fresnel lights and table top photography

[CatherineA]

I enjoy creating table top scenes. I would like to use continuous light and would like to upgrade what I have (too weak and few options with them). Does anyone use fresnel lights? Most are more powerful than I need but it seems a good route for me to investigate further. Thank you

[inkista]

Any specific reason you don't want to go with strobes? They'd probably be more light for less money than any continuous lights, and you wouldn't have to worry as much about heat issues with modifiers. And lots of strobes have modeling lights (continuous lights you can turn on to see shadow placement before using the strobe).

[CatherineA]

Any specific reason you don't want to go with strobes? They'd probably be more light for less money than any continuous lights, and you wouldn't have to worry as much about heat issues with modifiers. And lots of strobes have modeling lights (continuous lights you can turn on to see shadow placement before using the strobe).

thank you for the reply Kathy. I struggled with getting the modelling lights to give me enough info for the table top scenes. However, I think I should work harder with them and see if I can stick with the lights that I have after all.

(I have a sinking feeling that I asked a similar question years ago but I didn't find it doing a quick search so I posted this. If my chronic insomnia has caused me to repeat myself, I apologize!)

[Manfred M]

Catherine - the modeling lights are just used to determine what the scene looks like (light intensity, shadows, etc) while you are setting up. They are generally not used to shoot with; that's where the flash comes in. That being said, I have met people that use them to shoot with, but the exposures are very long and a sturdy tripod is mandatory.

I have used fresnel lights but only for a specialty look both as a key light or as a fill light. I don't own any because I would use them so rarely, I can't justify their cost.

[CatherineA]

Catherine - the modeling lights are just used to determine what the scene looks like (light intensity, shadows, etc) while you are setting up. They are generally not used to shoot with; that's where the flash comes in. That being said, I have met people that use them to shoot with, but the exposures are very long and a sturdy tripod is mandatory.

I have used fresnel lights but only for a specialty look both as a key light or as a fill light. I don't own any because I would use them so rarely, I can't justify their cost.

Thanks Manfred. I hadn't thought of shooting with the modelling light, what I meant was that with my modelling lights I wasn't getting a clear insight on how well the scene would be lit or a sufficiently clear idea for the shadows with the stobes. Could be that my lights are inexpensive or could - and probably is - that I need to work with them longer.

I was thinking that I would need the cheapest type of fresnel light given the relatively small area that I would be lighting. Power wouldn't be too much of an issue. But maybe there is not really a cheap end with this type of light.

[rpcrowe]

Catherine... Often when modeling lights are not bright enough to actually see what the flash will reveal - there could be two problems:

1. The modeling light of the studio flash is simply not bright enough - this may often be the case when using cheap studio strobes. IMO, it is important for a modeling light to show what the flash will look like.

2. The studio flash is positioned too far from the subject. This is very often the case. When using a light (either continuous or flash) with a modifier such as a softbox or umbrella, the best way to use that setup is to place it as close to the subject as possible. That way the light will be softest.

Studio type flashes can be very powerful and probably give you the best "bang for the buck". However, since tabletop photos are almost always of stationery subjects, continuous lighting can be used effectively.

[inkista]

What lights are you currently using? And have you considered using LED panels? Or LED CoB video lights?

[pnodrog]

It's not the sort of photography I do but one thing that has not been mentioned and I imagine is significant is the level of ambient light when using modeling lights. My guess is the lower the ambient light the more obvious is the effect of the modeling lights, especially if the modeling lights are underpowered.

[CatherineA]

Thank you all for the replies!

Kathy, I get to use other people's lights on occasion but the lights that I own are Godox flashes tt685. No modelling lights on them. The other light that I have consistently access to is a Godox AD600 Pro. It has a modelling light but I find that light so heavy and cumbersome to position, every tweak being difficult, that that's when my mind turned to continuous lights. I looked up what video folks used and that's where I came up fresnel lights. I think many of Fresnel lights now use LED lights. I was watching a few videos on them and the feature of converting from a soft spread to a narrow focussed light would be great.

What I will do this week is go to a store here in Ottawa that has a wide selection of lights that videographers use and see if I can understand the choices better. Maybe that Godox AD600 Pro is as easy as it gets and I just need to learn patience.

[inkista]

If you have the budget for LED fresnels, then maybe it's the right choice for you. Godox does make a focusing LED video light, but not sure using it (or the projection add-on) wouldn't be as cumbersome as an AD600.

