Bare bulb outside

[Michael_Canyes]

I use bare bulb inside, and have been happy with the results. Now I have some people shots that I need to shoot outside and I have been doing a little experimenting in my back yard. From some of the books in my collection the orientation of the bulb outside matters, but I don't see this in the shots that I have taken. Since there are no walls to reflect the light what difference would it make? I am using an Alien Bee with the reflector taken off, and pointing it at the subject as if it had a reflector.

Any thoughts on this?

Thanks,
Michael

[MitchWojnarowicz]

Indoors you have a fairly efficient setup when using bare bulb strobe because of all the reflected or bounced light flying around, assuming a smaller shooting space. You get the added benefit of some direct light coming from the tube which gives a nice mixed quality to the light.

A bare tube is not very efficient without some sort of reflector. Once you move outdoors I am assuming you are out in then open with no reflected light coming from the tube, only direct.

The inverse square law kicks in pretty quickly in this setup which means as you double the subject to flash distance you need to quadruple the power of the light to keep the same exposure.

So, to get a good bare bulb or point source effect in this situation, you would have to have your flash head very close to the subject or have a lot of power pumping through the flash. I haven't done this type of setup in awhile but when I did, it was with a 2400ws Speedotron and a single head. And a big extension cord.

Point sources of light, which is what I guess you are after, can be beautiful but they are finicky. That is why a lot of big time shooters use hyper expensive and very powerful lensed HMI's to get that gorgeous sunshine-quality light.

[Cecil_Thornhill]

A second on the other post - inverse square is the rule with bare bulb outdoors. Don't get hung up on the fact that the AB is a strobe - light from it acts just like light from any other source, including incandesant lights. I also have some AB units. Look at the design - the ring tube is not going to reach behind the unit so you have to either place it face up (for a hemisphere of light) or point it at the subject (again a hemisphere, but directed perp. to the ground or there abouts...). Think about intensity just as you would with an incandesant source. If you had a 600 watt quartz bulb outside it would make very little difference against the sun at any distance...

On motion pictures we often used banks of 12 or 24 quartz PAR bulbs to get any fill light at all, and they have reflectors built in. HMI is much more cost effective for this. For use with strobe gear, think 2K or more per head - say Speedo gear...At least most people I know who light outdoors use the big Speedo systems.

You might want to try a large dish on the AB and see if the quality is more to your liking. I don't think they have enough energy to do lots bare bulb at a distance against the sun.

Good Luck,

Cecil Thornhill
RidgeLight Studio Inc.

[Tony_Gamble]

I trace back the 'myth' of using bare bulb to Monte Zuker who, by almost certainly a coincidence, had a retainer to advocate one of the bare bulb systems. I have nothing against retainers. We all have to live some way. Just myths!

Bare bulb is what the pre-war flash photographers almost were forced into using before compact reflector flash guns were introduced.

Indoors it can work splendidly as the light bounces off any nearby wall and ceiling and you get shadows that have an image in them. A shadow cast by the sun is not black like that cast by a single reflector flash - and likewise the bare bulb.

I used to use a bare bulb Qflash when I was a younger, stronger, man able to cart half a car starter battery on my shoulder.

Outdoors it is simply a highly wasteful way of putting light on a subject. I even doubt that the light source is more compact from a bare bulb than from something like a 550 Canon or a Metz. My Qflash bulb was certainly as large.

My suggestion is to forget about bare bulb outdoors. You gain nothing and chuck an awful lot of lumens into the back of beyond.

Tony

[Michael_Canyes]

Thanks, guys. That's about the conclusion that I was reaching. I relate very well to carrying the car battery. The AB powerpack is not light and I used to be 30 a long time ago. It looks like I can open up dark eyes, etc. with a Nikon SB-800 just as easily.
Best,
Michael

[Billy_Mitchell]

Many misconceptions about light.I was fortunate to learn young from some of the best. Dick Balli of Balcar being one of those.
Light has no quality. Only size and power. Bare bulb is pinpoint and the reflections off walls and ceilings are as large as they are. Small light source = sharp shadows. Large light source = soft shadows. The size of the light source is relative the distance to subject. The sun is really large, but it's a long way off. So it's small realtive to the subject. The diffuser in front of the light makes no difference even though we think it does. It may mask the bulb and elimate the pinpoint element, but it's the size that matters. Now you can just look at the size of the light and the surrounding bounce and get a better idea.

[Michael_Canyes]

Billy,
That makes sense. So it would seem that using a bare bulb outside to "pick up" shadows, etc. is just wasting a lot of watts. Perhaps its main value is that it makes you look like you know what you are doing. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]
Best,
Michael