Modelling lamp, effect on images

mbridge87

mbridge87

Messages
5
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello,

This is my first post here so be kind,

I recently bought a Lencarta SF 300 to add to my current set of Bowens 500 Pro's. I've been using it quite a lot and have noticed that at low power settings the modeling lamp has an effect on the colour of the images. Clearly it does not completely turn off before the flash fires. I have not experienced this before with any other stobes and just wondered if this was common.

As an assumption, I would guess that the fast flash duration on the SF 300 (at lower power settings) is so quick that the lamp does not have a chance to fully power down before the flash fires. Just a guess. Is that common for other IGBT flash units?

Thanks in advance for any responses.

In case anyone else is interested, aside from this issue I am quite pleased with the flash. The only thing that annoys me is I don't particularly like the mount for light stands, it's a little fiddly to put on, does not fully tighten and feels a little weak. Bare in mind that is in comparison to Bowens 500 pro's, which are very solid.

Max
 
The purpose of the modelling lamp switching itself off when the flash fires is really just to give an indication (supplementary to or instead of the beep) that the flash is ready to fire again - whether that's a real benefit or not at low power, when the recycling is instant, is a moot point. But it isn't about the modelling lamp being off when the flash fires, and avoiding the light from the modelling lamp affecting the shot - because it takes time for the modelling lamp to stop emitting all light.

The modelling lamp can contribute unwanted light to the flash exposure, with any flash head, in the following conditions:
1. The modelling lamp is at full power and
2. The flash head is very close to the subject and
3. The flash is at very low power (which is possible with the SuperFast because it has so much adjustment)

So, to avoid the problem completely, either turn the modelling lamp down very low when using it at full power, or switch it off
 
Hi Gary,

Thanks for the response! You're just the man I was hoping would reply.

I like to have the modeling light on when shooting portraits, especially in a dark environment, as I don't like pupils to be too large. I must admit, the lamp was at full power when I was doing my test so I'll give it another try at a lower power setting and let you know the results. Hopefully that will solve the issue, although it will still be fairly close to the subject.

Thanks again
 
Just ran the test again. I varied the power setting of the modeling lamp and adjusted the distance. The distance was about 6-7 feet, which would be common for me, and the power was adjusted from minimum to half to full on the modeling lamp.

The test was not particularly scientific but did the job. I used a color checker passport and compared the results in LR.

At low power there was a difference of between 50 - 100 kelvin, which you could expect anyway. Hence the modeling light didn't seem to be affecting the colour temp. I also tested it at a higher power setting and the results here were even better.

My conclusion. When working at very close distance, less than 4 feet, with low power settings the modeling lamp did have a more significant effect. However, as mentioned above increasing the power of the strobe, modeling lamp or distance just a little seemed to solve the issue.

Thanks for the advice Gary and for pointing me in the right direction with my test.
 
Can you turn the modelling lights off completely once you have set up the light positions? That would make most sense to me.


Steve.
 
Hey Steve,

Yes you can, but when shooting in dark environments I like to leave the modeling light on, when doing portraits that is. If it's turned off I find people have very large pupils which never looks good.
 
mbridge87 said:
Hey Steve,

Yes you can, but when shooting in dark environments I like to leave the modeling light on, when doing portraits that is. If it's turned off I find people have very large pupils which never looks good.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's a good point. I do the same these days, small pupils show much more colour to the iris, but for many years I followed the mantra that large pupils are 'more alluring' as Amateur Photographer mag used to say.

The slight colour shift problem happens with almost all studio heads in the situation of low flash power combined with max modelling lamp brightness. But of all the many possible causes of colour casts, it's got to be very low on the list.

It begs the question though - why don't we have daylight-balanced, cool-running LED modelling lamps these days?
 
Last edited:
HoppyUK said:
Yes, that's a good point. I do the same these days, small pupils show much more colour to the iris, but for many years I followed the mantra that large pupils are 'more alluring' as Amateur Photographer mag used to say.

The slight colour shift problem happens with almost all studio heads in the situation of low flash power combined with max modelling lamp brightness. But of all the many possible causes of colour casts, it's got to be very low on the list.

It begs the question though - why don't we have daylight-balanced, cool-running LED modelling lamps these days?
Click to expand...

I'm interested in what you might see as other possible causes of colour casts?

Totally agree on the LED modelling lamp suggestion. They would last a lot longer, too.
 
I've never noticed the issue with my Bowens Pro's, not sure why that could be. Now I know to avoid the high power settings when in close range etc. it's easy to manage though. Still very happy with the light.

