I've always found Karl's videos informative and I like his presenting style (I could see him on Sky Arts!)I found it quite by accident and was pleasantly surprised when I watched it as YouTube has so many 'experts' that either talk out of their backside or talk a lot, but say nothing at all.
Its funny - he only does that "reading a prepared statement in court" voice on those short YouTube videos. On his ~2 hour live shoots he's much more natural. In fact sometimes it's downright hilarious. I have my popcorn ready for when someone invariably asks (for the 100th time) when there's a diffusion panel and projected gradients: "can I do it with a softbox". You can almost hear the collective "Oohhh" from the crowd, as we wait for the inevitable Kitchen Nightmares style response
One of the single biggest problems with photography today is that people tend to have too much equipment and not enough knowledge, and tend to see equipment as an alternative to knowledge, and they're always buying gadgets that they don't need instead of learning how to manage without them. Softboxes are one of my pet hates, in the sense that although they're extremely useful, they can never replace a basic understanding of physics and they can never replicate the effect of a graduated diffuser - basically a silk that's been partially lit to create a specific effect, for example when creating specific graduated highlights on highly reflective complex shapes such as the front element of a lens.Its funny - he only does that "reading a prepared statement in court" voice on those short YouTube videos. On his ~2 hour live shoots he's much more natural. In fact sometimes it's downright hilarious. I have my popcorn ready for when someone invariably asks (for the 100th time) when there's a diffusion panel and projected gradients: "can I do it with a softbox". You can almost hear the collective "Oohhh" from the crowd, as we wait for the inevitable Kitchen Nightmares style response
LED lights are perfect for video, that's what they're for. There's a vast range available for video, from the cheap and nasty to the horrifically expensive and incredibly good pro ranges.
It's strange, but instincts based on experience are usually right - for example the instinct to run away from danger, the instinct to cover the brake pedal for no apparent reason when something doesn't quite feel right - but the instinct to use totally inadequate continuous lighting is normally based on lack of experience, and it just doesn't make sense.
I use Peter’s lighting setups too, but stick Elinchrom heads into strip boxes, as do many Crew members (well, not all Elinchrom, obviously). I’m Crew member myself, in fact, and personally think it’s an amazing community with a commitment to providing support and mentoring that I’ve not encountered anywhere else. Perhaps not for everyone, though, and I understand that.It is and I think this is purely down to Peter Hurley tbh. Peter, by his own admission is not a technical person - he shot headshots purely using the north facing window light he just happened to have in his first studio for years, and then wanted something to replicate this "look" with, on location. He started to use Kinoflo tubes - ie lighting gear used on movie sets, and these worked for him. His skillset was not primarily in lighting, but in the rapport he builds with his clients. He's an exceptional headshot photographer, and became well known. He got hired by education and training outfits like Kelby One and went on to write a book on headshots, and found his own Headshot Academy - the "Headshot Crew". It's a bit cult-like tbh and his followers will do whatever he does. I listened in on eof his "free" sessions once, and he spent most of them time selling kit he had his name on, and his education programme. Westcott who were already marketing the Flex Panels to the movie industry, approached Hurley and persuaded him to try their panels. Of course they worked just as well as the tubes and were a whole lot more portable. He put his name on a four panel kit. https://www.fotodeals.co.uk/westcott-peter-hurley-4-light-flex-kit-7537-ag
Yes you read that right: 4 panels (and some tat) for £6200 actual Earth pounds.
Take a look at this review from fstoppers where they claim it is "the best light kit we have ever used":-
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dso5xilIdY
"I am standing in front of these 4 panels at full power right now and I have a headache. They are so bright" - a big downside for continuous lights - it's very uncomfortable for the client.
Meanwhile, the screen shows the exposure for the camera: 1/30th of a second, f/8 at Iso 100. So - not very much light at all then really. You could shoot at 1/120th. and f/4 I suppose, but that's still a bit slow to guarantee sharp shots of human subjects. Or just make the room darker and crank the gain up on the sensor - which also amplifies the noise.
Now these are genuinely useful in the movie industry - and you can see some of that utility on the FotoDeals webpage above, sticking them to the sunblinds in cars for example. But for headshots? Unless you're shooting in a wardrobe, you can bring something bigger into play. Westcott of course, have previous for this sort of thing "from the company that brought you the Ice Light" - an underpowered, over-priced light stick.
However, neither the outrageous price or the technical reasons why they're not that suitable for headshots matters, and to your point Tony: they are used extensively by headshot photographers. Because Peter Hurley uses them. His influence is remarkable.
I use Peter Hurley's triangular light setup for corp headshots - but mine consist of 2 30x120 strip softboxes with 600J lights in them, and a white reflector at the bottom. Same lighting result, just loads more of it, giving very high quality files. Plus my subjects are not blinded at the end of the session
50 portraits! Comic Relief
We shot 50 portraits at Barclays Technology Centre Radbroke in one afternoon and collected donations for Comic Relief. A lot of fun getting some fantastic expressions from these beautiful people !astonstudios.co.uk
I think that it all comes down to the sponsorship thing. Some people have b******t antennae but many don't, that's why it works so well. There was a time, long long ago, when photographers who were sponsored by manufacturers simply used the equipment in their videos, tutorials and demos and didn't even mention the brand, leaving it to the audience to work out that if a successful photographer chose to use that particular brand then it was likely to be a good one. However, things have changed for the worse and sadly a lot of people now make a very good living selling merchandise, training courses and basically conning people. Obviously I'm not saying that all of these salespeople are bad photographers - many are extremely talented - but I think we all know of some who are far better at presenting themselves and selling products than photography.Yep the Headshot Crew definitely works for a lot of people Tony, and so do those panels, but they cost far too much for what they are, and there are better solutions out there. I'm sure many of the Crew will, like you, work this out, however I do feel for the inexperienced who sign up and maybe fall into laying out £6200 on 4 LED panels thinking they really need those and nothing else will do. I'm not a headshot specialist by any means, however I learnt a great deal from Peter's book, and he is a very good photographer. Best to just skip the gear recommendations though I think - where sponsorship is detected
