylight tubes even in controlled/windowless environments. I believe I heard you get more output from the daylight tubes and the color temperature is less "weird" on skin.

Certainly possible, but the better solution is to avoid Kinos altogether. I have had more and more issues with them in the past few years to the point where I don't want to work with them ever again. The tubes shift color as they warm up, and I'm seeing more overall casts than I ever remember. On the last show I had them installed in softboxes and could visually see the difference in green/magenta shift in each softbox (requiring 1/8 plus or minusgreen for each box). The only time I will use them now is when we have to do a full-tube switchout for ceiling practicals and I don't have any other choice. For applications where I need to use tubes, I use the Quasar LED's now instead of Kinos, have variable color temp available to me and the color rendition is better and more consistent. For smaller units like a Diva, I now use Celebs, SkyPanels or Litemats.

The problem with going all 5600 is that you lose out on an arsenal of inexpensive tungsten units--there are many less options in the 5600 world (although that continues to grow). You also create issues with existing practicals, as there are few good options for dimmable bulb replacements. Most E26 base bulbs that claim they are daylight generally come in much warmer, and good luck finding the smaller bases in daylight.

I get that if you are traveling around shooting interviews with small lighting setups in practical locations, many of those will take place during the day with windowlight unavoidable, so that makes sense. But to start in a controlled environment and elect daylight balance...mmph.

 

[combatentropy]

If low budget, use what you got. The difference in look will be small. In my experience, the difference between cheap and pro --- whether it's lights, lenses, or any tool really --- isn't mostly in the result you see. It's two things.

1. Durability and convenience for a crew that unpacks it, drops it, works with it, and packs it back into the truck, day after day, year after year. If you drop a $5,000 lens, it will probably survive. If you drop a $500 plastic lens, you might be out $500. But if you shot with both lenses on the same camera, the $5,000 lens wouldn't look 10 times as good as the $500 one. In fact, most people won't tell a difference.

2. Low sales. Face it, not that many people in the world are going to buy an HMI light --- compared to, say, a 50" TV. The 50" TV is more complicated than an HMI light. But since they'll sell only so many of those lights, they must price each one rather high. If all 7 billion people in the world needed an HMI light, then they would each probably cost a tenth as much as they do now.

The moral of the story: If you're on a low budget, spend care and time instead of money. Be very careful not to drop your $500 lens or knock over your flimsy light stand or catch your bedsheet diffusion on fire. But since you're working probably 4 hours a week on average instead of the 12 hours a day a professional crew does, you can swing it. A professional crew could do it too for a day or two, but it would drive them crazy, which is why they end up spending thousands of dollars for rugged C stands and what not. 12 hours a day, 6 days a week, 50 weeks a year, for 5 or 10 years, it's worth it to them. Wait until you're working full time to fork out that much dough.

 

[Josh Bass]

charles you may be right but those divas are a houston institution, at leadt with the people i normally work with. theyre telling me they hardly bring tungsten units on shoots any longer...most work is done with kinos leds and hmis now, the odd tungsten fresnel only occasionally making an appearance. we tend to work in many places like offices etc. where we are supoolementing background as opposed to creating a look from the ground up. we are generally doing small corporate videos or something similar, not narrative tv/movies.

 

[CharlesPapert]

Well, when I was doing corporate videos...actually you don't want to know what I was using (lowel-lights, probably).

I think today's large sensor cameras have made things probably easier, since you don't have to rely on lighting to separate subject from background as much any more. That used to be much more of a thing.

I guess if the idea is to just bring a one-size fits all solution, daylight balanced will cover you in both eventualities.

 

[morgan_moore]

First of all, some definition: by my standards, any light fixture that is $500 or more a piece is "expensive" relative to what I know.

Say you have someone who is making youtube videos in their basement. They need to cost effectively light their subject and also a little set around them (maybe ~4 lights would do the trick or less). Some of the biggest reasons why certain light fixtures cost more than others is because of CRI, brightness, quality of parts, functionality (switching from warm/cool), throw(?), etc. If you can take any light you want, say the Ikan PL90 and you take the time to gel it to balance it's color accurately, how is that different, from a value standpoint, compared to something more expensive? The ikan has a CRI of 89, whereas something that costs $400 or more is ~93+. Would anyone really know that you were using less expensive light fixtures? Once gelled to be close to color accurate, what separates an Ikan PL90 from a Dracast LED 1000? Simply brightness?