I definitely agree with your modeling lamp idea. Seems odd that they don't use daylight balanced bulbs. I'm sure there is a reason though.
 
JennyGW said:
I'm interested in what you might see as other possible causes of colour casts?

Totally agree on the LED modelling lamp suggestion. They would last a lot longer, too.
Click to expand...

1) Light spill reflected from surroundings - walls, ceiling, curtains, coloured furnishings. Unless you have a bright red sofa or something just out of shot though, or bright green curtains, in practise this is usually just an overall colour shift that can be corrected quite easily.

2) Different coloured light modifiers. If you want good colour, don't mix brands. I have two softboxes that are at least 500K different, probably more - very common. Tip from Our Garry is to spray the insides lightly with car paint, which is on my To Do list. This is very hard to correct properly in post processing, though for portraits and stuff it's not usually noticeable. But for critical jobs, like maybe fashion or catalogue work, or product photography, it's a real issue. I shoot a lot of small black shiny things for work - cameras, lenses, flash guns - and with two different softboxes on either side it stands out immediately.

3) Different brands of flash, and colour shifts changing from max to min power. Usually not too serious, but certainly a consideration for colour-critical work. I've been testing some high-end heads recently, that use multiple capacitors of different sizes that are mixed and matched for optimum consistency of both colour and flash duration at all output levels. Very impressive they are too.

4) Using a longer shutter speed than necessary with flash increases the influence of ambient light, including modelling lamps. My default is 1/125sec, though I'd push that up to max in the OP's situation of low flash power with modelling lamps on full.
 
Steve Smith said:
Or just daylight balanced bulbs...

Steve.
Click to expand...

That would be a step in the right direction, but they'd still run very hot and you'd lose a bit of brightness.

Bright LEDs with good colour would also create a dual-purpose light, for both stills and video. Also good for shooting at very low f/numbers for shallow DoF. I'm a bit surprised we haven't seen LED modelling lamps outside of battery-powered location flash (for low power consumption) but I guess the answer is cost.
 
Yes, the reason is cost, LED modelling lamps will come but the first ones will be expensive and probably not very good in terms of cri
 
Garry Edwards said:
Yes, the reason is cost, LED modelling lamps will come but the first ones will be expensive and probably not very good in terms of cri
Click to expand...

Sweet (y)

Not too bothered about CRI personally, and can't be worse than what we have now. I wonder if manufacturers might be pleasantly surprised at the positive customer response to LED modelling lamps - so much better in all sorts of ways and opening up other potential uses :)

I've been using a snoot recently for the first time in ages. You really need a modelling lamp for accurate positioning with those, but bugga do they get hot! I cut a vent slot above the bulb, but it doesn't make much difference.
 
HoppyUK said:
Not too bothered about CRI personally, and can't be worse than what we have now. I wonder if manufacturers might be pleasantly surprised at the positive customer response to LED modelling lamps - so much better in all sorts of ways and opening up other potential uses :)
Click to expand...

It's a conspiracy as they'd lose a ton of sales thanks to the longevity of LEDs!
 
simonbarker said:
It's a conspiracy as they'd lose a ton of sales thanks to the longevity of LEDs!
Click to expand...

But LEDs actually cost individually very little to manufacture, so its a bit of a con that they are going to be highly priced. Their rise in price over the past ten years has been stratoscopic, and they use very little power. But as you say they are not easily damaged and last a long time.
 
shreds said:
But LEDs actually cost individually very little to manufacture, so its a bit of a con that they are going to be highly priced. Their rise in price over the past ten years has been stratoscopic, and they use very little power. But as you say they are not easily damaged and last a long time.
Click to expand...
I can't agree with that.
If they were to be used ONLY as modelling lamps, then cheap ones would do - but they aren't used only as modelling lamps, some people use them for wide aperture shooting - so the cheap ones, with their appallingly low CRI would produce very inaccurate colour rendition, and currently the LED's that have reasonably good CRI are very expensive.

And people expect the power of modelling lamps to be infinitely adjustable, LED's are non-adjustable for brightness so the array itself would have to be controllable, i.e. turn the power down and some of the LED's are switched off, which does cost money.
 
If we really wanted the best of both worlds - bright LEDs with good colour and dimmable, plus the power of flash, I guess we'd end up with a product like the Lencarta LED 1000. It's as big as a flash head and costs £400 http://www.lencarta.com/studio-lighting-shopfront/continuous-lighting/led-1000 Then there's the flash head on top - you'd end up with a monster.

