Beauty Dish vs. Softbox vs. Shoot-through Umbrella, can someone show me the differenc

[Wail]

As I venture deeper into using my lovely SB-900, and having to wait for delivery for the beauty dish I've ordered for it; I was wondering if someone could please show me what effect do each of the three produce?

Given the same output power, the same position & settings of light, subject and camera, how would the light differ on the subject and background.

Thanks, in advance, for any assistance on this.

 

[HoppyUK]

To be honest, there is very little difference in the kind of light that all three deliver, if they are all the same size and at the same distance. The differences are in the control they give, price, convenience etc.

Beauty dish - tends to be smaller, can be used close, very little spill, efficient, heavy for size, perfectly round catch-lights.

Softbox - big as you like, quite efficient, good control not much spill, light, square or octagonal catch-lights.

Brollies - shoot-throughs spill light everywhere from front and back, loads of fill-in when used in a normal room, not much control, can be used close, cheap and easy. Normal brollies have much less spill and more control, cheap and easy, but can't be used close as the shaft gets in the way and the flash head casts a slight shadow and it shows in the catch-lights.

 

[Wail]

Good morning Richard,

Thank you for that very informative summary

Not having used any before, only going by the reading on-line and in books / magazines, I was getting a bit confused as to which would be more controllable and with better* light effect.

The reason I've fancied the beauty dish is purely because of the round catch-lights you've mentioned. That, plus the soft & controlled light makes it something I wanted to experiment with; but it's not a cheap option.

Softboxes, I've found these to be all too commonly used and the square catch-light, though not bad, doesn't appeal to me much, Octaboxes may be

Umbrellas, as you've said, they're pretty cheap to get; so having one to play with isn't going to hurt the bank account much.

I was hoping to avoid having to buy each, and since I can't rent-out a fitted studio here I've no way to experiment and see the results on equal shoots without having to buy each :shrug:, something I was hoping to avoid.


*, I know each has its' own uses and merits; but I was looking for something that would give a very soft and defused effect with, soft shadows, and a flattering catch-light. Hence why I was hoping to see results of the three on similar shoots.

Again, thank you for the input

 

[Richard King]

As I venture deeper into using my lovely SB-900, and having to wait for delivery for the beauty dish I've ordered for it; I was wondering if someone could please show me what effect do each of the three produce?

Given the same output power, the same position & settings of light, subject and camera, how would the light differ on the subject and background.

Thanks, in advance, for any assistance on this.

Im not convinced you will 100% get the effect you want using a sb900

the starting shape of the light it produces is totally different to that of a normal strobe with a reflector. That will then knock on to the evenness and quality of the light you fill the light modifier with

 

[JasonRS]

One other thing that's not been mentioned is using them outside in the wind.

Softboxes and umbrella's turn into sails / kites due to their size, whereas a beauty dish is much easier to control in a breeze, it still catches the wind, but it's got a much smaller surface area, so you need less bagging of the light stand.

Didn't Garry Edwards do something to show the differences between modifiers?

 

[Garry Edwards]

To be honest, there is very little difference in the kind of light that all three deliver, if they are all the same size and at the same distance. The differences are in the control they give, price, convenience etc.

Beauty dish - tends to be smaller, can be used close, very little spill, efficient, heavy for size, perfectly round catch-lights.

Softbox - big as you like, quite efficient, good control not much spill, light, square or octagonal catch-lights.

Brollies - shoot-throughs spill light everywhere from front and back, loads of fill-in when used in a normal room, not much control, can be used close, cheap and easy. Normal brollies have much less spill and more control, cheap and easy, but can't be used close as the shaft gets in the way and the flash head casts a slight shadow and it shows in the catch-lights.

In my experience, there is a world of difference between the effects of beauty dishes, softboxes and umbrellas, as I said in reply to another, identical question.

(Regardless of their shape) softboxes basically produce a large, diffused light with soft, diffused and indistinct shadow transfer edges.

A beauty dish of the same size and at the same distance produces much more clearly defined shadow transfer edges and the light is much more controlled. Because of this, the light from a beauty dish is much harder and will create modelling on the face that a softbox cannot create.

A softbox can be used in literally any position, it's a very versatile lighting tool that can create a large number of very different effects. A beauty dish only works in one position for portrait use, immediately in front of and above the subject, this is the only position where it can create its trademark modelling effect.

A softbox minimises skin imperfections (because of its size and the soft shadow transfer edges). A beauty dish has the opposite effect but has the benefit of emphasising good bone structure.

