Foba Acryl Diffuser Cone Alternative?

[russellsnr]

Hi, Have been looking for a solution for lighting flowers indoors, I have speedlights and the Godox AD360 lights but have found that flash lighting always seems to give results that to me look really false, even tried with soft boxes and exposure set with a flash meter also tried or am trying continuous LED lights, again through soft boxes. I came across a video on youtube with the photographer using a Foba Acryl Cone, don't look at the B&H photo website if you have not won the lottery (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...glas_Cone.html). Then again on youtube I found another photographer using an IKEA lamp shade (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiihXExf5Ss). Anyone here tried the lampshade option?
Thanks,
Russ

[Manfred M]

Russell - it's challenging to give advice unless you post some of the images that are not working out for you.

The light modifiers you are looking at are primarily used for very small objects, so unless your flowers are the size of the watch, it is not going to do you much good. Secondly, the aim of using a light tent (which these cone modifiers are just small versions of) are primarily used for product photography for catalogues. These approaches give you very flat, shadow free lighting, which is fine for catalogues, but not necessarily what you would want in photograph that shows off the beauty of the flowers.

I would be surprised if this solution is what you are really after.

[DanK]

Russ,

I haven't, but I use only continuous lighting for flowers and have tried a number of things.

Currently, I use one or two halogen floods, 50W and 75W, combined either with some sort of diffuser or an umbrella to get reflected light. Here's an old version of this:



What I do now is similar, except that I usually use a silvered, more reflective umbrella. Most often, I use the brighter bulb to get reflected, diffuse light and the 50W to get direct light and shadows. Here's an example:



Re what diffuser to use: It hasn't seemed to matter much, as long as (1) it doesn't create a problematic color cast, and (2) it diffuses enough. For a while, I worked my way through a pack of Monfrotto diffusing sheets. Now I generally use two sheets of baking parchment paper. I think that is what I used for the photo posted above.

For fixtures, I use cheap head light stands. One is a Smith-Victor. The other is an Impact (a B&H store brand), which has the advantage that it has a socket to hold an umbrella. If I recall, they cost me about $100 each.

I control brightness by moving the direct light closer or farther back.

My next steps will be:

1. Adding a third light for those rare cases when I want one.
2. Finding suitable LED bulbs. The halogens are hot and a little weak, requiring longer shutter speeds than is ideal. (Besides, on principle, I want to get rid of the pointless consumption of electricity.)
3. Adding a rheostat to the direct light.

None of these is urgent.

The one big disadvantage of weak continuous lighting is the long shutter speeds required. That in itself isn't a problem; what is a problem is the opportunity for unwanted motion. It doesn't take much to get a flower to move, and that is a real problem if you stack, as I do. I currently have my gear set up in an attic study, and even though it is on a very heavy table, the wood floor moves enough to cause problems. (I used to drag stuff down to our kitchen and set up on granite counter tops, which weigh so much that movement was less of a problem.) I have trained myself to stand to the side with a remote release and stand very still while the shutter is open.

Dan

[Shadowman]

For the effect Manfred describes (shadowless features) why not try northern/ambient light from a window, for the OP you say flash gives false look, so what would you like the final output to look like, as if shot in sunlight, moonlight, etc.? How about a greenhouse look?

[DanK]

Manfred's post is stamped earlier than mine but didn't show up when I wrote my post. So to add more: I generally don't want really flat lighting with flowers. Harsh shadows are usually unpleasant, but no variation at all is generally boring. That's why I use some direct light in most cases. But YMMV.

[russellsnr]

Russ,

I haven't, but I use only continuous lighting for flowers and have tried a number of things.

Currently, I use one or two halogen floods, 50W and 75W, combined either with some sort of diffuser or an umbrella to get reflected light. Here's an old version of this:



What I do now is similar, except that I usually use a silvered, more reflective umbrella. Most often, I use the brighter bulb to get reflected, diffuse light and the 50W to get direct light and shadows. Here's an example:

~

Dan

Hi Dan, Thanks for the reply. How did you fix that uplight to the boom arm please? Thanks, Russ

[DanK]

Hi Dan, Thanks for the reply. How did you fix that uplight to the boom arm please? Thanks, Russ

Russ,

Hair lights come with a cone-shaped light receptacle. A cheap Smith-victor, which might be the same one I bought, is here: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...Mini_Boom.html. The cone can be rotated 360 degrees. I just replaced the high-wattage bulb with a halogen flood to keep the heat down. Because I am doing stacks, I can be at it for quite a while, and so the heat is an issue except in winter.

