derick_miller

Thank you all for the suggestions. I ordered the FLM CP10 because is is reputed to be quite stable, has infinitely individually adjustable legs and offers a fair range of heights down to under 2". We will see...

I use a strap from Hyperion (there are many similar--this one is inexpensive, many color choices and longer lengths available than others I have seen, but it comes from Greece, so delay is longer). It slides along your body, since it is a smooth cord. Easy to bring up. Hangs comfortably (again because is is round and has slight give). You can also loosely double-wrap it around your wrist if you want it as a wrist strap.

If only my local dealer stocked good table top tripods :(. They are pretty good, but they can't have everything.

Interesting. The base of the Sirui is a bit heavier, but it is sturdy. They recommend standing on a tripod leg with your foot to add more stability, which would break many other brands. :).

Thank you for the helpful suggestions! Especially about the slider plate. Using the tabletop head as the base for a monopod is a great idea to magnify usefulness of a gear purchase. It doesn't apply for me, since I have the Sirui P-324s monopod which has a removable tripod at the base. That tripod is fixed in height and substantial in weight and size (too much to fit my portable solution needs), but it is a useful consideration for future seekers. For future seekers: If it were going to support a monopod, I think the weight support ability would be more significantly challenged since the XX Lbs of camera plus head would be balanced atop the far end of a lever (the monopod). So a tripod to fill this roll should be more substantial than otherwise.

Fuji has much more than doubled their sales in the medium format market since the 50r was released. And they will announce the 100 on Thursday and it is expected to ship by end of June. They also now dominate the MF market. And the GFX 50r hit #1 in sales on Amazon and B&H a few times--amazing considering it is MF. So the statements about the camera being on the way out are not well informed. :). The price drop is about the pending new release. As for a One camera, One lens option: I vote for the GFX with the 32-64 zoom. You can do any sort of portrait including headshots. Having a longer lens is nice, but you can do fine with just the 32-64.

I am looking for a lightweight, strong tabletop tripod. The legs should support at least 11 Lbs/5 kg. The weight should be under 1 Lb/500 gr. The FML CP10 and Feisol TT-15 and Basicball are the top 3 contenders so far. I would like to have the option to mount the Benro GD3WH geared head on the legs. The most challenging load expected is a GFX 50r with an L bracket, RF flash controller and 110mm lens attached. Thank you for sharing suggestions.

You don't need a full-blown studio to practice. As suggested above, there are some moderately priced Godox units which will work as well as anything else for your purpose and are quite handy since they can run off of a battery. You don't need the TTL version for studio, which saves a little. For the cost of a few studio sessions, you can practice as much as you want and you have a handy tool. Get one good modifier and practice anywhere you can set up a lightstand. Both of the videos you shared use Beauty Dishes, which are a fashion standard, and reflectors. So, as your first modifier, it might be worth investing in a Beauty Dish. Mola is the gold standard in the fashion world, but there are inexpensive alternatives on Amazon. The big free-standing reflectors, being used with the black side out in Sadowska's video, look to be v-flats--easy and cheap to make, incredibly versatile. You make them with two sheets which are about 4'x8' (1.2m x2.4m), White on one side, black on the other. Tape the two together along one long end, so they can be in a V shape. They stand by themselves. Google search for how to make videos etc. Indoors is better so you are not pitting your strobes against the sun. A wall will do fine as a background. The images don't need to be perfect in all the location details, just to give you the option to practice with the lights. Once you nail a lighting look you like, perfect the other details and you have something to build upon. And the same skills work on location, so investing in a strobe and beauty dish can serve your other work:

I'm curious to hear how it went. My advice would be to hire an assistant with good lighting skills. This is a common practice in the industry.

Fuji There is a WCL for the X100 series which some think is a better lens than the original on the X100 series, but it does add bulk. If you don't need the viewfinder, the X70 has much to recommend it including being even smaller. The interchangeable lens cameras are worth looking at for wider lenses. The 18/f2 is tiny (a gem of a pancake lens) and could be paired with an XE series camera for "small with a viewfinder" or with the Xpro series if you want a rangefinder type viewfinder option (XPro1 can be had for a song, the Xpro2 is an impressive street machine). If you want wider than 18, the 16/f1.4 is an outstanding lens and rivals the Leica equivelent at a tiny fraction of the cost, but it isn't nearly as tiny and light as the 18/f2.