A softbox can flatter older subjects, a beauty dish tends to have the opposite effect. Most of us will use a beauty dish only on a young model (aged to about 21-22) with high cheekbones and an excellent complexion. If her looks are truly outstanding then we might add a honeycomb too. If we're photographing her mother, we'll swap the beauty dish for a large softbox

It would be nice to think that a hotshoe flash will work with a beauty dish, and up to a point it will, but care is needed.
1. The flashgun needs to be mounted dead square, so that the light hits the deflector perfectly and bounces back perfectly, so that all of the light that ends up going forward is perfectly even - that's possible but not easy. It happens automatically with a studio flash.
2. The zoom needs to be set to fill all of the deflector, with none of the light going past it. Again, possible but not easy, especially as there is no modelling lamp.
3. Power from a hotshoe flash may be adequate for head shots indoors, but not outdoors (so the fact that the beauty dish is heavy and will catch the wind doesn't matter).

I know each has its' own uses and merits; but I was looking for something that would give a very soft and defused effect with, soft shadows, and a flattering catch-light. Hence why I was hoping to see results of the three on similar shoots.

You'll get your 'softbox effect' if you fit a diffuser to the beauty dish, otherwise you won't.

Didn't Garry Edwards do something to show the differences between modifiers?

Yes. Here

 

[HoppyUK]

In my experience, there is a world of difference between the effects of beauty dishes, softboxes and umbrellas, as I said in reply to another, identical question.

<snip>

I said "very little difference" and you said "a world of difference" Garry. I guess that's subjective, but looking at the illustrations on your link, I'm not convinced the difference is massive in terms of the light falling directly on the subject. Not nearly so great a difference as the size of the light, or the distance it is set at. Or the effects of spill in the average home studio.

Sure, the the difference between a softbox and a beauty dish is the most marked but, as you say, putting a diffuser over a beauty dish turns it into a softbox, and by the same token, taking the diffuser panel off a softbox gives you a beauty dish (well it does if you've got an Elinchrom with a deflector cap ).

In terms of light, what you get from a small silver umbrella is exactly the same as a beauty dish of the same size. But you can't use the brolly close, and it won't be perfectly round. And you'll see the flash head reflected in the catchlights. The differences are less in the quality of light.

Reading between the lines of Wails post, I think he'd be better off starting out with a softbox. But as I recall, the beauty dish he's ordered comes with an optional diffuser front? Sounds perfect

 

[Garry Edwards]

Richard,
I think we'll have to agree to disagree on just how significant the differences are.
Like everything else to do with lighting, it's subjective and what may be an significant difference to me may not matter to you, and vice versa.

As for the OP, I agree - a softbox is probably what he wants. It seems that he wants perfectly round catchlights, which he doesn't need a beauty dish for anyway as any softbox can be easily modified to produce perfectly round catchlights.

A beauty dish with a diffuser fitted to the front produces broadly similar results to a softbox of the same size and at the same distance - not the same but similar, so I'm sure he'll be happy with the beauty dish he's bought.

 

[Wail]

That’s a rather plenty bit of information you’ve all given; thank you, all, very much

The reason I went with the beauty dish, I want that catch light in the eye. Personally, I would rather go with a dedicated ring light, but that’s another ballgame altogether.

In a way, I am “settling” for the SB900 even though I’ve had some play with it and am finding it very easy to get to grip with [but have also got loads of weird questions, I’ll post in due course]. My aim is to get to understand all this artificial light and then order one good set of studio light; but for now, it's SB900 only I'm afraid

That link is exactly what I was looking for; seeing the end result makes it easy to understand what’s going on.

The thing is, I’m reading as much as I can and I know I’ve yet a long way to go.

But again, thank you very much for all the input and help on this

 

[HoppyUK]

Thing to do is get on and try it. A bit of practise and you'll soon get the hang of things, soon see what you can do with what and kind of bits you might need to take things forward.

Have you seen Joe McNally's book The Hot Shoe Diaries? A great combination of entertaining read, inspirational pics and hot-shoe flash techniques. And he uses Nikon. He does have quite a few flash guns though http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hot-Shoe-Di...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275315211&sr=8-1

 

[Wail]

I've been practising with what I already have , and doing as much reading as I can.

Yes, I just got that book (thank you Amazon for the quick delivery); and thank God McNally is on Nikon, makes understanding things a lot easier

 

[Matt989]

Got to agree with Gary, theres a massive difference between a beauty dish and a softbox, completely different type of light is produced, exactly as Gary has described.

 

[HoppyUK]

Got to agree with Gary, theres a massive difference between a beauty dish and a softbox, completely different type of light is produced, exactly as Gary has described.

Define 'a beauty dish' and define 'a softbox'. I think it's very important.

You can get examples of both that are completely different, as you say, but equally you can often get pretty much the same kind of light out of either. The fundamental difference between light sources is their size, and their size relative to the subject (ie position). And does it have a diffuser panel on the front or doesn't it. I think the OP's beauty dish has an optional diffuser attachment, so then it will be essentially a small softbox.