But isn't there an affordable compromise? I'm not sure manufacturers have seen the need, or the opportunity.
 
benc98 said:
I guess the cost of reengineering the product to take LEDs might need to be built into the price of the early models...
Click to expand...

They may not need to if the screw in types eventually become powerful enough, only products I'm aware of that do currently use them are Profoto B1/B2 (20w/9w), Phottix Indra500 (4.5w) and some Priolites (80w ?). Having not used any of them I can't be certain but I think they're all using inbuilt LEDs so there's added cost there but never having to replace the modelling light is a nice bonus.

There's other knock on benefits, heads should be able to operate with less aggressive cooling (although high powered LEDs still get hot) but it does seem a missed opportunity not to make them daylight balanced (I assume it's because it's cheaper/easier or they wanted to stick with what existing kit was producing).
 
HoppyUK said:
1) Light spill reflected from surroundings - walls, ceiling, curtains, coloured furnishings. Unless you have a bright red sofa or something just out of shot though, or bright green curtains, in practise this is usually just an overall colour shift that can be corrected quite easily.

2) Different coloured light modifiers. If you want good colour, don't mix brands. I have two softboxes that are at least 500K different, probably more - very common. Tip from Our Garry is to spray the insides lightly with car paint, which is on my To Do list. This is very hard to correct properly in post processing, though for portraits and stuff it's not usually noticeable. But for critical jobs, like maybe fashion or catalogue work, or product photography, it's a real issue. I shoot a lot of small black shiny things for work - cameras, lenses, flash guns - and with two different softboxes on either side it stands out immediately.

3) Different brands of flash, and colour shifts changing from max to min power. Usually not too serious, but certainly a consideration for colour-critical work. I've been testing some high-end heads recently, that use multiple capacitors of different sizes that are mixed and matched for optimum consistency of both colour and flash duration at all output levels. Very impressive they are too.

4) Using a longer shutter speed than necessary with flash increases the influence of ambient light, including modelling lamps. My default is 1/125sec, though I'd push that up to max in the OP's situation of low flash power with modelling lamps on full.
Click to expand...

Thanks, nice reply, good info. The one I hadn't thought of was two (if that makes sense ;) ). Going to run some tests on my gear. Cheers.
 
simonbarker said:
They may not need to if the screw in types eventually become powerful enough, only products I'm aware of that do currently use them are Profoto B1/B2 (20w/9w), Phottix Indra500 (4.5w) and some Priolites (80w ?). Having not used any of them I can't be certain but I think they're all using inbuilt LEDs so there's added cost there but never having to replace the modelling light is a nice bonus.

There's other knock on benefits, heads should be able to operate with less aggressive cooling (although high powered LEDs still get hot) but it does seem a missed opportunity not to make them daylight balanced (I assume it's because it's cheaper/easier or they wanted to stick with what existing kit was producing).
Click to expand...
I don't see longer life as being the main potential benefit. Having said that, all tungsten (filament) lamps do have a pretty short potential life when used as modelling lamps, and the main reasons for this are that
1. They are used at all sorts of angles that cause the filaments to sag (unlike the standard household tungsten lamps that we used to use, which were nearly always in a vertical position
2. They get abused by being moved whilst hot - again unlike the household lamps, which nobody ever went near.

Cooler running is a definite benefit. LED's do run hot, but our LED1000 that Richard mentioned is incredibly cool running.
I think though that the greatest potential benefit is the position of the LED - very close to the flash tube. This won't matter to the people who only use softboxes and umbrellas, but it's a real benefit to those of us who use things like fresnel spots and focussing spots, because a long thin modelling lamp that sticks out well beyond the flash tube gives a poor indication of what the flash will actually produce. Interestingly, Bowens flash heads have the flash tube sitting well forward of the more normal position, this makes it vulnerable to damage but does mean that the modelling lamps give a better indication of the finished result.
HoppyUK said:
If we really wanted the best of both worlds - bright LEDs with good colour and dimmable, plus the power of flash, I guess we'd end up with a product like the Lencarta LED 1000. It's as big as a flash head and costs £400 http://www.lencarta.com/studio-lighting-shopfront/continuous-lighting/led-1000 Then there's the flash head on top - you'd end up with a monster.

But isn't there an affordable compromise? I'm not sure manufacturers have seen the need, or the opportunity.
Click to expand...
I am in fact talking to factories about this. I think the problem is really the cost, including the tooling cost. In these days of throw-away hotshoe flashguns, and the increasing number of people who seem to think that these cheap flashguns can do the job of studio flashes, it has all suddenly become very price sensitive, and the factories are trying to compete by making their products more cheaply, rather than by adding extra, expensive features.
 
