NSFW Review of focusing spotlight

Garry Edwards

Garry Edwards

Moderator
Messages
13,475
Name
Garry Edwards
Edit My Images
No
Last edited:
Great review Garry . I have 4 different types of these and they're each flawed in their own way. All of them eat an insane amount of light, large flash heads are the least efficient drivers for these spot projectors as the light source is not centred with the lens: it goes around the edge of it and although they somewhat make up for it in terms of brute force power, the results are much better using a Fresnel focused light such as a speedlight or AD200. If you use a zoomable speedlight, zoom it right in so the light fills the front Fresnel Although the input light is much less from a COB LED, it is also more efficient for the same reason. It's still dimmer of course, but I tend to use mine with a Godox SL200 LED as I can see the pattern and we're often asking a model to do something within the pattern - which is very hard if you can't see it.

Then there's light gathering area - most of these projectors use a small lens, and some use (usually Canon EF) camera lenses. These typically have very small rear elements and again, a lot of light is bouncing around inside the spot projector and lots of that is getting absorbed rather than finding it's way through the narrow hole in the middle.

The most efficient one for large light heads (flash or LED) I have is the biggest - it has an actual lump of hemispherical glass on the front rather than a Fresnel so it's very heavy, but yields a stop more light than the next best one I have when using a 600J studio head. However, the "optics" are pretty terrible on this one with a lot of smearing and chromatic aberrations going on around the edges of any GoBO you place inside. Sometimes this is ok though and I'll use it. The one I use the most is a Bowens fit one, with a fixed 85mm lens on the front. It's ok. I have a set if cutters for it, but they are the shonkiest thing you've ever seen and a complete pita to use.

They are all way overpriced with the bigger, most efficient one coming at £100, and the others at £250+ except for the speedlight/AD200 only Lightblaster which was I think around £100. All of them are pretty shonky looking tbh, and none of them are easy to use. So good to see these which look just as well built for a more realistic price.

Here's the tests I did with the Lightblaster 10 years ago using a couple of different speedlights, and a Lencarta 600SF via the Lightblaster S-Fit adapter
https://owenlloydphotography.com/lightblaster-tests/ (contains examples using leotards etc Fairly safe for work)

I've got a lots more examples which I can post as long as we're ok with this thread becoming unsafe for work.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the review, @Garry Edwards. The budget spotlights are a lot of fun, but not as easy to use as the advertising may have you believe. We have a couple and found that you need a fairly powerful flash with a strong modelling light to be able to focus light properly. As I recall, we burned out the modelling lamp of one of our old studio heads when we were experimenting with them.
 
Hi Owen, many thanks for your helpful reply.

Yes, please post some more examples, I've now marked the thread NSFW, as I mentioned in my review I used to use my Elinchrom spot attachment a lot for artistic nude photography.

All of the points about power loss are 100% right in my experience. I routinely used my 2400j generator unit with my spot attachment, but from time to time I had to use my 6000j one. At that time, or at least the start of it, I was shooting exclusively on film, normally 50 or 100 iso, but even so . . .

I may be wrong about this, but I think that the manufacturers could easily get around most of the power loss problem simply by having a polished metal cone to concentrate the light. The problem, as I've found many times on my trips to China, is that the manufacturers neither know nor care about lighting, and routinely ignore any advice from photographers.

Using this new one with my little 60W Godox LED light worked well, for the reasons you've given - very close distance, which helped a lot, but I got the effect I wanted at 1/15th second, 100iso, f/8

One of the other cheap options on Temu - the one with the 4 sliding shutters - has reviews that mention very bad chromatic aberration, but I can't comment on that as I haven't seen it.

I've seen one that uses Canon lenses, I haven't tried it and don't use Canon anyway, but I can't help wondering whether the lens might get a bit hot . . .
 
TimHughes said:
Thanks for the review, @Garry Edwards. The budget spotlights are a lot of fun, but not as easy to use as the advertising may have you believe. We have a couple and found that you need a fairly powerful flash with a strong modelling light to be able to focus light properly. As I recall, we burned out the modelling lamp of one of our old studio heads when we were experimenting with them.
Click to expand...
I've burned out a few myself, my fault entirely (although of course I always blamed assistants for not turning them off). My Elinchrom heads used those tiny and very expensive halogen bulbs:(
 
Hi Garry

Thanks for the review. Although I have barely used my camera in a couple of years.
Your review and the insanely cheap cost of this product convinced me this would be fun to try.
If nothing else it might spur me into taking photos again.


Gaz
 
Last edited:
cargo said:
Hi Garry

Thanks for the review. Although I have barely used my camera in a couple of years.
Your review and the insanely cheap cost of this product convinced me this would be fun to try.
If nothing else it might spur me into taking photos again.


Gaz
Click to expand...
Yes, please pick up your camera again:)
I remember you from a few years ago, your lighting was terrible at the start, my cat could have done better and I don't even have a cat. You said that lighting was too complicated for you, you were after all just a plasterer - forgetting that plastering is an incredibly highly-skilled job!

But then you improved rapidly, once you understood that good lighting is just about simplicity, common sense, care and a very basic understanding of how light works, a degree in physics is very much optional:)

I count you as one of my very rare successes, get back out there and prove me right!
 