The older non-Pro AD600 did have a relatively dim LED modeling lamp. The newer Pro version's modeling lamp is bright enough to shoot video by. And, of course, speedlights generally don't have modeling lights. The so-called "modeling light" mode with speedlights is serious seizure-induced flashing. Godox does put LED lamps on two of the li-ion speedlight models, the V860 III and V1, but they're pretty low output and even with tabletop shooting might not be sufficient.

[Manfred M]

Catherine - I don't know how bright your work area is and I do know that the modeling lights in many studio flash units can be quite poor. I don't know about the AD600 Pro, so cannot comment on the specific model.

The most common reason I have found that people have trouble with modeling lights is that their workspace is too brightly lit whiel they are building their setup. In general, when I build my lighting, I have the lights off (I work in a fairly dark basement with a small window) and I have no issue at all seeing what the lights are doing, to a point. I have my studio lights set so that the modeling light is set to track with the power adjustments I make to the flash output and find that this does a reasonable job.

The other trick that I use is that I shoot tethered in almost 100% of my still life work. That gives me a really good view of how everything comes together on my laptop, which I have sitting quite near the camera.

[CatherineA]

If you have the budget for LED fresnels, then maybe it's the right choice for you. Godox does make a focusing LED video light, but not sure using it (or the projection add-on) wouldn't be as cumbersome as an AD600.

The older non-Pro AD600 did have a relatively dim LED modeling lamp. The newer Pro version's modeling lamp is bright enough to shoot video by. And, of course, speedlights generally don't have modeling lights. The so-called "modeling light" mode with speedlights is serious seizure-induced flashing. Godox does put LED lamps on two of the li-ion speedlight models, the V860 III and V1, but they're pretty low output and even with tabletop shooting might not be sufficient.

Thanks Kathy! The Godox S60 looks really good for my need and it might be the one for me. I see there is the S30 version too and I will have to check into them both. When they list the different lux measurements I can't I have a great feel for what that translates too exactly in terms of light falling across whatever scene I have made.

Thanks so much for putting me on a promising path!

[CatherineA]

Catherine - I don't know how bright your work area is and I do know that the modeling lights in many studio flash units can be quite poor. I don't know about the AD600 Pro, so cannot comment on the specific model.

The most common reason I have found that people have trouble with modeling lights is that their workspace is too brightly lit whiel they are building their setup. In general, when I build my lighting, I have the lights off (I work in a fairly dark basement with a small window) and I have no issue at all seeing what the lights are doing, to a point. I have my studio lights set so that the modeling light is set to track with the power adjustments I make to the flash output and find that this does a reasonable job.

The other trick that I use is that I shoot tethered in almost 100% of my still life work. That gives me a really good view of how everything comes together on my laptop, which I have sitting quite near the camera.

thank you for the tips

[rpcrowe]

Joanie Simon has a series of food photography videos on Youtube under the title "The Bite Shot".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlZyL2KUmh4

I have been viewing this series, on and off, for quite a few years. Her early videos were very simple and later videos more complex and professional.

If you are interested in a low cost light for table top photography, I recommend a used Paul C. Buff original White Lightning 5.000 or 10,000 unit. I have owned a pair of these lights for well over twenty-five years and purchased them used, for $50.00 USD each (pro rated, the units have cost about two dollars a year!) I looked on eBay and they are still going for a bit more than $50 bucks each. Believe it of not. Paul C. Buff still supports these units with parts. I bought a flash tube for one of my units a few years ago. The units use screw in incandescent bulbs for the modeling light but, could use just about any type of screw-in bulb - even LED bulbs.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/26484364021...Bk9SR-LQr-r8YA

They adapt quite well to both reflecting and shoot through umbrellas. I personally like to use a shoot through umbrella that has a black backing. The black backing prevents light from reflecting all over your studio and adds control to your lighting.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/33325519632...Bk9SR-LSv-r8YA



One thing I like about these White Lightning flashes is that they accept an umbrella rod through the reflector of the strobe. This ensures that the modified light will be quite even.

I totally agree that the best way to shoot table top images is in a very dark room. If I had a dedicated studio, I would paint the walls a dark gray. However, I can live shooting in my living room with the plantation shutters closed or at night.

Although this isn't tabletop photography per se, it has many of the attributes of that type of photography.

[CatherineA]

Thank you so much Richard! Before investing in continuous lights I will work harder with what I've got. you are working with flash even if it's different from what I have. And if I still fail to get what I am after in lighting, you and Kathy (Inkista) have great suggestions for next steps.

Really like the Joanie Simon video and she doesn't seem to over-buy equipment.

