what are your views on lighting with photoflood lights?

They are very professional if you're a plumber or a carpenter. And that's exactly the point. It's not the light that is professional or not, it's how it's used. Have I used them? Yes. Would I use them again in the same circumstances? Yes. Would I call them a good solution on a film set? Maybe, maybe not.

Would I use them on a set for a paying client? No. So if that's how professional is defined, then you'd be better served with something from maybe Litepanels or similar.
 
+1 and let me add a thought about professionalism.

It's not just about the money. Why does someone pay you money?
They want you to get the job done, even if things aren't exactly how
they were described when you took the job. A pro is ready to adapt,
without having to drive to the grip store and without complaining.
Just smile, grab some more stuff out of your bag of tricks, and start on time.

In other words, you might get a job, and you might figure out a way to do it with floods
and black wrap, but then you get there and you realize that--OOPS--there's way too much spill
on something that shouldn't be lit. Or OOPS we've got to put the light over there,
where you can't attach your little clamp light.

A pro can deal with the situation: "OK, I can use this fresnel to keep the light
off that thing that we're not supposed to see. Or, OK, I'll go grab my C-stand or ceiling clamp
and put it right where it needs to be."

Now back to those photofloods. They're a wonderful inexpensive way to learn about light!
Buy 'em. Experiment. Shoot some freebies. Make some mistakes. Learn their limitations.
When you really understand why they're not considered pro,
then you're one step closer to being a pro.
 
Last edited:
I'm not even sure what a "photoflood" is... those old-style bar lights? And open-faced Smith-Victor? A lone lightbulb in a clip-reflector?

I'm guessing you're not talking work lights?

I've lit some nice scenes with open-faced lights; but they are purpose-made photo or theatrical fixtures with barn doors and standard mounting spuds. Especially for a natural look, they're great - bounce 'em, diffuse 'em, gel 'em, flag 'em, and they'll provide anything from a narrow shaft of hard & focused light to a room-sized fill of beautiful glowing daylight. They may need a lot of flags or even ceiling-high drops of black fabric, but they're one of those "endless creative uses" pieces of gear.

If you're charging money for a finished video product, and the client isn't a friend/family member who knows you're just getting your feet wet, it's usually not a good idea to start rigging up gear they already use in their garage, or something that's clearly from the antique store. But do fill us in on exactly what sort of light you're talking about. Google image search for "photoflood" returns a lot of bare bulbs and a lot of flo and tungsten open-faced units (and a lot of freaky porn, that "safe search" feature looks better every day), some of which look useable and like "real gear"; but for an open-faced fixture, I wouldn't consider something without a barn door option and a standard 5/8 baby mount.
 
Deadby, I'd hunt around some more - you should be able to find something with barn doors and likely a more modern & efficient bulb.
 
I keep a good stock of Ushio photoflood globes from Filmtools in my kit for when the DP wants 3200K light from a China ball, and rarely, from a bare bulb. You can get them in 150W, 250W and 500W flavors. They are hot as hell but a good way to get tungsten balanced light in a globe with a standard medium base. Note too, that they have very short life, only a few hours, so save them when you're not lighting or shooting.

In China balls they are a little dangerous because they burn so hot so be careful that the lantern is hanging straight and the globe inside is too and you should also build your own power cable using a porcelain socket - I get mine from Lowes - because it will handle more heat. Nonetheless, I see the regular cord and socket sets which are speced for like 75W maximum being used and I'm always amazed that they are discolored and look cooked but they don't seem to melt. Don't chance it.

For China balls I much prefer multiple CFLs but for some dumb reason you don't seem to be able to find consumer bulbs in 3200K variety, though you can get some that are "bright white" that are close - 3400-3500K typically.

It appears the OP is referring to photoflood globes in scoop clamp lights and I concur with all the comments above. They look like crap and are hard to place and extremely hard to control but a good lighting person can get beautiful images from just about any source. If he means 3200K photoflood PARs of the variety once produced for lighting home 8mm movies the same comments apply.
 
There is no bulb that is unprofessional-if you need a certain bulb to get the job done, use it! However, you can use a bulb in a way that looks unprofessional-say, for example, if you have your photoflood bulb in a spring clamp work light with the round aluminum reflector, that's not going to be looked at by your client as very professional.
But photoflood bulbs are used by professional cinematographers, usually not as a bare bulb source-usually with a china ball, or in some type of overhead soft light with multiple bulbs.
 