Or how about buying something old, say like a Mole Richardson light off of ebay. Are these economical ways to light for video without really skimping on quality? Am I misunderstanding something about "expensive" lights?

I think these lights have attributes that you must apply to your business.

-Colour purity. Nothing is going to be tungsten or expensive fixtures well beyond $500
-ability to run off batteries.. tungsten wont do that
-ability to modify .. tungsten can be more tricky because they run hot.

The simple truth is most RnG interviews are done with a pair of 1.1 panels and some Vlock batts. Yes the colour is poor and the light is often not soft enough or bright enough but the things do the job without location power and easy setup/pack down.

S

 

[Patryk_Rebisz]

The simple truth is most RnG interviews are done with a pair of 1.1 panels and some Vlock batts. Yes the colour is poor and the light is often not soft enough or bright enough but the things do the job without location power and easy setup/pack down.

NEVER did i have to use 1x1 in run-and-gun situation. You spend an extra minute to find an outlet (so that when that important one liner is delivered the battery doesn't go down - as it has happened...). And since you have an outlet then you go for a light that produces better color result as the last thing you want is to waste time in the post on color correction.

 

[gkantziper]

If you decide to go with tungsten, I suggest Tota lights with Chimera speed rings and Chimeras with grids when some control is needed.

Now before everybody gets all in an uproar about poor quality, here is my reasoning/condition:

If you just take the time to use a Rip Tie cable wrap (which should be on the header cable at the end that plugs in the Tota) and make a "U" shape with the cable and wrap the cable to 8PM, that is 20:00, for our friends outside the US, ha, position on the speed ring, the rubber strain relief on the header cable won't melt in the down position, it'll stay straight and work for many years. The lamps are cheap and the 750s (don't use 1Ks) literally run for 100s of hours. About the only time I've lost a lamp was via impact, not filament failure. So, I keep the safety screens on the lights for safety and to protect the lamps. I keep a couple spare heads lamped lower at 500W as backups. So, 2 totas with speed rings, cables and 2 spare heads and cables fit in one milk crate.

I don't use 'em nearly as often anymore having 1X1 bicolor LEDs, but they still go with me everywhere, especially useful for cross lighting a green screen for a waist up shot! And, as said above, much prettier tungsten light than LEDs with diff!

 

[SDub]

If you decide to go with tungsten, I suggest Tota lights with Chimera speed rings and Chimeras with grids when some control is needed.

Now before everybody gets all in an uproar about poor quality, here is my reasoning/condition:

If you just take the time to use a Rip Tie cable wrap (which should be on the header cable at the end that plugs in the Tota) and make a "U" shape with the cable and wrap the cable to 8PM, that is 20:00, for our friends outside the US, ha, position on the speed ring, the rubber strain relief on the header cable won't melt in the down position, it'll stay straight and work for many years. The lamps are cheap and the 750s (don't use 1Ks) literally run for 100s of hours. About the only time I've lost a lamp was via impact, not filament failure. So, I keep the safety screens on the lights for safety and to protect the lamps. I keep a couple spare heads lamped lower at 500W as backups. So, 2 totas with speed rings, cables and 2 spare heads and cables fit in one milk crate.

I don't use 'em nearly as often anymore having 1X1 bicolor LEDs, but they still go with me everywhere, especially useful for cross lighting a green screen for a waist up shot! And, as said above, much prettier tungsten light than LEDs with diff!

Actually had my eyes on a kit from Lowel or some used Mole Richardson's on ebay. The lowel set seems more complete whereas with the Mole Richardsons I'd need to find a ton of accessories like gels, flags, ways to mount those in front of/to the fixture, etc.

 

[morgan_moore]

NEVER did i have to use 1x1 in run-and-gun situation. You spend an extra minute to find an outlet (so that when that important one liner is delivered the battery doesn't go down - as it has happened...). And since you have an outlet then you go for a light that produces better color result as the last thing you want is to waste time in the post on color correction.

Im just saying that is what the majority use.. and Im beginning to see the logic (personally I use redheads where possible!)

In the UK finding power can be an issue.. some buildings dont allow plug in unless their electir team have done safety checks... certainly all your fixtures need up to date PAT test stickers

Everywhere one is scared of trip hazard and getting sued.. so you wont use leads across any space where the public (or any non crew) may walk.

