Gary Fong's Lightsphere - technical question

[joe_demb1]

OOPS, this thread is specifically about guide numbers relative to a product. I didn't intend to contribute to a hijacking & get off topic. The answer is 'yes' David. But getting back to the subject, I am a little surprised to see people even talking about guide numbers. Does this mean that folks are steering away from TTL systems and using flash on manual settings? I thought we old time film shooters killed that stuff back in the 80's.

[george_schafer]

I, for one, want to learn about a flash accesory's modified Guide Number because I took the time to learn what guide numbers meant. Unlike my peers, from what I've gathered.

[gpjoell3]

Jason,

 

I understand what you are saying and I agree with your point. Using the GF light sphere does take a bit of technique, like most other aspects of photography accessories. I have learned to master the GF Sphere and I feel more comfortable with it. I have two and I use it on both of my SB800s. Neither of them fall down like you described. I have heard that this is an issue, but I have not experienced it. I do bounce my flash, however, many reception halls have high ceilings or they have a dark brown or black ceiling. When the occurs, I look for a white wall or just rely on my GF to light up my subjects. Oh by the way, you have a cool photo on your page. I like the lens...

 

George

[christopher hartt dallas]

David, I don't have a grudge with Mr. Fong, just think that there's quite a bit of the "Paris Hilton" thing going on with him - he's a celebrity by virtue of no great talent except for marketing himself as a celeb. His photography doesn't do it for me.

 

I teach a number of seminars for "newer" photographers and AM a little disappointed when they rely on the LS to 'water down' their flash so far that it doesn't blow out highlights. In reality, I want my students to learn about using flash compensation at a lower level, using smaller aperture, etc to eliminate the hot spots and uneven lighting. It seems that when aspiring photographers find a "quick and dirty" (LS) way to make their pics seem better looking, the desire to learn the fundamentals often diminishes.

 

"Too much light" is often a problem for beginners or intermediate students who don't understand how to use the light, but at the more advanced stages, a photographer probably shoots manual settings and uses the camera and flash unit to control the look of the images. I can honestly say that I've never shot an event, concert or editorial event with other pros present who are using a LS. Even at weddings that I've critiqued for students, it's almost always the inexperienced students who are using the LS, more advanced students sometimes use the Demb, and the MOST experienced photographers are complaining that there isn't enough light (don't diffuse at all and rely on bounce, smaller aperture at close distance, faster speed, lower ISO, etc.). I'm sure everybody has different experiences but this has been mine.

 

I also have "grudges" about teachers who allow a student to use a calculator before the child knows how to multiply and divide manually.

 

If a photographer who really knows and has excellent technique decides to use a LS, then more power to him or her. But I know that the number of pros who do use the LS is minimal (or less than that). I really don't like to think about photographer's being convinced by clever and deceptive marketing that the Fong LS is what they need to solve their lack of understanding and short circuit mastering the fundamentals of flash photography.

 

In principal, this is why I like the Demb diffuser better also. It takes at least a basic understanding of fundamental flash principles to use it successfully, and it's not being marketed as the 'Mother of All flash products' like Mr. Fong is marketing the LS.

 

I know my post will arouse some disagreements and question my opinion. For your own education though. Next time a major award show comes up - Grammy, Emmy, Tony - tune into the Red Carpet pre show and check out the line of hundreds of photographers. The Red Carpet has celebs walking 5 to 8 feet from photographers outside the ropes who are shooting the celeb's for press, etc. I was in the line for the recent Grammy Red Carpet and didn't see a single LS among the hundreds of credentialed photographers. I saw a few Demb's, but the everyone else had either no modifier at all or a Sto-fen (as much to protect the flash as to diffuse). It's this way at pretty much every event that I've shot - including O'Bama's visit here the other day. Sure, just because a photographer is a full time pro, it doesn't mean that he or she always uses the very best tools for the job, but when their actions verify my own experiences, I take the information more as "fact" than not.

 

Opinions are like noses...everybody has one.

[george_schafer]

This is why I love the forums on Photo.net. I always get a feeling of enlightenment whenever the posts get as in-depth as this.

 

Christopher Hartt-

I completely understand where you're coming from. My teachers of my classes here at NAU are just starting to explain to me the proper way of using flash, but they seem to rely on using flash meters. So far, I've found the flash meters that we're using are overexposing by at least 2 stops (although I'm using ISO 160 film rather than 100). I also find myself at a handicap because I'm doing this with film while my teacher has been encouraging us to use digital so that she can make suggestions while we're shooting.

 

So far, flash is proving to be a daunting subject, but I've taken upon myself to do research on flash outside of class. So far, I've been very disappointed with my negatives, although I have found that I will be able to scan them into the computer to help save them, but it isn't enough.

 

I'm interested in on-camera flash utilities because as an intermediate user, I am not going to be able to afford remote slaves, off camera flashes, and even handle-mount flashes are proving to be quite elusive on my budget when for 15-50$ I can buy a utility that won't make me cry on the way to the bank, and may help jump-start my career and help me reach my goal of becoming a bohemian photographer who can afford to tinker around all day for no other reason than to master Photography.