Dan

[xpatUSA]

My next steps will be:

2. Finding suitable LED bulbs.

Been using these 3500K, 90W equiv, 60 deg floods for several years:

https://www.satco.com/s8985.html

Custom WB works well enough for my purposes ...

For diffusion, I place 85g/m^2 tracing paper betwixt lamps and subjects - distance as required.

[DanK]

Been using these 3500K, 90W equiv, 60 deg floods for several years:

https://www.satco.com/s8985.html

Custom WB works well enough for my purposes ...

For diffusion, I place 85g/m^2 tracing paper betwixt lamps and subjects - distance as required.

That bulb has been discontinued. It's CRI is only 83. What I will want is a higher CRI and a good value on R9. However, your idea of a color checker might take care of spikes and dips. For a concrete example of why CRI alone isn't necessarily a sufficient indicator, check out the Cree bulb in this article: https://www.cnet.com/news/shining-a-...cri-led-bulbs/

[rpcrowe]

Just a couple of thoughts on the above comments...

1. Flash, in itself, will not necessarily produce results that look "false". It is the way that flash is often used which produces the problem. I will admit, that using a flash such as the AD360 (despite that being a fine flash) or any of the hotshoe flashes on the market from OEM or 3rd party manufacturers can be a bit difficult due to the lack of a modeling light to let you see what your light is doing. Studio type strobes, even the cheapie Chinese knock-offs have modeling lights as well as most being set up to use modifiers without adding extra equipment. Soft boxes with fluorescent compact lamps are also decent choices - remember - UP CLOSE IS SOFT...

2. The problem that I have noticed with many photographers using modifiers such as softboxes is that they just don't get the light close enough to the subject. The closer you are, the softer you get...

3. You can make DIY modifier/diffusers by fabricating a frame from some pieces of wood or by recycling some old picture frames. Stretching some white diffusion material over the frames and positioning this diffuser between your light source and your subject. However, you can purchase very inexpensive light tents on eBay. These fold and do a nice job in achieving shadowless lighting.

These come in all sizes and all prices. I like the folding nylon spring frame type that is very much like a car window shade. I haven't noticed much difference between the most expensive and the least expensive.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/36-Photo-Li...EAAOSw8vNaXr1q

There is a trick to place a black cylinder of some type in the tent in order to give a shiny (expecially silver) object some shape and depth. You can use any type of light source for this type of work. You can adjust the lighting to get a bit of shadow if you desire. Just be careful if you opt to use halogen work lights. They burn hot and are dangerous.

4. You can make a DIY tent for small items by cutting the an opening in a plastic milk container. Just be careful regarding your color balance. Using a white balance target like to WhiBal card and shooting in RAW will allow you to easily adjust the color balance in PP.

5. A collection of fabric can be used as a background and a collection of scrap wood or Styrofoam blocks can help you set up your shots.

[xpatUSA]

That bulb has been discontinued. It's CRI is only 83. What I will want is a higher CRI and a good value on R9. However, your idea of a color checker might take care of spikes and dips. For a concrete example of why CRI alone isn't necessarily a sufficient indicator, check out the Cree bulb in this article: https://www.cnet.com/news/shining-a-...cri-led-bulbs/

I don't recall mentioning a color-checker, or spikes and dips for that matter?

[russellsnr]

Hi, Again thankyou for ALL the advice. I after a little search through my gear came up with as seen in first image, I fixed the light to the boom with a Godox S type speedlight bracket, seems to work but think maybe need a brighter bulb and a bigger umbrella for larger subjects. I got at ISO 400, F5.6 20th sec. would like a faster shutter speed. The yellow rose images are SOOC as fine Jpegs (normally shoot RAW) I also use a Colourchecker but this time missed it out. Thanks again, Russ.

