The LED Apocalypse. Should I rush out and get some panels ASAP?

[bill totolo]

Judge for yourself: https://vimeo.com/50673337 PW: nina

I need to bring up the brightness a notch but I think you can evaluate the skin tones well enough.
The LED's used were the Litepanels 1x1's (Key, and B/L). Used an ARRI 600 on the bricks.

 

[Movie Mike]

… ive been shooting for approaching 20 years and i have yet to hear a single client or clients customer say that my lighting (lowels, kinos, ikan, litepanels, arris, whatever) was just a little off.… a good shooter can work with whatever they're given. as long as all your sources suffer arguably the same problems. you'll be ok. and even then. a good array of gels will get you most of the way there.

If the guy in the picture below were the groom of a wedding, do you think he would be happy if in his wedding videos he looked like the guy on the right when in fact he looks like the guy on the left. What you see here are the same subject under daylight (left side) and under a “daylight” LED (right side.) The difference is caused by the steep drop-off of long wavelength color in Phosphor White LEDs.



Putting CTO gel on the LED to get a warmer flesh tone is not a solution since standard Color Correction gels have unexpected effects on DayLight balanced LEDs. To see this for yourself, check out this article: http://talltalepictures.com/blog/2011/12/06/are-led-1x1-panels-ready-for-prime-time/. In it, DP Michael Morian tests a Lightpanels 1×1 Superspot and a Shantou Nanguang CN-600HS 1×1 panel and finds that their poor color rendering is not easily corrected with gels. In the article he also cites studies by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and other independent sources. Anybody thinking of buying LEDs should first read these articles.

Movie Mike

 

[wgzn]

all due respect movie mike. and i do agree with you. as ive used a number of LEDs and have seen how they react when gelled, flagged, etc... but like id said earlier - its a situation of horses for courses.
and how sophisticated your audience is. unless they had a side by side comparison, id bet 70% of the folks here and 99% of my clients would never see the difference.

it gets to a point where you have people creating art and people creating business. id be so bold as to say for the latter of the two, the shortcomings of LED dont outweigh the benefits.
i know that sounds blasphemous. but its just what ive experienced.

 

[wgzn]

Shining an "LED" on a 'scene' is not particularly 'novel' and 'different' from any other use of 'light' on a movie set.

i found the whole thing very un-novel and a bit too broad to swallow

 

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

Putting CTO gel on the LED to get a warmer flesh tone is not a solution since standard Color Correction gels have unexpected effects on DayLight balanced LEDs. To see this for yourself, check out this article: http://talltalepictures.com/blog/2011/12/06/are-led-1x1-panels-ready-for-prime-time/. In it, DP Michael Morian tests a Lightpanels 1×1 Superspot and a Shantou Nanguang CN-600HS 1×1 panel and finds that their poor color rendering is not easily corrected with gels. In the article he also cites studies by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and other independent sources. Anybody thinking of buying LEDs should first read these articles.

Movie Mike

It seems to me that you are talking about something completely different than whether or not "Light Panels" can lock the industry with their solution in the US by appealing to their 'patent'.

It could very well be that LED's are 'wrong for many film situations'... the referenced 'difference' between a 'full bandwidth daylight' spectrum and an LED that produces a 'distorted' spectrum being one such example.

Here's my take... since Light Panels has taken to The Courts, it seems their management has gone in the direction of 'limit competition', rather than 'make something better'...

Coka-Cola has been running on a 'trade secret' for over 100 years, and despite having to make their drink 'without the active ingredient in cocaine', they have still survived. As such, "trade secrets" have an infinite 'life', as long as all those with access to the 'secret' sign non-disclosure agreements, and the company actively pursues any disclosure, or hint of disclosure.

 

[Denis Haineault]

For an oficial statement from the company you can read a quick Q&A here, its worth a read I reckon:

http://cinescopophilia.com/litepanels-address-led-patent-concerns/

And for the official patent description (one of them) you can read about it here:

http://www.google.com/patents/US6948823

...select "Download PDF", read on and be amazed.