Mostly manipulating selective color or curves layers often with Chanel pulls, blend-if, luminosity masks or gradient. Brief trip into LAB with PPW Man from Mars.

I think there are options to de-fish the fisheye and get a wider angle of view than you can get with a rectilinear lens. David Ziser was mentioned above. He discusses his use of a Canon Fisheye zoom in this video, but the lessons apply to FE generally: I don't know if it's the lens or his software methods, but the edge results in the video are softer than they need to be. But he was using LR four and adjusting by hand in PS. I include it for its discussion of why you might want to use a FE lens and how it applies in the wedding context. The current version of Photoshop CC has wide-angle lens correction which has worked better for me with the Nikon 10.5mm Fisheye on a Fuji Xpro camera. Fisheye Hemi also works well: https://imadio.com/products/prodpage_hemi.aspx My experience is that it is worth trying FE Hemi variations and the built-in PS options, because some images fare better with one or the other. This is the most useful article I have found on de fishing and it covers a method to get better results out of using FE Hemi http://www.lonelyspeck.com/defish/ I also found some of this information helpful even though the review is about a specific lens: https://www.slrlounge.com/rokinon-12mm-f2-8-full-frame-fisheye-lens-review-urbex-extreme-adventure-photography-lens/ I know the thread is a bit old, but the topic is still relevant :).

Photographs have been manipulated since the very early history of Photography. And I do not mean just dodging, burning and contrast development. We have early example of HDR using more than one exposure. We have plentiful examples of early combinations of people from multiple negatives being combined in a single image. Images where sky and clouds are added in are plentiful. Painted images. Retouching of faces. Adding or removing items. What we do have as photographer is greater ease in using more powerful tools. But this is the whole history. At first you needed chemistry skills. Prepared plates, film, film of higher resolution and greater portability, color process. The cameras underwent a similar progression. The amount of skill you need to develop to create a properly exposed picture which is in focus has plummeted. The conditions under which you can create a proper exposure has expanded. The rate at which you can accomplish these tasks has accelerated by orders of magnitude. So I would agree that much has changed, but it has been on the typical trajectory of evolving technology. We are pioneers in the sense that all photographers have been pioneers--we all have to learn the craft amidst evolving technology. The basic problems remain the same: How do we learn to see? How do we learn to translate what we see onto a two-dimensional medium frozen in time plucked from a three-dimensional stream which rushes ever onward?

Normally you would like the light to be fully striking the inside surface of the umbrella without wasting extra light by spilling around the edge. This gives you the largest sized source and greatest efficiency in using your strobe for that. The best way to determine what you are getting is to take a picture of the umbrella from where your subject would be. Properly exposed (i.e. Not blown out), this gives you a good indication of how your light source is working, if there are hotspots, etc.

That is rare and worth hearing about.

Flashpoint is the Adorama house brand. I am not familiar with the unit you mentioned. You will need to search for information and read reviews to determine its quality. Be sure the review you are reading is about the specific model--as I said, it's their house brand, so it really represents many manufacturers. I can't tell what the connector is. If it is the bowens mount, that is fairly universal and easy to find things which will attach to it. A few thoughts: It's better to buy reliable equipment which is less likely to break and is more likely to deliver consistent results (if the amount of power varies from shot to shot, there goes your even lighting). It is better to buy more power than you need. One reason is you might need more power than you think, but the main reason is that using a unit at a fraction of its power will let it recycle faster and heat up less. 150ws is on the low side. If you double the distance of the light from the subject, the power is cut by 75%! Inverse square law. It is better to buy equipment which will grow with you. Otherwise you have to get rid of one to get the next. There isn't much resale value in a unit like this. Major brands and well known units do better on resale. You can use a wire, but you want to have more than one. They fail at the worst times. You want a backup for critical gear. For these cords, you want backups for your backups :). The cord will also need to go from your camera to the unit and cross the space between. You need to think of this as a tripping hazard. Gaffer tape (like masking tape but designed for easy removal without gum) is a good way to reduce risk, especially in bright colors. I am avoiding buying any more lighting gear which is AC powered and, if starting from scratch, would probably buy none. AC means cords (see tripping hazard, above) and the need for plugs. The draw is significant enough and you are competing with old wiring, laser printers, microwaves, heaters, hair dryers... I prefer lightweight gear. This unit is AC dependent and maybe half the power of a Godox 360 (you can't really compare WS to WS across brands, but it is a starting point). The 360 is 300WS, give or take, but I tested it against a 424ws system from a major brand and it was about the same in the same modifiers, which were designed for the 424ws system. Monolights are heavy, so you need a stronger stand. Weight on the top counts for more. You can add weight at the bottom of a stand to increase stability if needed. On the plus side, the unit is cheap, a single unit and has a modeling light, which makes it easier to see what you will be getting. As I said, I don't know this unit and don't know anyone using it, so you will need to research it. As for this with your other light in the Octabox... With the other light on full power in a dark room, what are your settings to get a good exposure of a person with the full body shot? I need ISO and Shutter Speed -- set the Aperture at f8. You can set this up in a dark room, turn on the light, be the model and use the self timer if you don't have someone handy. Take the picture so you can be sure it's a good exposure, the light isn't in the shot and you have positioned the light in a good place, etc. Don't worry if the shadows are dark, etc so long as the lit part is exposed correctly. Also, can the light be dimmed or is it one power level?

