| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
AB800 Strobes - Higher or Lower?
Jason Heffran, Photographer
 |
Tarentum | PA | United States | Posted: 9:01 PM on 02.01.11 |
->> Hopefully a simple question. Couldn't find a simple answer when I searched so hopefully someone has some insight.
When positioning strobes (AB800), is it better to have them higher up and closer to the ceiling surface or lower?
What are the advantages/disadvantages of having more distance or less distance before the "bounce" surface?
Obviously there are other factors to take into consideration but, on the most basic level, what is a general rule of thumb?
* OT: I continue to get emails regarding the "Open Letter" I posted a few months ago about my 1st year on SS. A big "thank you" goes out to those members who have given some very good advice - both on the original post and through direct contact. |
|
Butch Miller, Photographer
|
Lock Haven | PA | USA | Posted: 10:06 PM on 02.01.11 |
->> When I bounce flash, I like to keep them closer to the ceiling or bounce surface ... trying to mimic the direction of light from the same angle as the house lights ... that way you can also control the direction of light and the rate of fall off, rather than light the entire area but also get a little softer light to keep the shadows more reasonable ...
Also with a smaller bounce area, the flash is less noticeable to anyone who may possibly object to the use of flash ... if you place your flash so the surface you are bouncing from becomes a 20 foot diameter light source (or larger) ... you are bouncing light everywhere and risk the possibility of creating a strong light source that could be in direct line of sight of the athletes as they execute their talents which could be distracting in some sports ... |
|
Jason Heffran, Photographer
|
Tarentum | PA | United States | Posted: 10:25 PM on 02.01.11 |
->> Butch, thanks for the response. Makes perfect sense.
As someone who played sports myself, I am always concerned with the "distraction" factor. |
|
Guy Rhodes, Photographer
 |
East Chicago | IN | USA | Posted: 2:33 PM on 02.03.11 |
->> If you're bouncing, I'd prefer to have the lights far from the bounce surface. After all, the larger the light source (the ceiling / wall / whatever you're bouncing off of is becoming the light source), the softer your shadows will be. Having a strobe a foot away from the ceiling (making the "light source" on the ceiling almost the same size as the strobe reflector itself, but with far less output) is simply wasting electricity.
If you're lighting direct, higher / further away is usually always better. You'll have more even coverage across your side of the court (I'm assuming we're talking about basketball here) and avoid those pesky effects of the inverse-square law. |
|
Jason Heffran, Photographer
|
Tarentum | PA | United States | Posted: 10:22 PM on 02.03.11 |
->> @Guy - I should've clarified that it's an indoor soccer field and not basketball. But, what you're saying also makes sense the way you put it.
http://www.hsiphoto.com/field.jpg
There is a picture of the facility. I shoot from the other end by the goal. Currently the AB800 are in the upper corners. The difference is that the lights pictured have been replaced by the fluorescents.
If it's 40' ceilings, let's just say that the AB800 with the 7" reflectors are 3/4 of the way up the wall, in the corners, angled more vertical than 45 degrees, bouncing off that white, pitched ceiling. There are fluorescents, all along the ceiling as you can see. That plywood on the right is actually all glass that allows the people in the "bar/pub" to watch what's going on.
All that being said, I am definitely getting harsh shadows as if I am re-creating sunlight the closer the players get.
I know that a lot goes into calculating lighting but am very much a novice at it. All I know is bouncing strobes indoors is better than the high ISO option when I have player's faces to illuminate in helmets.
Here's an example shot where you can see the reflection in the helmet of the player. This one is decent - just wondering if there is possibly a general rule of thumb on the best placement, or if adding another one/two is the answer. I'd like to shoot lower power and burst a few frames per second as opposed to single-shot.
http://www.hsiphoto.com/player.jpg (he's about 30yds away at about midfield)
* I have to go up on a lift to move them if that's the solution so I am trying to make an educated guess before going to that trouble. I realize that no one can give any definitive answers without all the measurements, etc but the general advice is helpful.
Thanks for all the input - including the emails I've received. |
|
Guy Rhodes, Photographer
|
East Chicago | IN | USA | Posted: 2:57 PM on 02.04.11 |
->> There are no hard and fast rules, as each space is different. I wouldn't plan on being able to motor drive with strobes. You're not going to get the recycle time, especially if you're bouncing (requiring more power).
Part of the art of shooting sports with strobes (and one reason why I enjoy it so much) is being forced to time when you fire the shutter to capture the peak-action. "Spraying and praying" is not an option.
I will say that if you're bouncing your strobes in there (the examples you sent me look more like direct, hard light), I'd angle the heads at something more like 45 degrees and focus them out on the ceiling *over* the playing surface. Remember, the surface you're bouncing off of becomes the light source, and doing it this way will give you something akin to a huge softbox over the field.
If you go with this method of focusing your strobes, you may have to step up to something like an AB1600, as I'm not sure you'll have the firepower with the 800's. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|