[DanK]

If your subjects are stationary and IF you have a very stable platform on which to take the photos, you can use cheap continuous lighting with long shutter speeds. That's how I did most of the studio shots of flowers on my site, https://photography.dkoretz.net/Flowers. In many cases, I use only two halogen lights in hair-light fixtures, usually one with an umbrella and the other on a dimmer and with diffusion. Here's a photo of a setup for this quite a number of years ago. What I use now is a bit different (a reflecting umbrella, and sometimes a small LED for fill light), but it's not all that different.

[CatherineA]

If your subjects are stationary and IF you have a very stable platform on which to take the photos, you can use cheap continuous lighting with long shutter speeds. That's how I did most of the studio shots of flowers on my site, https://photography.dkoretz.net/Flowers. In many cases, I use only two halogen lights in hair-light fixtures, usually one with an umbrella and the other on a dimmer and with diffusion. Here's a photo of a setup for this quite a number of years ago. What I use now is a bit different (a reflecting umbrella, and sometimes a small LED for fill light), but it's not all that different.

Thank you very much Dan, that is very helpful. I hadn't considered hair-light fixtures but maybe they would be ideal for highlighting details in the scene. The choice of modifiers gets bewildering - today I have read about lanterns and cylinders and space lights. I do have access to a soft box and an umbrella though and I will get more familiar with them and learn when to use one over the other.

I thought that long shutter speeds were to be avoided because of the noise they introduce. But maybe that is only a concern for "pixel peepers" or if images are to enlarged to the size of a wall.

[Chataignier]

Catherine... Often when modeling lights are not bright enough to actually see what the flash will reveal - there could be two problems:

1. The modeling light of the studio flash is simply not bright enough - this may often be the case when using cheap studio strobes. IMO, it is important for a modeling light to show what the flash will look like.

2. The studio flash is positioned too far from the subject. This is very often the case. When using a light (either continuous or flash) with a modifier such as a softbox or umbrella, the best way to use that setup is to place it as close to the subject as possible. That way the light will be softest.

Studio type flashes can be very powerful and probably give you the best "bang for the buck". However, since tabletop photos are almost always of stationery subjects, continuous lighting can be used effectively.

I agree with Richard, but would add one other possible reason : too much ambient light. Try working in the dark.

Edit : I've just read to the end of the thread and I see Manfred has already mentioned this. Worth a try.

[DanK]

I thought that long shutter speeds were to be avoided because of the noise they introduce.

Long exposure noise is not an issue at the exposure times you would need in these circumstances. How long one can go depends on the sensor, but the only time I worry about it is in doing night photography, where I often have exposures measured in minutes. Long-exposure noise is entirely different from the random noise one gets from underexposing. It is usually fixed: a few specific pixels that trigger when they shouldn't.

Re modifiers: there are indeed a bewildering number, but I use only a diffusing surface for direct light (a couple of sheets of baking parchment paper work fine) and an umbrella. At some point, I'll get around to adding flags or a snoot to avoid light going off to the side where I don't want it.

[BobGilbody]

IMG_3746 by Bob Gilbody, on Flickr

I took this photo some years ago using a Canon 80D fitted to a Sinar tech camera. Lens used was a Schneider-Kreuznach 10047003 Symar 1:5.6/240 1:12/420. Used as a 240mm lens. The Sinar probably dates from the early 1960's. The lens could well be mid 50's. I used the Sinar with a Pentax 645 thirty years ago. I had a lens reversing ring and had a machinist make up an adapter to fit a Sinar lens plate. That's how I attached the Pentax 645. When I started using Canon gear I got an adapter so that I could fit Pentax 645 lenses to the Canon. This also allowed me to fit a Canon camera to the Sinar.
The Schneider-Kreuznach lens covers for 5x4. It covers a lot more to allow for movements on the Sinar. I used some movement on the Sinar to give the DoF seen in the attached photo.
This morning I set it up again and did some test shots of ruler. Unfortunately flickr rejects the photos I took of the set up.
I'll leave it someone with more active brain cells than myself to figure out how much of the lens is being employed to generate the image.
PS I did clean the watch when I saw the photo.
Forgot to mention the photo was taken with natural light.

Sorted out flickr problem.

macro test 19 10 22-6 by Bob Gilbody, on Flickr

macro test 19 10 22-2-2 by Bob Gilbody, on Flickr

macro test 19 10 22-2 by Bob Gilbody, on Flickr

macro test 19 10 22--2 by Bob Gilbody, on Flickr

Thought I would see what difference a de-noise and sharpen would make.

macro test 1 19 10 22--DeNoiseAI-standard-SharpenAI-Focus by Bob Gilbody, on Flickr

The divisions to the left are 1/100 inch