JennyGW said:
Thanks, nice reply, good info. The one I hadn't thought of was two (if that makes sense ;) ). Going to run some tests on my gear. Cheers.
Click to expand...

If you go looking for problems, you'll probably find ones you never knew you had. The fact that these things hardly ever get mentioned in posts suggests most users are quite happy.

Use same head, at same power, same position in room, same subject distance (keep it close, to reduce influence of spill), modelling lamp off, zero ambient contamination, same lens, same shutter speed. If you want to be really picky, same aperture and adjust exposure with ISO (CA changes can slightly affect colour at lowest f/numbers).
 
Last edited:
why don't we have daylight-balanced, cool-running LED modelling lamps these days?
Click to expand...
Because studio flash manufacturers enjoy the extra profit they get from selling modelling lamp that cost pennies at cost price for £9.00 each.
 
redsnappa said:
Because studio flash manufacturers enjoy the extra profit they get from selling modelling lamp that cost pennies at cost price for £9.00 each.
Click to expand...
If only you were right about them costing pennies, there would be a profit...
We sell them at £18 per pair, we can't afford to sell them singly because of the costs.
Assume for the moment that they cost £6 for 2
Transport from China, import duty and transport from the docks adds about 50p.
Tied up capital, warehousing costs including labour, adds a few pence more.
£3 of the £18 retail price goes in VAT, leaving £15.
They are fragile, the cardboard box we send them in and the packing materials cost about another £1.20, leaving £13.80
Delivery by courier costs £6, leaving £7.80
Take away the cost of the product, transport, duty and their small share of the warehousing cost and we're left with about £1.20
And that's before we take off the cost of the credit card fees on the £18 payment, staff costs, free replacements (and the cost of sending them) for any that arrive broken or arrive dead,

Tell me, where's the "extra profit" in that? It's a service item, not a profit item, which I expect is why some people charge a lot more than we do.
 
Garry Edwards said:
If only you were right about them costing pennies, there would be a profit...
We sell them at £18 per pair, we can't afford to sell them singly because of the costs.
Assume for the moment that they cost £6 for 2
Transport from China, import duty and transport from the docks adds about 50p.
Tied up capital, warehousing costs including labour, adds a few pence more.
£3 of the £18 retail price goes in VAT, leaving £15.
They are fragile, the cardboard box we send them in and the packing materials cost about another £1.20, leaving £13.80
Delivery by courier costs £6, leaving £7.80
Take away the cost of the product, transport, duty and their small share of the warehousing cost and we're left with about £1.20
And that's before we take off the cost of the credit card fees on the £18 payment, staff costs, free replacements (and the cost of sending them) for any that arrive broken or arrive dead,

Tell me, where's the "extra profit" in that? It's a service item, not a profit item, which I expect is why some people charge a lot more than we do.
Click to expand...

The two I just bought were £5.99 each. Elinchrom branded.
 
JennyGW said:
The two I just bought were £5.99 each. Elinchrom branded.
Click to expand...

I managed to buy some 150w bulbs for £3.10 each a few months back but had to wait weeks to get them from China and a couple were smashed (which isn't really a problem if you're buying via eBay or whatever) but it's not really a valid comparison to Gary's example.
 
My studio strobes (Calumet AS250 monolights) do have LED modelling lamps... but they are a little feeble, and annoyingly don't have a "proportional" mode (just "on" or "off"). So far from perfect, but I can confirm that such things do exist!

Another way around the OP's issue would be to use continuous lighting rather than low power flash. If the flash power he is using is so low that the (partially on) modelling light affects the exposure then the amount of continuous lighting required wouldn't be crazy. Once you have only one type of light your colour balancing issues are solved.
 
Somersetman said:
My studio strobes (Calumet AS250 monolights) do have LED modelling lamps... but they are a little feeble, and annoyingly don't have a "proportional" mode (just "on" or "off"). So far from perfect, but I can confirm that such things do exist!

Another way around the OP's issue would be to use continuous lighting rather than low power flash. If the flash power he is using is so low that the (partially on) modelling light affects the exposure then the amount of continuous lighting required wouldn't be crazy. Once you have only one type of light your colour balancing issues are solved.
Click to expand...
Yes, they have been available for some time but, to date, offer no real world improvement to traditional filament technology when used as modelling lamps - quite the reverse in fact - and it will be a few months before this changes.

The OP is using a SuperFast flash head. This produces incredibly short flash durations for freezing action, and he couldn't do this with continuous lighting (of any power) because their wouldn't be enough power to allow him to use very fast shutter speeds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top