 

Here at NAU, our teachers only stress one thing about on-camera flash: DON'T USE IT! If they could write it in the sky for all their students to read, they would. In fact, they would probably skywrite it all over the planet because, from what we hear, that's the biggest problem with point-&-shoot photography.

 

However, the more point & shooters do their thing, the more pros keep their niche and lifestyle. So I guess you have to have standards that you don't just give away for free.

 

The biggest problem with sites like Strobist, and guides here at Photo.net, I've found is that they're hard to follow. Maybe I'm unusual, but I'm a visual & tactile learner. If I can see & do something, I will keep with me much longer than just straight text. I am considering writing a paper with examples to demystify flash, and flash accesories, so all of your concerns are insightful and will make a great section for it.

 

As for Gary Fong:

Advertising is my first major, Photography is my second. The one thing I've noticed about Fong's media that he uses a format that reminds me of infomercials. Even with the lame co-host who asks poorly acted pre-scripted questions. It's rather amusing, but it's a format that has proven itself to work.

 

Regardless of Fong's product, or even his work, he's accomplishing his goal: to sell. I kinda have to admire that.

[steve_c.5]

Once again, some here have taken the poster's original question far afield of what he was asking. He's asking about intensity and guide numbers with the Fong attachment. He's not asking whether one thing is better than another.

 

To be direct in answering the original question, I would not worry about measuring or knowing the guide number with this attachment. What is important, is how well it works, and what the subject's appearance is with it. Sure, there will be less intensity once light has been diffused through the device, but that's the idea. Make the shot look good, and nobody will ever wonder what light intensity was there.

 

Let's be clear: The Fong device is a DIFFUSER. It produces a soft, natural-looking diffused light with soft shadows, and does this by bouncing light 360 degrees like a lampshade. This feature is the reason that shadows cast by the light are soft, as opposed to the sharp-edged and harsh shadows like you see on the Demp Flip-it website, or even if you tape a white card to the flash.

 

The Flip-It, and similar devices are REFLECTORS, not DIFFUSERS. They bounce light at an angle toward the subject, and do not allow any rear-reflection of light. This results in the sharp shadows behind the subject, which some may like, but I find look unnatural.

 

The next advantage of the Fong device is the domes. With the white dome, one can shoot outdoors with black sky, or in a room with a dark ceiling, and still bounce light off the upper dome and horizontally off surrounding surfaces in a 360 pattern.

 

The amber dome is most useful in dim tungsten reception areas. Set your WB on tungsten, and the amber dome makes your flash output the same color temp as the surrounding lighting. So, your color balance is natural and not amber-colored. With the Flip-It, your WB will have to be set on Flash, and if you're using a slow shutter speed to gather ambient light, it results in dark amber background lighting. Not natural-looking at all.

 

The Chromedome is most useful for shooting large groups with the center hole for ceiling bounce and the rear kicker to direct light forward.

 

I used to ceiling-bounce. It's better than direct flash, but casts a downward lightsource that results in eye-socket shadows.

 

I think some people like to rag on Gary Fong because he's a successful capitalist, who had a good idea, and is doing well with it. They think that because he sells his product for so much money, that it has to be a scam or rip-off. Those folks obviously have never brought an injection-molded product to market, and don't know the startup and tooling costs involved. Personally, the Lightsphere has improved my indoor flash photography far beyond what any reflective card could ever have done. There are a number of correct camera settings and techniques one needs to learn to get the most from it. Those who used it and turned away from it may never have figured out the right settings for their particular equipment.

 

I'm not going to get into a back and forth argument with anyone here over this, I just want to provide some useful info for the poster from my perspective.

[christopher hartt dallas]

Yeah Steve, but the thing is, this is a forum for photographers, not "capitalists". Gary Fong needs an infomercial, not an educational forum. Perhaps somewhere late night after Conan and before the Ginzu knives guy makes an appearance on the tube.

[steve_c.5]

Chris, this is a forum for photographers, irrespective of whether they are capitalists, which you seem to think is a dirty word. I'd guess you fall into the capitalist catagory as well. That's good. We need more capitalists to make the economy grow.

 

Gary is a photographer who does not frequent this forum, to my knowledge. If I were Gary, I would use the same marketing techniques he's using to successfully market my product, with the exception of his clunky website design, but that's a technicality. And I've never seen him market the LS as "the mother of all flash products". All I've ever seen him do is expound on it's virtues, which any inventor would do. I don't sense there is any great "war" going on between him and reflector manufacturers, either.

 

As this thread "reflects", there are plenty of us who use his products and like them. You've expressed your opinion, so you use what YOU like.

[ilkka_nissila]

White reflector cards do diffuse the light. It is not quite a Lambertian light source but closer to that than to a mirror.

 

The GF Lightsphere cannot be given a guide number reduction factor. The light hitting the subject is too dependent on the distance of the flash to the walls and their reflectance.

