Strobes make the most sense for me. Since I frequently shoot corporate headshots on locations, the power to completely kill the ambient without turning off the lights and hanging duvetyne over the windows(neither very popular in an office) is key. With the mixed lighting(fluorescent/daylight) normally polluting the space, killing it is the best way to get good color. I can accomplish that goal with a few easily portable speedlights(kit size is critical since I often cab/Uber around NYC). That said, I started out with tungsten 'hot lights' and then fluorescent equivalents in my home studio where I could easily knock down the ambient at the flick of a switch. I still have the fluorescent ones for the occasional product shot when other gear gets put on Ebay. If you have a space where you can control the ambient, there's nothing wrong with continuous lights.
Thanks so much u took away my confusion as I’m buying my first light and was confused between continuous and strobe now I know exactly what I want 👍🏻👍🏻
Modern led definitely have a strong advantage with pupils, strobes you can spot easily since the eyes quickly dilate and you have more center black then eye color verse continuous led lighting. There’s also a more natural look and feel to the continuous lighting over the strobe, I’ve used strobe lighting for two decades but over the last year I find myself using more continuous. Specially around kids and animals since they react to strobe lights with blinking or flinching back. Another big advantage is shooting outdoors at sunset, you can balance everything beautifully and get a clean face with a great background. And even in full sunset you can still shoot a moving subject with easy focusing. Works great when switching between cameras, which is easier then swapping lenses outdoors. Especially between medium and FF formats or different brand cameras and focal lengths. You also know what to expect with every photo it’s already in your viewfinder.
the size of the subjects pupils(in the eyes) are a huge influence on the desirability of a portrait too, flash shows dilated pupils, continuous gives tiny pupils, dilated wins hands down 99%of the time
What I’ve been doing lately is using continuous lights for my base fill and a strobe for my key light. Let’s me flood the shoot space with continuous light. I control the amount of base fill with my shutter speed and control the key via the power control on the strobe trigger. It’s been working great, and gives the video guys doing bits more light to shoot with. If the continuous lights doesn’t work out to enough light to be the fill, then I add a small kicker strobe in a strip box on axis below camera to bring up the shadows on the subject to where I want them in addition to the continuous lights.
dear Joel, I would like to told you that your work and your ability in teaching is a great value for all. Your lessons, supported and builded around extraordinary shots, are so precious. Your art supports our passion and feeds our eyes. Thanks so much for sharing all this beautiful work! Have a nice day!
I have a big problem with this comparison. You won't get noise in the blacks if you use high quality continuous light with more power. for example, Joker Bugs, ARRI HMI or Nanlight Forza 5oo or 800. Also not mentioned, the ability to shoot with a wider aperture to gain a shallow depth of field. These two factors are incredibly important factors for shooting with continuous light.
This is the second video I’ve seen that is related to strobes vs continuous light. A similar video by another photographer discussed using continuous led lights. That photographer found that even though the lights appeared brighter, it did a few things... . Too bright to point at someone for a portrait. The person was inclined to squint. With a modifier it cut the light just like any other light. But like your discussion, higher iso causing digital noise, and a strobe gives you better tonal range
You can freeze action just with flash duration so this makes since. Never thought about it comparing 'always on' lights for photography. Lower iso is always a great thing too ;) Thanks for sharing!
Great job as always Joel, wondering if you might be interested in orientation regarding gallery art photography, I've been a commercial photographer for over 20 years and never beeing at any exhibition nor had the time to exhibit my work, after all this years I'd love to give it a try to my personal project and get those thousands of slides and rolls out of their boxes. Thank you for your valuable time, great content and encouraging words that Do make a great addition to your channel. Alberto.
Interesting vídeo. You could have taken the continuous light photo with a lower ISO by rising the apperture - ex: ISO 400 / f 2.8 or ISO 200 / f 2.0 - in which cases there would be no noise to complain about. Also, you mentioned you used a bigger source (softbox) for the strobe photos. If you had used an identical softbox on both cases I presume the strobe ones would have come out with even more clipped whites, which is one of the down sides of strobes in my opinion.
Big question with motion, my biggest issue with strobe lights, refresh rates. How do you shoot someone moving? Can you shoot 10 FPS or 20 FPS? If your continuous lighting is set up properly freezing motion is much easier with continuous lighting. Granted one strobe light might do the job of two continuous lights due to the strength differences between them.
There is not such as wast of money. It all comes down to the work you do and what makes you comfortable. Like Peter Hurley he only uses continues light with his headshots eventho he knows very well how to use strobes and can afford any strobe he want, but he stick with continues light. And his headshots are just amazing way better than many headshot photographers that use strobes.