It's getting late and I would have to read it more carefully, but so far, the bulk of it talks about the overall specifications of traditional (non LED) lighting equipment and how it used in cinematography/photography. Then the patent proceeds to explain how substituting incandescent lightbulbs and/or fluorescent for LEDs is innovative and how arranging lights (any light source, not just LEDs) together on a panel is also innovative. Apparently, the flexibility of using batteries or a power outlet as a power source is also something new. It also talks about how putting a colored lens in front of the light allows for correcting improper lighting...again, this hasn't been done. And then there's talk of dimmers, and so on...

Yes I'm paraphrasing, and some of it may not be "paraphrased" accurately. So I suggest people do their own reading.

Does Litepanel manufacture their own LED?

Btw, here are their other patents:
http://www.google.com/patents/US7318652
http://www.google.com/patents/US7972022

 

[Noel Evans]

What lights do you prefer to use instead of LED's? How portable are they?

I still find a lot of use for tungsten, I rent HMIS when I need power and use a number of fluoro fixtures.

 

[Bern Caughey]

Many types of lights are used on all levels of production, especially when color accuracy isn't a major concern, but most high-end beauty campaigns shot in studio still utilize tungstens due to their continuous spectrum.

 

[Norman99]

Taken from the last statement of Q&A in : http://cinescopophilia.com/litepanel...tent-concerns/


"There are also companies in the industry who have taken it upon themselves to establish their own research and development initiatives to create new kinds of LED fixtures and other innovative forms of lighting. They are not infringing on our patents and continue to bring welcomed innovation and healthy competition to the market."

This statement. perhaps as vague as their patent(s) does not, in my opinion, clarify:
1- what "industry" are they referring to. Is it the general home/commercial/industrial lighting OR is it the film/photography/media industry ???
2- "innovative forms of lighting" . Can I assume this "forms of lighting" to be also used in the film/photography/media industry ???

 

[Jon Furtado]

I worry that I can't afford quality LED panels yet so I'm kinda old school. I prefer 2 four-bank 2' KinoFlos for interviews with a 250W Lowel Pro hair light behind. And you can light great interviews with just one of those Kinos if you like a little shadow opposite the key, with or without bounce. I nearly always use daylight tubes because there's usually a window in the room and often in the shot. I gel the hairlight with half CTB.

Color looks great, setup is not terribly bulky, everything fits in a milk crate. Costs more than the cheaper LEDs but try to find some used ones.

This was the other alternative I was thinking about doing. Just buying a Dual Kino Diva Kit. The 4 banks are just too massive for me to transport solo by myself without help. A Dedo light would be preferred as a hair light, but I already have 3 300w Mole's.

I was also investigating a dual Kino Celeb kit. There's an off brand company called Film Gear that sells a great dual LED/Flo kit. But it's $2800.

 

[Bern Caughey]

I prefer a pair of single-lamp Diva 400 suitcase-type kits over the bulkier two-lamp Gaffer kit.

I never air ship Kinos, & the single light kits are easier to transport locally.

 

[Postmaster]

I got 3 of those 2 bank and two 5 bank.
Pretty happy with them and way cheaper than Divas.
I use Osram 55w tubes that come in 4 different temperatures and around 6 bucks each.
Skintones on the daylight tubes are better than Kinos IMHO

 

[Paul F]

There not ready for prime time.

I've noticed NBC and CBS are making more and more use of LEDs. They used them as fill outdoors (that was a surprise) during the olympics on their set. I've also noticed them using LEDs quite a bit for interviews on the road (60 Minutes).

 

[MattinSTL]

Here's my take... since Light Panels has taken to The Courts, it seems their management has gone in the direction of 'limit competition', rather than 'make something better'...

^ This.