 

As for the Red Carpet, I think many of the images published that were taken there are lousy examples of direct flash use. Blown-out faces, excessive contrast, and so on. But the subjects have a lot of make-up on, and the clothes are probably designed to look good under direct flash, so it doesn't matter as much as it does in a more casual event. A small diffuser/reflector doesn't do much at a distance, and probably you really don't want too much of that red from the carpet to be projected on the subjects. The ceiling is so high there isn't any possibility of using it for reflection. Hence a Lightsphere would be useless. What would be useful is a large reflector or a soft box but since the photographers are packed so tightly it may well be forbidden to use such things because they would prevent other photographers from taking their shot. Anyway, I have never been there, just observations after watching it on TV.

[picturesque]

I am late to the party, but I would advise George, since he is a hands on kind of guy, to make similar diffusers himself, at home, and test them all in the venues he will be shooting in. Then make up his mind, if he is to only get one diffuser/modifier. I would also emphasize the "in the venues he will be shooting in" part. If you are going to write a paper on modifiers, don't make the same mistake of others doing the same thing. Invariably, they choose small objects to be subjects and use their small, white living room. Magically, all the modifiers do a great job with these circumstances. These modifiers each react differently in different kinds of locations. Then, each modifier acts differently from the other. The first thing to do is to observe these differences and figure out the reasons. Then choose an array of modifiers that satisfy you for the given lighting condition.

 

To make the various modifiers, just figure out a suitable approximation. This will give you a pretty good idea how the actual, commercially made product will perform. For instance, I recently found a cheap substitute for the milky Lightsphere that you can buy from The Container Store for $2. I wrote about it in a recent thread.

 

The sole reason for buying a Demb Diffuser or Flip It is the hinge, in my opinion. You can make paper bounce cards for testing, but the hinge makes your life easier in fast moving situations such as weddings. Also look at A Better Bounce Card and Chuck Gardner's homemade modifier for inexpensive options.

 

I personally have many of these and have adapted and modfied my modifiers to suit me. To answer some actual questions. I once tested the Lightsphere in a medium sized, mostly light colored room and found the light loss to be 3 stops (from the head direct position). So 2-3 stops would be a good starting point. Also remember that with film, you want to overexpose slightly, for good negative density. Digital would be opposite. So factor that into your guide number.

 

And, the Lightsphere with the dome on, pointed straight ahead is actually quite a nice fill flash diffuser.

[dannytekino]

I'm an extremely happy lightsphere user. I have an original lightsphere cloud version, and also one of the cheap imitation versions from ebay. They both work really well. Maybe you should buy one of the imitation ones first to test it out, before you hand over a decent bunch of cash for the original one which you may or may not like.

[william_bray1]

I have to say there seem to be a lot of knowledgeable people here who could run circles around me of how to use a flash. So I'm talking from a pratical perspective, and the LS is not practical in a fast moving environment like a wedding. For me the number one priority is to get the shot and LS is a pain and slows me down, on one occasion if it wasn't for looking unprofessional I would have thrown it into the road.The LS might be fine to take shots of your pets or your baby, but in real life God knows how any one can shoot a wedding with the LS strapped on all day long or they must shout for everyone to stop what they are doing while they take it off so they can use direct flash. Up untill now I have used a stofen indoors using ETTL and the camera in manual mode. Outside I still use the stofen if I'm close enough to the subject, or direct flash if I'm further away with a 70-200 lens and underexpose the flash by 1 stop or more if I need to. I sometimes bounce flash behind me to achive the look I want but with the LS the light goes everywhere and theres no control. I'm now going to try the Demb diffuser because I can see how that can work and how fast it is to use.

[russ_konrad]

<b><i>"...but in real life God knows how any one can shoot a wedding with the LS strapped on all day long or they must shout for everyone to stop what they are doing while they take it off so they can use direct flash...."</b></i>

<p>

Not exactly sure what you are talking about. It goes on easily and comes off easily. Perhaps you just need to use it more to "break it in".

<p>

Just a thought since I have no problem at all taking it off and/or putting it on for different effects. Just my humble opinion. I do use a better bounce card off and on as well depending upon the room and surrounding conditions.

[william_bray1]

I just found the whole experiance with the LS to be clumsy, if I wanted the flash head to be at a angle instaed of sraight up the weight of the LS would make it drop forward.As for taking it off it's difficult to find any where to put it (except the floor) while I used direct flash. Example, I was shooting a wedding,It was the time of the speaches indoors. The best man was on a stage giving his speach and i was near the guests so he was the furthest away. The LS was wasting so much light it was under exposed, so I used direct flash with off camera and exposure compensation. When I wanted to get the guests reaction to the speach I wanted to diffuse the light as I was that much closer to them. By the time I fitted the LS I was loosing the moment. The stofen is fast it goes in my pocket and takes no tme to fit. I can understand where the LS would be usefull and if I had the time I would use it but I carry enough gear at a wedding as it is.The LS is not that great for me to risk loosing a shot while I fiddle about with it.