For focusing issues, do make sure you have the latest firmware on your Fuji. AF got a LOT better over time. Missed focus is probably from using the system the wrong way. I had the same problem, coming from Nikon DSLR experience. With an SLR, when you want to get focus, it often helps to place the focus point at the edge of the subject to get more contrast. With the Fuji, you want to put the focus point on the subject as completely as possible. It is much easier to nail the right focus point position using the electronic view finder. The optical viewfinder corrects for parallax after you focus. But until you are used to how it works, it is easy to make a mistake and miss focus. If you learn first on the EVF, it will be easier to transfer those skills to the OVF. The newer version (Xpro2) is much better and solves the Xpro1 shortcomings. But the main reason to have the Xpro is for the OVF. If this isn't a game changer for you, the XT series is a better way to go. The XT2 is indeed fantastic and probably a better fit for your needs if you wanted to keep the great Fuji colors and handling. The XT1 isn't as good as the XT2, but is still a big step up functionally from the Xpro1, since its a later generation camera. And the price is much lower.

"That said, my main point, not knowing the just now disclosed details, is how does company ask a photographer to do 13 offices when there portfolio is just available light pictures?" My experience is that most clients who are not photo editors or art directors don't know that much about photography. And why should we expect them to? If my car has a problem, I go to a mechanic. If I need to go to a transmission specialist, my mechanic will explain this to me. MY point was that making negative assumptions about a person who is posting based your frame of reference creates a hostile environment which doesn't encourage new people. My first impression was that you were being a jerk. But I held back and considered that maybe you didn't realize you were asking in a rude way. Our initial negative assumptions can be wrong. We are all beginners at some point in so many ways and many people were generous to get us where we are. Have you ever noticed how many posts there are where a new person asks one question and never comes back? It seems like photo.net has become more that way over the years.

Here is a plausible solution. Use it as a guide to how to think about the purchase rather than as a buying guide. I would recommend buying from a local dealer if they carry it. Otherwise, I would go with a reputable dealer who specializes in photo gear (B & H, Adorama or Cheetah Stand for this product). Sales on this product are regular. The 360 mentioned above was $450 not $350. Sorry. The 860s are about $200 with radio controls and a spare battery. The basic setup could be two 860s for the background and one for the key (main) light. I would prefer a 360 for the main light (more power, more even distribution). When working professionally, you want a certain amount of redundancy in case something fails. An extra 860 would do the trick (it could serve as your main light if the 360 fails, or it could replace a background light). Alternatively, you could use one light on the background if one failed to get "close enough" and fix it in post. Not ideal but only needed if gear failed. Or you could skip the 360and get 4 860s. You still need stands. You need a bracket to connect the 360 to your main light source (s type for soft boxes or umbrella holder). You might be able to use your current soft box. You need a reflector (a large white surface to bounce light into the subject to fill the shadows). You need a way to hold up the reflector. You need a white background (white wall, seamless paper, etc). I like a tripod. You don't need it if you use flash, but it allows you to know your camera is where it needs to be so you can focus your attention on your subject.