Of course there are no outlets outdoors.

S

 

[Michael Carter]

Seems like everyone here fills different niches with different workflows… but for your average one-guy setting up and shooting, corporate interview and sales videos and grab some b-roll… maybe you bring a sound guy sometimes...

I've yet to be in a situation where batteries were necessary… but in my work, it's expected that I'll need 30 mins. to setup. My clients get it that the more time they give me, the better the end result, If I have to do an interview at an "event" (usually several media crews are there), I get there early and setup my space early. Several times I've let CNN shoot under my scrims.

Current "affordable" LED panels (less that $500 per fixture say) aren't bright enough to be your key anyway - especially outdoors where you'd be likely to need batteries… if I were some youtube once-a-week podcaster? Hell yeah, I'd use one and just shoot at whatever ISO it took.

Chinese Kino-knockoff quads are really, really the bomb for most interview setups (shoot them through a popup diffuser or frame, or hang ripstop across the barn doors for low key looks)...

"Affordable" LEDs, (like the popular araman) are really killer for rim/hair lights, background splashes, etc. They easily replace an HID fresnel or gelled fresnel in your kit… I'll add another before long...

I rarely bring anything more than a 3" 300 fresnel - a 6"/650 is just too hot for an office situation, once you get used to daylight stuff… I just don't take tungsten to corporate gigs any more.

I need to get my full interview kit in on one rock-n-roller cart load whenever possible. For me, that's the sweet spot to make a living, in and out fast and spend my time getting the best interview possible. So for my key, I try to figure out in advance whether to bring a quad kino, a 400 HID softbox, or a 575 HMI par (big freaking window office setups). And that includes my audio kit, a heavy steel roller stand for the mic, and everything else.

A 150 HID housed in a 300 fresnel body with a small ballast is a very kickass thing to have; equivalent to a 500-650 tungsten (once you add in gelling that tungsten to daylight, it's more like a 1200 watt fixture). Only pulls 150 watts and produces similar heat.

I do love tungsten for more narrative stuff, or if I'm shooting at night in a residential-look location.

All the above? That's one way to do it, and I have gotten my go-interview-the-ceo kit and workflow humming along nicely.

 

[MattinSTL]

For a permanent basement installation on the cheap, I'd go with high-CRI dimmable LED (or standard tungsten) bulbs, standard edison base, inside a china ball or in a cheap work-light type reflector. I've worked on docs where they used a 3-way tungsten edison bulb that could go to 150w inside a china ball, to light people around a table (at night, not competing with daylight) and it worked surprisingly well with C300s.

Kino's daylight tubes are good, but the kino tungsten tubes are pink... which is flattering on some skin-tones, but they're not in the same league as the high 90's CRI daylight... but regardless... yes, Divas are an institution... in STL also.

 

[Phil Rhodes]

That is opposed to more accurate units such as HMI's, where a particular globe may have a color temperature shift due to age, but applying the appropriate CT gel can successfully wrangle it back around.

While this is true, it does raise one of the unexpected spectres of lighting for camera: HMI is not a paragon of virtue as regards colour rendering. It never has been. It's a mercury-iodine lamp of broadly similar colour performance to ceramic metal halide and the colour performance is only about as good as a reasonable modern LED. An HMI spectrum has just as many lumps and bumps in it as many not-so-brilliant things. Most of them are promoted as having a CRI of 90, which can hide a multitude of sins, as the TLCI people know. They can be terribly deficient in red, for instance, and UV pollution can be noticeable (the UV that causes contrast reduction in photography is not the same UV which causes a radiation safety hazard with discharge light sources).

They're also heavy, finickity to set up with their separate ballasts and cables, and horrifyingly expensive, even as they begin to be overtaken by LED in terms of sheer effectiveness.

I don't mean to give up any position I may have a a skeptic of LED lighting - it's promising, but it's still outdone by more traditional devices in a lot of circumstances. Equally, though, let's not succumb to the mentality that HMI is unimpeachable. Movie lights tend to end up being sorted into broad categoris of acceptable and unacceptable. HMI has been shown to be perfectly usable by long experience, but at the end of the day, it's still just a metal halide discharge light, as used in a thousand parking structures, warehouses and night clubs (where for some reason it's called MSR), and it's far from perfect.

P