[DanK]

I don't recall mentioning a color-checker, or spikes and dips for that matter?

Nope, you didn't. I incorrectly assumed that by "custom WB," you meant more than color temperature. The issue with using LEDs for photography of the sort in the OP isn't temperature, which is trivially easy to fix without a custom setting. In choosing bulbs for flower photograph, I don't worry about color temperature; I just shoot one shot with a neutral card and then take a minute or two to adjust the entire set of images. (In LR, once you set one--the one with the neutral card--you can simply sync that setting to all the others in the folder.) The problem is the spikes and troughs, and to deal with that reasonably well, one would need a color checker.

[rpcrowe]

I am wondering if you have tried a "studio type" monolight bounced into an umbrella. The "studio type" monolight would have a modeling light so that you would have a WYSIWYG shoot.

The power of most "studio type" strobes is adjustable. Some strobes are adjustable in increments and some have power that is adjustable without increments.

The critical thing about adjustable power is that you can set up your lights as close to the subject as possible using a softbox, shoot through umbrella any of several diffusing type accessories. Most strobes will keep within reasonable color parameters when adjusting the power. The closer the light to the subject, the softer it will be. However if you are shooting with an umbrella, you can chose a white umbrella or silver umbrella. The light from both will be soft but, the silver reflecting surface will give your image a bit more "pop"...

Umbrellas are cheap enough so that you can have two or three different types in your kit.

The "studio type" strobe will provide you with quite a bit more power and you will not need to worry about shutter speed (within sync parameters for the strobe), only concerning yourself with f/stop, flash power and flash to subject distance when shooting. You would easily be able to shoot using the lowest ISO your camera is capable of using and still be able to shoot at a smaller f/stop.

BTW: a boom stand is a neat way to place your light right over the subject. I often use a setup like that with my rescue dog portraits...



The white ceramic Maltese is a stand-in for my dogs so I can get the lighting correct before setting up with the dog. The real dog is quite a bit larger than the statue so the main light umbrella overhead would be a lot closer in comparison...

This setup can provide very nice soft light but the silver umbrella does add a bit of "pop"!





I think that a setup somewhere along this line could be appropriate for your flowers...

As far as the expense for small "studio type" strobes, they can be dirt cheap on the used market. I recently purchased a pair of small strobes, which would be just in line with what you could use shooting flowers, a 22-inch beauty dish (I would guess that this might be pretty neat for shooting flowers - since it also provides soft light with a little pop), a snoot plus a grid and a light stand. The total cost for this package was $60 U.S. Dollars.

BTW, I have a small softbox like the one above in your image #1, image right. I use it with a Canon 600EX-RT hotshoe flash on a Stroboframe Camera Flip Bracket, triggered with an off camera sync cork that I use for shooting run and gun people portraits. IMO, it really does a nice job...

[russellsnr]

Hi, sorry to drag this one back up but I thought as I bought a £12 lamp shade I should show what I have done thus far.



Also please Richard, What does the umbrella with the black cover on the LHS of your setup image actually do to the light?
Many Thanks
Russ.

[Manfred M]

It seems to me that the "£12 lamp shade" was money well spent.

[rpcrowe]

Nicely done Russ. This goes to show you that there are many ways to achieve good to excellent imagery and that, often, the results are only limited by the results and skill of the photographer.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Russ,

Also please Richard, What does the umbrella with the black cover on the LHS of your setup image actually do to the light?

I think Richard missed your question.

Although I'm not familiar with the exact kit shown in Richard's picture, but if you think about what would happen if that black material were not there ...
A fair bit of light that didn't go through the shoot through umbrella would reflect back in to the room and hit the coloured walls, then bounce again toward the subject with the colour cast of the walls. this uncontrolled addition to the subject lighting is not going to help with consistency of shots.

With it there though ...
I suspect that the inside of the black surface is white or silver, so the photons that didn't go straight through the shoot through umbrella would reflect from it, hit the white/silver flat surface and then have a second chance to reach the subject in a controlled manner, adding a little more to the brightness.

Great photography (in this genre especially) is all about understanding light (and hence shadows and also reflections from the subject too). The more you shoot, the more you learn.

Cheers,
Dave