Looks like you posted while I was writing :) Rental is often a good option. Yes. Continuous lights for the background will work. The point is to get even light on the background and enough light so it is white, but not so much light that there is too much light coming at the subject. There are a number of inexpensive strobe options if you only need manual control. I recommend manual when the strobe is not attached to the camera (not everyone will agree). I like the Godox brand, which is sold under many names, because of their useful innovations. The 860 model uses rechargeable batteries instead of AA batteries which hold more power for a longer time and are less of a pain to deal with and the cost is moderate. You can buy sets with wireless controllers and spare batteries. These are like your typical camera flash. I like the Godox 360 (I bought the Adorama house brand version) which gives you a bare bulb studio strobe ability in a very portable unit. I tested it side by side with a 425WS strobe and the same modifiers (reflectors and an octabox) and got comparable results, so it does a good job filling a modifier. On sale it was $350 (strobe, power pack, and radio controller). It is the same radio system as the 860s. You could probably put together a good, portable kit with this for $1000. Another option is the Dynalight Baja. More power. Quicker to set up. Industry standard connection (Bowens). Or you could go the continuous light direction....

"Explain that to me. One does not learn strobe lighting on a Job." Ouch. A little harsher than you intended, perhaps? I don't think the OP was planning to learn this on the Job. She is doing research and will, one presumes, practice the skills before showing up at the job. If we don't push our limits, we won't get better. Peter Hurley has made a name for himself as a headshot photographer who shoots on a white background. He was a natural light photographer who couldn't get comfortable with strobes, so he used continuous lights (Kino Flos, commonly used for video productions, easy enough to rent). He is now pushing a line of video lights from Westcott (also expensive but not so easy to rent). He has a book which describes his current methods, which make a good studio setup but might be a little cumbersome for location use (depending on how much time for setup and how many subjects at each location). He sets up two strobes on the background and uses a pair of VFlats to block them. He then builds a frame of continuous lights around the camera facing the subject. There are free videos available where you can see his setup. The advantage of the continuous light setup is that what you see is what you get. The disadvantage is that it can be a little bright for your subject and you will still have less light than a strobe can generate. If you want more detail, give us an idea of what direction you are considering...

If I understand correctly, you want a white background? If so, you will want to light the background separately from your subject. The standard method is to use two lights from the sides on the background and aim them to get the light even by aiming them across each other. You want enough light to get it white but not so much that you get too much blowback of light, which can give you crispy hair. It is possible to do this with one light, but easier with two. I was once pressed into service and had to use a single camera flash on the background (which was a white reflector) and used the other flash in a soft box to light the subject. This was just for headshots. It worked out, but I wouldn't recommend it. Since you need full length, the two light setup is the best method I know. I have done it with studio strobes with normal reflectors and with strip soft boxes. There are also specialized background reflectors, but I have never used them. My guess is they make it easier. A flash meter is helpful but it can be done without. You can cheat in Photoshop if you must, but this costs time. Crispy hair is a real pain in post, so don't over light. Uneven edges (away from the subject) are easier to fix. I strongly recommend testing while you are not under pressure. Look at the edges of your test subject at 100% and preferably print, too. This will reveal any flaws. As for lighting your subject, you will want to practice this, too, especially if using strobes. If you use your continuous light to light your subject, you still need to see how it combines with the background strobes. A properly lit white background will provide good separation, so you won't need a light aimed at your subject from behind (also called a hair light or rim light). Your main light (also called a key light) provides the shape. You may want a white reflector to fill in the shadows. Some use a second light on the subject as fill, but a reflector is easier and is unlikely to go wrong :).

Can you use it with just the internal baffle and inverted?

That would be great. I do understand the client issue. Why don't you think it is worth using in direct mode? I have the 27.5" deep octa, which works quite nicely in direct mode, especially with just the inner baffle, but it is substantially smaller.

I am interested in seeing examples of the Elincrom 150cm 59" deep octa in use, preferably as the only artificial light source, but combined with reflectors, ambient light, etc is fine. Here is what I have found: http://www.aaronaubrey.ca/2013/12/10/kimiko/ http://www.frankdoorhof.com/site/2011/10/elinchrom-1-50-indirect-octa/ http://www.frankdoorhof.com/site/2011/10/elinchrom-1-50-deep-indirect-octa-review-part-ii/ Do you have images or know of other sources of images? Thanks.