Last edited:
if youre just talking about for your own movies:

Rodriguez lit EL Mariachi with similar lights. He used one with diffusion, for closeups, as a key, no fill, with the second light as a background light, and the wide shots used natural light.

nothings impossible
 
Whether or not it looks professional depends on what type of job you're doing. If you're doing web videos for a small company that knows nothing about lighting, they won't know the difference. If you're doing work that's for someone that is used to bringing in thousands of dollars worth of softbox lights and flourescents, then it probably won't pass muster.

In the end, it doesn't matter what you use, as long as it gets the job done. If you can accomplish that with photofloods, so be it. That being said, there's a reason why they're cheaper than other lights. They aren't as well made, the bulbs don't put out as much light or the same quality of light as some other lights, and it's much more difficult to control the spill and intensity of light they put out.

If your main concern is cost, I think the money would be better spent getting a basic Lowel kit used. They last forever, especially if cared for, so you are not missing much by not buying new, except a hefty price tag. I recently picked up a kit with a Tota and Omni, plus the stands and a hard case for under $250 and it was basically brand new. You can do a lot with just two lights believe it or not.
 
The main problem with photoflods is their cost. Yes, you hear it right.

Average life-span of a 500w bulb is 6h... I shot a film like 5 years ago lit with those and we were going through light bulbs like crazy. Imagine you have 3 lights and each shining a light for 4-6 hours/day... That mean you gonna have to chage bulbs every other day. On 24 day film it adds up to 36 bulbs! At $5/bulb... See where i'm going? All the sudden the more expensive pro light doesn't seem so expensive.
 
The right tool for the right job

The right tool for the right job

I have a friend who shot an independent film that just got picked up by warner brothers. He and I have worked together on a bunch of music videos and he LOVES shooting with photofloods. We use them shooting film or digital. He had a budget just under one million dollars, a full lighting crew with expensive arri lights and such but he still uses photofloods when they fit. His trick is using them in china-balls. It produces a fantastic diffused light that makes actors skin look fantastic and just has a great, warm natural look. You can get a lot of production value out of a $30 investment of 3 china balls and some 500w photoflood bulbs.

I'd avoid using them as direct light, though, in those worklight/clamp things. That's not because it's cheap or unprofessional but rather because it gives you no control and you wind up fighting with hot spots or light spilling where it shouldn't. If you try to put diffusion or cinefoil over those clamps it either falls off, or it gets too close to the bulb and it'll start smoking or even burn through your gels.
 
deadby23 said:
@stuck footage - i appreciate that response

@michael carter - i mean a light like http://www.bhphotovideo.com/images/images345x345/48853.jpg
Click to expand...

I have that S-V kit. I picked up off of eBay for about $30.00. What I like about it is its versatility. With a standard E-26 Medium base screw mount, you can put anything from a 500 watt photoflood to E-26 base CFLs in it and it does look a bit more "Professional" than hardware clamp work lights (Though I do have about 15 or so of those and they are very handy). There are even E-26 to Mogul base adaptors so that you can use higher wattage mogul base CFLs (or any mogul base bulb) in those lights. One issue with them is that the screw base throat on the lights is very narrow and short and most big Mogul base CFLs would also need a E-26 base extender, with the E-26 to Mogul base adapter, which are available and very inexpensive. I also have a case of R-34 375 watt photoflood lights, and a good handful of R-40 500 watt photofloods. I don't use them very often, though.

A kit like that is handy, and having picked it up real cheap, I really like having it around. The thing is that, while I am a fan of E-26 base lights, because of their versatility, If I need pretty high output lights, quartz halogens are just so much more cost efficient. The life span of the photofloods is a pain in the butt over a long shoot. A good bunch of 150 watt or 200 watt photofloods would be handy of china balls, as mentioned above, but if you are going 375 watt or 500 watt, I just think going with a small open faced quartz-halogen would be the way to go. A lot of my open faced quartz lights use the DYS/DYV/BHC 600 watt bulb. You can get that bulb for about $7.00, and it is rated at 75 hours of life (Which I have found to be very conservative), as apposed to 15 hours for a 500 watt R-40 photoflood, which will cost about $10.00.

As a specific tool for specific jobs, photoflood are useful, but I would seriously think about using them as my primary method of lighting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top