If the difference between a beauty dish and a softbox was truly "massive" then they wouldn't be interchangeable which, a lot of the time, they are.

The term beauty dish is now so abused and vague that you can get a so-called beauty dish that is only the size of an ash tray (eg Strobies) - and is about as useful.

 

[Matt989]

For me THIS is a beauty dish, a shallow dish like reflector with a bounce plate in the center.

THIS is a softbox

Beaty dishes give a diffused light with a hard edge while a softbox gives a diffused wrap around kind of light.

Have a look HERE

Compare the 2 beauty dish examples in the middle with the very last shot with a softbox, the shadow graduation is what its all about!

 

[Garry Edwards]

If the difference between a beauty dish and a softbox was truly "massive" then they wouldn't be interchangeable which, a lot of the time, they are.

Any light shaping tools are interchangeable - in the sense that knowledge & skill are more important than tools, so a skilled technician can 'bodge' quite well - and because there is rarely a 'right' tool for any particular job, just different ways of doing the job.
But it doesn't follow that just because different tools may be interchangeable to some extent doesn't mean that the differences between them are minor.
(

Matt989) For me THIS is a beauty dish, a shallow dish like reflector with a bounce plate in the center.

THIS is a softbox

Beaty dishes give a diffused light with a hard edge while a softbox gives a diffused wrap around kind of light.

Have a look HERE

Compare the 2 beauty dish examples in the middle with the very last shot with a softbox, the shadow graduation is what its all about!

I agree, although it isn't necessary to pay Bowens prices to get good design.

The term beauty dish is now so abused and vague that you can get a so-called beauty dish that is only the size of an ash tray (eg Strobies) - and is about as useful.

I agree with this too. Personally I like beauty dishes to be about 1 metre diameter or larger, but they're too big, too expensive and too heavy for most people. Lencarta do 70cm and 40cm versions in both warm white and silver finish, these cover most bases I feel, but anything smaller is a waste of money - and the ones that don't have deflectors are particuarly useless.
The problem, as I see it, is that a lot of people who have entered the lighting market know absolutely nothing about it (regardless of what they may say in their adverts), they are buying accessories such as beauty dishes that are made by backstreet workshops in China that are nothing more than cheap copies of the real thing and, like the cheap copies of real softboxes, they don't work properly. The manufacturers can't tell the difference (and probably don't care either) and the sellers can't tell the difference either.
Not surprising then that the buyers can't make informed decisions about which ones are worth buying...

 

[Wail]

<snip>

Not surprising then that the buyers can't make informed decisions about which ones are worth buying...

And herein lies my dilemma :bang:!

Anyway, I've already bought the wilamex beauty dish which ought to be with me within a few day; I will see how I like the light from that.

 

[JasonRS]

Have a look HERE

Compare the 2 beauty dish examples in the middle with the very last shot with a softbox, the shadow graduation is what its all about!

Just to throw oil on a raging fire, quoted from the site you've linked to

"Now, granted they are a little more dynamic than the others, the shadows are a little deeper - but that's really about it. Also, that difference could be more to do with how I light the first few examples rather than anything specific with the beauty dish... So it's more like going on a drive and having many different roads, all pretty much the same distance, that will get you to where you're going."

And my personal favourite

"but again for headshots it really depends on your style and what you're comfortable using and less on what type of light it is. It also depends on how you retouch, since that plays a vital role in your style and image."

 

[Garry Edwards]

Just to throw oil on a raging fire, quoted from the site you've linked to

"Now, granted they are a little more dynamic than the others, the shadows are a little deeper - but that's really about it. Also, that difference could be more to do with how I light the first few examples rather than anything specific with the beauty dish... So it's more like going on a drive and having many different roads, all pretty much the same distance, that will get you to where you're going."

And my personal favourite

"but again for headshots it really depends on your style and what you're comfortable using and less on what type of light it is. It also depends on how you retouch, since that plays a vital role in your style and image."

That's just an opinion, from someone who goes on to say that his own tests aren't scientific anyway.
He's entitled to his opinion and I'm entitled to disagree with it.

As for retouching - yes the style and the quality of retouching does make a big difference to the overall result. The harder the light the greater the need for really good retouching (and good makeup). But good retouching is no substitute for good lighting. It just becomes even more important to retouch well when the subject is lit dynamically.

 

[HoppyUK]

For me THIS is a beauty dish, a shallow dish like reflector with a bounce plate in the center.

It's 38cm round. Tiny. I think a beauty dish needs to be 60-70cm to be worthy of the name.

THIS is a softbox

A nice one too. But it's 60x80cm - four times the area of the beauty dish above. That's the main difference.

Beaty dishes give a diffused light with a hard edge while a softbox gives a diffused wrap around kind of light.

When the dish is that small, of course it does.

