gandyjs

Thanks to everyone for contributing your advice...very helpful. I've come to the conclu$ion that I'll have to go with $ome lower-co$t lighting option$. I do have a good camera, but my lighting endeavors will not be professional as of yet. I was thinking of Photoflex stuff. I didn't want to have to use tungsten but current finances dictate that. I don't want to limit myself to just tungsten film and then having to resort to CC blue filters if I want to use Velvia 50 & E100VS. The blue cast in the viewfinder that I'll see sounds irritating (any experience with this, anyone?). But I figured, "OK, you've got all the daylight films to capture the Colorado outdoors and places, you can use the tungsten for your studio." Good for now. I guess I'm anal or persnickity. But this was my fear: "limiting" myself to tungsten film (is there high-resolution film in that lighting sensitivity?) and having to use the 80A CC filters (either on the lights or on the lens). I just wanted the less intrusive road travelled (since I'm electing to use hot lights).

Looking for the best film out there (closest to Velvia 50 & E100VS). I've heard good things about the Fuji 64T. Is that about the best for saturation and resolving power? I'm always ever-seeking to have photographs of the highest clarity and detail, wishing to duplicate reality as best as I can in a photograph. Again, my primary subject will be glass things, knick-knacks & paddy-whacks....

I'm about to venture into studio lighting at home. Primarily, my

lighting will be used to illuminate small items on a table with

various backgrounds (various textures, colors, reflectance, etc.).

I'm particularly interested in shooting glass: wine bottles, colored

spheres, marbles, various bottles and crystal mugs and even ceramic

cups of tea. Now, to me, it seems very confusing to have to use

strobes since that's not what the final product will look like. That

is, getting the right exposure, DOF, etc., can be a task already,

visualizing the lighting is another mystery I choose not to have. My

question is about WHICH style of artificial lighting is best for my

subject matter and style of shooting (as I have never used any

lighting like this before).

I'm visualizing this: it'd be great to work with daylight balanced

lighting (5400K?), always on and at the intensity necessary

(WYSIWYG). Then, any coloring, texturing (gobo, etc.), tinting,

correction, etc., will be done "subtractively" if you will, before

the final trip of the shutter. See what I'm saying? "Just gimmie

these huge 'n powerful monster white lights and let 'the ah-teest'

work his magic!"

So. What do you think? A couple of florescent lights (photographic

quality)? HMI? Strobes (argh)? Keep in mind...all these terms I'm

throwing out here I've only heard about and have read a little

about...I've never had any hands-on experience with them. I'm just

starting out. But I have this overwhelming excitement about doing

this kind of imaging.

Again, all the coloring, directing/redirecting of light, reflection

correction, polarizing, etc., I plan to do with photoflex type stuff

or white cards, mirrors, gobos, etc.

Equipment: Mamiya RZ67 Pro II w/110mm lens, very study Bogen tripod

with lock down/movable Bogen head, using Fuji Velvia 50 and Kodak

100VS films. Polarization at times. I'm about to get the longer

Mamiya extension tube to (please correct my thinking on this if

necessary) greater fill the viewfinder, enabling me to photograph

more detail, getting in closer to the subject.

Thanks for your time!