tungsten lighting w/umbrella

[sloyd66]

i did some shots and messed up and didn't write down what was actually done. I

used the hot lights and the umbrella as main, with electronic flash as fill for

the first time.. my question is do i still need to use the 80a filter with this

setup? some of the pictures came out good, some came out with a blueish look

which i'm wondering was it from the filter or just that the flash didn't

recycle fast enough and didn't go off. see picture attach which one do this

look like? thanks for you continous help.. also i have a picture in my

portfolio maybe you can look and see if that was without the filter, and the

flash did go off. it's the same person so you will be able to tell..thanks!

[sloyd66]

I'm sorry here's the picture

[beauh44]

Hi Shelly, If you're using hotlights and flash it could very well be a color temperature issue - assuming they're the "old fashioned" hotlights that have a color temperature around 2800 (very reddish light, like a lightbulb) versus flash, which has a color temperature closer to daylight - around 5500 - which is a "cooler" looking light (more blueish). They usually don't go together very well. You could get rid of one or the other or if you're using on-camera flash, put a red/orange gel over it to help match the color of your hotlight(s). It would be helpful to know what kind of hotlight(s) and flash(es) you're using. If you're not already using them you can get continuous light that's daylight balanced and thus a very close match with your flash. And then there's the "final solution": Make 'em into B&W's! ;-) Good luck!

[beauh44]

Sorry - I should've referred to the "2800" and "5500" as Kelvin on the color temperature scale.

[garry edwards]

As above. What you did was to use an 80A filter to convert the tungsten light, which of course turned the light from the flash blue.

 

You need to either gel the flash to match the colour of the tungsten or the other way round. In reality, it isn't practical to gel the tungsten because its power output is too low to start with.

[gdw]

Shelly, I am making an assumption that you are using daylight balanced film (based on the fact that you are using the 80a filter to balance to your hot lights).

 

IMO, there is a better way to go. Use tungsten balanced film so that you do not have to use the filter on your camera. The main advantage is that you do not have to deal with the loss of light from using the filter. That will solve any problems with your hot lights.

 

But, it will cause an easily fixable problem with your flash. You will need to place a filter over the flash to get the color of the flash to balance with the tungsten film. To do that you need either a Lee or a Rosco filter sheet that is normally used in movie photography. Lee makes a full CTO orange filter which is available from Adorama in a 20 x 24 sheet for about $7. I could only find a Rosco 3/4 CTO available from B&H. I know the Lee will work. I am not sure about the Rosco. You can cut the sheet to whatever size you need to cover your flash and hold it on with a small piece of gaffer tape or if you are going to do it a lot, glue some Velcro to the flash and to the filter.

 

Here's a link to the Lee filter: http://www.adorama.com/LE204.html?searchinfo=lee%20cto&item_no=3

[sloyd66]

thanks! i have used just the tungsten lighting for main/fill on most of my photos.. but i was just testing working with the umbrella.. before i got the filter just the hotlights my pictures came out yellowish so i got the filter to correct it. i have done pictures with just the flash as well as a studio set-up.. but i want to try and work with the umbrella more now- so basically if i don't get this gel/or filter for the flash the two won't work together? it's just weird because some of the pictures came out fine and some came out blueish so this is why i was trying to figure out where the problem is at. oh and i was using daylight film. my other question is it best to use umbrella's on both my main and fill or can i use it on just one and which one should it be main or fill? I know it may sound crazy to some of you because looking at your portfolio's your more advance, but thanks for your help !

[bill c.]

Shelly-- One extrememly important question. The first part of the file name on you photograph reads "scan". I am assuming that it is a scan of a print, and not a scan of a transparency. Is that the case, that the photo is a scan of a print?

 

Do not EVER try to judge color balance by way of a print made from an ordinary photo lab. The sensor in the enlarger will attempt to achieve what it thinks is a proper color balance. In short, it will modify the color balance to whatever it thinks is right, and if you are doing critical work, it will fail miserably.

 

If you have to use film, the only way to get a critical judgement of color balance is to shoot transparency (slide) film.

 

Other than that, the respondent who said to use tungsten-balanced film and put a yellow/orange compensation filter over the flash was correct. It's much easier to do it that way. Just don't let any stray window light come onto the subject, or you will get a bluish tint.

 

Happy shooting. -BC-

[sloyd66]

thanks all.. Bill it is a scan of a print.. they don't sell tungsten balance film negative i can't find anywhere for one.. and two the transparency (slide) film are you able to get prints?

[bill c.]

Shelly-- It's been a while since I've had the time to log on to photo.net, so forgive me if I post this far past the time you asked your question. Hope it is still of any value.

 

First of all, I need to say that digital has changed the face of photographic lab services radically and permanently. Things that were available inexpensively and quickly are now hard to come by, expensive, and time-consuming.

 

That being said, getting good prints from slides has always been a challenge both technically and economically. While you can get kind of OK prints directly from slides at most full-service photo labs (or at least you could a few years ago), previously you needed to get either an internegative (the lab takes a picture of your transparency on large-format negative stock, and prints from that), or something called Cibachrome to get really good quality.

 

While those are still available, nowadays what you will probably want to do is shoot slide film and simply have the lab scan the slide on a good scanner. It should cost about $1-$4 each at between 4000 DPI and 4800 DPI. The lab should be able to print from that (often at decent rates, depending on your requested quality), or you can print it off your printer at home. Happy shooting, -BC-