Have a look HERE

Compare the 2 beauty dish examples in the middle with the very last shot with a softbox, the shadow graduation is what its all about!

The author fails to mention the size of any of his lights, and then says "that difference could be more to do with how I light the first few examples rather than anything specific with the beauty dish... "

Not trying to pick you up on this stuff Matt, but it makes the point that you have to be specific and the term 'beauty dish' seems to be more misused than most.

What I am saying is, if you took, say, a 60cm square soft box and a 70cm beauty dish, ie both roughly the same area, the differences between them would be more subtle than massive. There would be discernable and significant differences between them - along the lines you describe - but I see that as relatively subtle in terms of practical working when there are all sorts of other variables going on (eg distance) that have a bigger impact.

 

[Matt989]

Id be interested in seeing a direct comparison, Ive got a feeling it would be more than a subtle difference.

The shots I picked out were not a subtle difference (whether the author thinks so or not) all be it the size and distance of the source probably varied.

 

[Garry Edwards]

Richard, let's have another go at disagreeing with you - politely
You seem to be saying that the different effects are mainly due to differences in physical size, position and distance, i.e. a softbox of the same size at the same distance produces a very similar effect to a beauty dish, and I am saying that it doesn't.

To be honest, there is very little difference in the kind of light that all three deliver, if they are all the same size and at the same distance. The differences are in the control they give, price, convenience etc.

You are also saying that a beauty dish fitted with diffuser effectively turns it into a softbox.

You can get examples of both that are completely different, as you say, but equally you can often get pretty much the same kind of light out of either. The fundamental difference between light sources is their size, and their size relative to the subject (ie position). And does it have a diffuser panel on the front or doesn't it. I think the OP's beauty dish has an optional diffuser attachment, so then it will be essentially a small softbox.

I'm not saying that fitting a diffuser to a beauty dish just turns it into a diffused beauty dish, but that the effect it produces is more like a softbox than a beauty dish - or in other words, although I don't entirely agree with you on that point, I don't entirely disagree either.

Any test that tries to demonstrate similarities/differences will be flawed. I suppose the perfect test would be carried out by a top fashion photographer using a top fashion model, with perfect bone structure, perfect skin and who can repeat a pose exactly, because the slightest change in pose would make the test irrelevant.
That would be difficult and expensive to achieve, so when I carried out the tests on various light shapers for Lencarta I did the best I could. I used a mannequin simply because she keeps perfectly still, doesn't need tea breaks, doesn't want paying etc., making her the perfect model for comparative tests.

What made her less than perfect is that her skin is plastic, so is her hair and, worse of all, her eyes are painted, so the catchlights you see are not created by the light I used.

This page on the 70cm beauty dish tests includes a shot with a silver finish beauty dish, both with and without the diffuser. If we accept Richard's point that beauty dishes fitted with a diffuser are pretty much the same as a softbox of the same size and shape, then my tests show a useful comparison between the effect of the beauty dish and the effect of a softbox in the same position, of the same size, and at the same distance.
Everything was the same, as even the camera was bolted to a studio stand, and there was no retouching - these shots were resized only. You can even see the beauty dish, with and without the diffuser, in the top right corner of the photos.

I don't think the differences are subtle.

 

[HoppyUK]

Richard, let's have another go at disagreeing with you - politely

<snip>

Thanks for taking the time Garry. It's a good link you've posted. Folks can decide for themselves about how significant that 'harder shadow transfer' thing actually is

 

[Wail]

Thanks for taking the time Garry. It's a good link you've posted. Folks can decide for themselves about how significant that 'harder shadow transfer' thing actually is

If I may add, thanks to all who've posted here; and the link posted by Garry is exactly what I was looking for.

You'd think I'd find that link on my own :bang:

I think it's time I reduce the reading a bit and did a bit more practice :shrug:

 

[HoppyUK]

Guys, I saw this pic and thought of this thread - it's a really great shot!

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-10051-10609

Just comments really:
It look like a beauty dish, but it's actually a softbox used at a little distance.
Excellent series of shots showing the set and how the lighting was built up.
You couldn't do it with hot-shoe guns - big hall, big lights, big power.
One for Pocket Wizard fans.

 

[Garry Edwards]

Interesting link and thanks for posting it.

But those shots look NOTHING like a beauty dish.

 

[HoppyUK]

Interesting link and thanks for posting it.

But those shots look NOTHING like a beauty dish.

Haha! Looks enough like a beauty dish used close to me. Except you couldn't use a beauty dish for that.

Works for me anyway

 

[Richard King]

I tried my beauty dish on a self portrait, and there was no improvement at all :-(

 

[Wail]

Thank you for posting that

Seems like the stuff we've ordered from Germany has arrived in UK and is now being shipped off to Saudi ; I hope to have them here by Monday ~ Tuesday , just in good time for some real play.