Which off camera flash kit

Robclarke

Robclarke

Messages
647
Edit My Images
Yes
I currently have one speed light (580 ex ii). I like taking portraits of my family at home. For this I tend to use ceiling bounced off camera flash. However I can't really control the light very well like this and it lights up the whole room.
What kit do I need to get effective portraits?
 
An umbrella would give soft light on the subject but would still spill light around. A softbox only sends light from the box and is also soft and wrap around, but more expensive. If looking at softboxes, look at the Lastolite smaller ones or the Micansu Ezy Up 70cm as this one will allow the box to tilt over fully as the speedlite is on the inside and it has a special bracket .

see this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxQgGIj3nqM

Malcolm
 
Last edited:
I just bought a Westcott Apollo kit that includes the softbox (obviously), light stand and umbrella bracket.It's real nice and I'm getting some good shots with it.

Although it's not cheap at around £125 on Amazon I wanted the Apollo because of the ability to have more control over where the light is going due to the deep recess between the end of the 'umbrella' and the diffuser material. An umbrella didn't seem to be able to offer this sort of control.
 
Last edited:
Are light boxes much better than something like this

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B001JQLGW0

They look a bit more complicated to use. I am just really looking to get softly lit portraits where I can have the background black. I can't achieve that at the moment as The flash lights the whole room.
 
Robclarke said:
Are light boxes much better than something like this

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B001JQLGW0

They look a bit more complicated to use. I am just really looking to get softly lit portraits where I can have the background black. I can't achieve that at the moment as The flash lights the whole room.
Click to expand...

That's basically a reflective umbrella (as opposed to a shoot-through). It'll do a good job in producing a large apparent light size relative to a human being but I think you'll get plenty of spill from it.

A large softbox with a deep recess on the front (like the Westcott Apollo 28') to avoid spill will be good. There are clones of the Apollo from the likes of Phottix, but they don't have the same recessed lip on the front for feathering light. Thy're a fraction of the price though and will do a grand job with one speedlight through them.
 
Just to note, you don't actually need any sort of modifier if you want a black background. Simply a speedlight on a light stand can work with good effect like in this video.
 
As other people have said, a softbox will control the spread of light better than a softbox, and good lighting is all about how the light is controlled, it has nothing to do with having enough light to actually do the job.

If you want a black background though, you need to have your subject well away from the background, so that very little light reaches the background, your lighting needs to be very close to the subject (if you are lighting from the front of your subject) so that the effect of the inverse square law minimises the amount of light reaching the background, and the background materials needs to be non-reflective, i.e. black velvet at best and black muslin at worst - black paper and black vinyl are generally too reflective.
 
These days, anyone would think you can't take great portraits without a softbox and a beauty dish, but it's not true. For basic, high quality, nice and simple portraits, one white reflective umbrella is very good indeed. So cheap, dead easy to put up, and they take up less space than a softbox.

Then add a reflector to fill in the shadow side to suit. If you want a harder light, go for silver. For a softer light, go for shoot-though with a bit of fill-in from all the spill and bounce that goes around the room.

So much you can do with that, cheap as chips.
 
HoppyUK said:
These days, anyone would think you can't take great portraits without a softbox and a beauty dish, but it's not true. For basic, high quality, nice and simple portraits, one white reflective umbrella is very good indeed. So cheap, dead easy to put up, and they take up less space than a softbox.

Then add a reflector to fill in the shadow side to suit. If you want a harder light, go for silver. For a softer light, go for shoot-though with a bit of fill-in from all the spill and bounce that goes around the room.

So much you can do with that, cheap as chips.
Click to expand...

This is indeed a good way to get up and running. However, if you want a black background, as the OP mentioned............

Robclarke said:
They look a bit more complicated to use. I am just really looking to get softly lit portraits where I can have the background black. I can't achieve that at the moment as The flash lights the whole room.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid a shoot through brolly will kill the black background. A reflective brolly is better, but is still difficult to control the light due to their shallow nature.
 
Last edited:
Hunders said:
Just to note, you don't actually need any sort of modifier if you want a black background. Simply a speedlight on a light stand can work with good effect like in this video.
Click to expand...

I tried this today but I got shadows Anderson the chin and on the background. Would this be helped by a softbox or brolly?
 
Robclarke said:
I tried this today but I got shadows Anderson the chin and on the background. Would this be helped by a softbox or brolly?
Click to expand...

Shadow is good. It's how you control and use the shadow areas in the shot that is key.

Basically, the larger the light source appears relative to the subject (apparent light size) the softer the transition between highlight (i.e. skin) and the shadow area will be.

Use a small light source compared to a human body set 10ft away - a bare speedlight for example - and the shadows will be more defined, 'harder' as it's know. But make that light source several feet across but still in the same position - 28" softbox for example - then the shadows will be gentler.

There are other differences to consider as well - how much diffusion is used and how much light that diffusion eats up.

It's worth reading something like Strobist:101 to give an idea of what can be achieved with different bits of equipment.
 
specialman said:
Shadow is good. It's how you control and use the shadow areas in the shot that is key.

Basically, the larger the light source appears relative to the subject (apparent light size) the softer the transition between highlight (i.e. skin) and the shadow area will be.

Use a small light source compared to a human body set 10ft away - a bare speedlight for example - and the shadows will be more defined, 'harder' as it's know. But make that light source several feet across but still in the same position - 28" softbox for example - then the shadows will be gentler.

There are other differences to consider as well - how much diffusion is used and how much light that diffusion eats up.

It's worth reading something like Strobist:101 to give an idea of what can be achieved with different bits of equipment.
Click to expand...

Yes I have read some of strobist 101. This is was made me think of getting a single brolly setup (it is what they say you should buy first) now I am not sure if I need that or a softbox.
 
As already mentioned, brollies are cheap and easy to use. Something is better than nothing IMO and at least it'll give you an idea of what diffusion does to light and allows you to at least shape some of the light you're working with.

RE: softboxes - it's a personal thing as to what you end up using. There are probably as many people whom like working with harder light as there are from diffused light sources, it's probably just that diffused light gives a more accessible effect... hard light can be predictable for sure but for many (myself included) it can seem that there's a lot more work involved because of the shadows it creates.
 
Black velvet, with the nap brushed the right way, is the best. But it's incredibly expensive.
'"Velveteen", "Faux velvet" and similar cheaper alternatives are worse than useless.
 
Garry Edwards said:
Black velvet, with the nap brushed the right way, is the best. But it's incredibly expensive.
'"Velveteen", "Faux velvet" and similar cheaper alternatives are worse than useless.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I bought some for work - it's about 7x8ft - and it did cost a fair bit from the haberdashers. Can't remember the exact cost, had it ages now. It's worth it, especially when you get close to it as you can light and photograph it and it hardly shows up. Try that with black cloth though and it's horrid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top