I don't see how arranging a commodity product should prevent another company from arranging a similar commodity product in another way. Right now Litepanels has the best product at the highest price. Clearly they're concerned about the evolution of the competition... or about losing sales to people who will accept lower quality at a lower price.

It's kind of like the Chinese Arri knock-offs... they really should make the effort to do a (semi) original design and color scheme, but really how much different is an Arri fresnel from a Mole, Altman, LTM, DeSisti, blah blah blah. They're all the same thing but with quality differences in the components used and the functionality of the components.

If Litepanels wins that case they should have to pay Mole Richardson royalties for the 9 Light...

 

[txdp]

I used the light panels color changing panels alot recently. For over 2 grand, you'd think they feel less like a fisher price toy. I think I'm gonna break it if I look at it wrong.

 

[legrevedotcom]

Im on the FloLight team as well... Only got 1 330w so far but was planning on doing a similar setup to yours frank. They are great for the price.. Just dont dim them down too far. Also I keep a slice of -1/8 green with it. Gets nice and natural...

 

[Patryk_Rebisz]

It's kind of like the Chinese Arri knock-offs... they really should make the effort to do a (semi) original design and color scheme, but really how much different is an Arri fresnel from a Mole, Altman, LTM, DeSisti, blah blah blah. They're all the same thing but with quality differences in the components used and the functionality of the components.

Oh come on, you didn't say that!

Arris, DeSistic, Moles, Lowels are HUGELY different - just because they all have the same bulbs inside doesn't mean they are not different. In a way you are pointing out what LitePanels are fighting against. On the surface LPs and Chines knockoffs are the same, but i'm sure under the surface the research that goes into their electronics and bulbs is vastly different BUT unlike Arris, DeSistic, Moles, Lowels... where the difference between each light is obvious - right away you know which light will last if you go into rental market and which is perfect for one-man show the same can't be said about LPs v Chinese knock-offs and thue you have LPs dilemma - spend time educating the public or simply use bogus (even though probably legal) claim about their patent infringement.

 

[MattinSTL]

I can instantly see the difference in the quality of light from a high-end LED vs. the low-end versions... I can't see the difference in a Mole Richardson beam vs. an Arri beam. I'm not defending Chinese copies of Arri lights... I'm saying THAT is totally different then the Litepanels issue... even though the output of every fresnel on the market looks the same with the same bulb.

There's WAY less difference in all these companies selling the same basic light then all the companies selling LED products right now... and if Mole Richardson said nobody else could sell anything using an FRK bulb in it I wouldn't like that either.

I agree with the other posts stating that LEDs are building blocks... hence "commodity"... and saying nobody else can put LEDs into an array and use them for video production seems like a really broad patent. I can see them protecting their physical design... and even if they have a unique dimming circuit or other unique electronics inside... sure... protect all that, but to say that they came up with putting LED light-sources next to each other and nobody else can do that for video?

Litepanels isn't going after people who are making anything that can be confused for a Litepanels' product... they're going after anybody that uses a cluster of LEDs for video production.

 

[Patryk_Rebisz]

But this is exactly my point. Even though tungsten lights look exactly the same as far as the lighting quality - noone can confuse one housing with the other and you notice right away how well Moles are made and if so choose to pay that bit extra for the workmanship. With LPs the quality is not so apparent - sure you can tell difference in light quality but it happens when you actually get to play with the light (namely AFTER you purchase it). For most folks it's one 1x1 square against another 1x1 square with only difference that one cost $2000 while another just $700. LP dropped the bomb by not educating the public on why there is such huge price difference.

 

[MattinSTL]

I've never seen another LED product that looks like Litepanels' products. With the perforated metal construction and the slide-in hard filters? Somebody's selling that same design?

Even the small Litepanels lights are unique. I can spot one of those bricks a mile away... nobody else has anything like that.

The crux of the suit isn't protecting a design anyway... it's an attempt to prevent anyone else from selling a cluster of LEDs in a fixture used for video production.