Vail, thanks for taking time to run this test and share your results. It seems that what you found most beneficial was the ability to see the light patterns more easily when using constant lights but adjusting the flex lights seems to be pretty cumbersome with lots of hardware to have to loosen/tighten as you try to move the lights into position. Would be interesting to see the comparison with using your Glow softboxes and a constant light like the Amaran or Nanlite LED's. You get the advantage of constant light with the benefits of lighter weight, easier adjustments, and lower cost. (and while you do still end up with cords you don't have to deal with the ballast boxes so there is less clutter to work around)
Hi Mike, after the shoot I too found using the knuckles for adjustment to not be my cup of tea. So I got these great pieces from Kupo. It makes adjusting my angles of the lights sooooo simple. bhpho.to/3XIQAdW Another thing I can do with the panels that I can’t do with constant lights in softboxes is that I can nestle one in behind the other. The depth of the softbox makes that really difficult to do. With the flex kit I can do a much tighter triangle. And the last thing I have figured is you have top to bottom even illumination with the flex kit. With a double diffused softbox you can come close but it just plain is different than having the light eliminate from a single point and be diffused or hundreds of lights distributed evenly over the panels. I don’t know if that’s what makes the difference or not. But when I use the flex the light just looks like it is painted on them. The light is different somehow.
Vail this is a great video. Seeing the difference the flex kit makes is really helpful. As someone using strobes it’s also useful to see what your process was before switching. Great to see you and Kevin working.
I wish more You Tube videos used this approach of minimal editing and more stream of consciousness type of education. Although it takes more time to watch a video like this, I think the viewer actually learns more from this format.
Thank you very much for this valuable and interesting comparison. With regard to the comparison shots between the strobes and the Flex lighting, it seems that the strobes were a bit hot and the colors somewhat washed out. Either that or the continuous light was a bit too low, although the colors are substantially more vivid. However, I'm reasonably confident that each can be adjusted to achieve the almost exact same exposure result without having to resort to extensive retouching in post. Although there's certainly a benefit to the WYSIWYG of continuous light, the cost is significant in terms of initial expense, transportation issues, and a substantially more cumbersome setup and breakdown. In the end, I imagine if I were a high-producing headshot photographer and primarily worked in my own studio, I'd probably go for a continuous light system. But, until I reach that level, I'm going to be sticking with my strobes.
Great video. I wish I could afford the flex kit. I just got the stripboxes to try and up my game. Hopefully, once I've mastered the stripboxes, I can up my game. Thanks for the video.
I like the flex color. Strobes had a bit of blue. Great job. Peter chops the top of the head off. I like your composition better than Peter's. The way you interact with your clients is so Peter. Great job. Thanks.
Oh, this is one of the most incredible and explanatory videos about the "Peter triangle". I have a big question: you used strobes, right? But the light source inside the stripbox (in the case of strobes) is small. It's not like the LED panel where the entire surface is illuminated. In the case of strobes, doesn't the light lose strength from the middle to the edges of the softbox? Is it a big difference? Does it interfere with anything? Another question, along the same lines: would I be able to achieve the same result using LED cannons (like Amaran 200) + stripboxes? Or could this give the same effect as strobes (maybe strong light in the center and weaker on the edges)? Thank you very much, from the bottom of my heart. I'm trying to set up this setup because I think this light is very beautiful. Congratulations and greetings from Brazil (Rio de Janeiro)
@adrianomoreira1341 if you did it with just constant lights in softboxes you would be a step above the strobes because you could see where the light is visible as you shoot. So you can adjust things easier. Depending on your softbox construction there will be different distribution of that light. If you are using double diffusion fabric that sucks up a lot of the power of the light. Some have a reflector in the center like a beauty dish to try to spread the light more evenly. That’s the type I used in the demonstration above. I now have the flex kit and adore it. It has been worth every penny to me.
Hi Steve, yes I have. I shot that way before I joined the headshot crew. It works in a pinch, particularly for volume headshots that have to be done in a hurry. But my clients are typically looking for a more high-end look and the Hurley Triangle configuration or his key fill kick configuration accomplishes that better than any other lighting setup I have encountered.
@@gengphoto I haven’t tried that before. I had a knock of eye lighter from angler but once I got the flex kit I didn’t use it any more so I gave it to one of my students.
That's interesting as the light from the Flex seems more enhancing somehow. I saw in one of Peter's videos that he set the Flex to 5600 to match his window light for a shot and wonder if, and when he would ever change the temperature.
I agree you got more dramatic lighting out of the Flex, but one thing I noticed is that if you get rid of that green/cyan cast in the images from the AD-300s, you improve the image a lot.
Errr why not just use constant LED with the stripboxes. That is how I was doing it and way cheaper and just as a effective as the overpriced Westcott. Nice ad though...
You could definitely do that. But then the soft boxes are much deeper than the panels. I would question if you would get the exact even pattern of light the flex outputs because you still would have it coming from a single point going forward, or bouncing into a disc inside. I would be curious if you took a light meter to it and measured the output across it at different points what the values would be and how many stops different from one system to another.