Boob posting here and now, in order to fulfil the lack. ;)
 
I can't win can I?

Don't make it NSFW and Owen can't post his examples, do make it NSFW and I'm accused of sillybuggery . . .
 
Super review of the spotlight, it looks very handy.
 
TimHughes said:
Thanks for the review, @Garry Edwards. The budget spotlights are a lot of fun, but not as easy to use as the advertising may have you believe. We have a couple and found that you need a fairly powerful flash with a strong modelling light to be able to focus light properly. As I recall, we burned out the modelling lamp of one of our old studio heads when we were experimenting with them.
Click to expand...

I haven’t done anything serious with mine yet but I have the same one Garry reviewed, a smiffy (bought a few years as an impulse purchase at the NEC) and I had previously built one by getting an old film camera, stripping off the back door, putting a cheap gobo (got some 1” ish special effect ones from eBay for something like 99p each ) behind the lens and using a flash gun behind it just for the hell of it.

I tend to just use a torch to set the focus before transferring it onto the flash.
 
@Garry Edwards
My you've got a great memory :-)
You are correct I was very eager to take better images back then. With help from yourself I eventually took some descent photos.
The lighting section on this forum is still fab.

Gaz
 
Just wondered if you've seen the Smallrig RF 05b torch spotlight thingy> Marcus pix showed one on his channel recently. Now it's not going to be anything like as powerful as this it could be handy for someone.
 
I've used a few different variants of focus spotlights over the years - Elinchrom, Lightblaster, a couple of different Godox things and an actual stage spotlight. Some had fixed lenses, some had shutters, some didn't.

My preferred is one which takes a Canon-mount lens on the front. It's not perfect but it works. I've modified one of mine to get more light out of it - at the risk of increased heating.

They're surprisingly verstaile but they do need a HUGE amount of light unless you're working in darkness.
 
Last edited:
sirch said:
@Scooter posted some striking examples here but it was felt that they would be better in the NSFW Nude and Glamour section, here's a link if you would like to view them
Click to expand...
So, this is getting a bit complicated now , , ,

You're in the right place for discussion about this bit of kit, or similar ones
We've got Owen's superb examples here
There's my written review here
With the accompanying video here
And a tutorial which includes using it here
And, when I can make the time, I plan to do another with it in use
 
oh well here's what real boobies look like :p :p :p :p :p :p
 

Attachments

  • images.jpeg
    images.jpeg
    11.5 KB · Views: 1
I was unsure where to post these.

@Garry Edwards

The gadget arrived, it seems to work this is my Niece in the photos. She prefers the airy/lighter look.
I don't have the room really but we did get some images. I am outside the cabin along with the snoot taking these. Luckily the weather as been lovely for a few days.



Gaz



 
Last edited:
That's a very good result, I'm guessing that you didn't find it easy . . .

One of the challenges, based on memory from when I photographed models with a focusing spot, is that unless we can get the shooting space almost dark, it can be difficult to see exactly what the focusing spot is doing, the modelling lamp is never quite bright enough to make it easy.

One thing that might make it easier in the future is to arrange the focusing spot so that it's dead square to the subject, so that the shadows created by the spot don't show on the background (assuming that the spot lights the subject as well as the background. If the spot is lighting only the background then this doesn't apply, but requires space that you may not have between the subject and the background. If it's just a head and shoulders or a half-length shot (no legs) then we can usually get away with having it square but looking down - it's a pretty sharp learning curve!

Sadly, I no longer have either the space or the availability of models, so am limited to very small subjects.
This is my latest effort, lighting just the chequering on the forend of this antique shotgun
bottom projector brighter.jpg
Which I then defocussed to avoid the sharp demarcation between lit and unlit, but I forgot to take a shot of it out of focus, as I usually do :( and although lack of space made it difficult to position the light at the acute angle that would have shown the chequering at its very best, this is what usually happens, we often can't position the light exactly where it should be, but I think it did the job adequately, especially as this hand-cut chequering has had a hundred years of use and is pretty worn.
I think we can see the angle of incidence, the light is far left and jsut skims across the subject, we can see this from the release button, far right, which is only just caught by the light, the light has also accidentally caught a bit of the trigger guard, this should really be retouched out but I don't retouch my example shots.
I ended up with this, with a bit less exposure on the forend.
bottom final_1_retouched.jpg
Please see https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/tutorials/creating-very-hard-lighting-to-emphasise-detail.172/

BTW, I've learned something. I lit this shot using the longer and thinner gobo shown below
slot gobos.jpg
The focusing spot allows a limited amount of skew, to allow the GoBo to be positioned at the perfect angle, but if that movement isn't enough we can rotate the whole thing by 120 degrees simply by uncoupling it from the light and repositioning it, a benefit of the S-fit mount.

Has anyone else bought one? If so, please post your results, it's a bit of a gadget but, at the same time, it's also a useful lighting tool.
 
@Garry Edwards

Thanks for the reply. I agree it is a a bit hard to see in the small room I am using but not too bad. like you mentioned before I do have a little knowledege I am more hindered by my lack of ideas and directing/posing folk.
I took a few photos at first using just the spotlight which is attached to a Godox 400 if the space were larger I would not have needed to have had the doors wide open letting in the sunlight. The bottom third of the image below had some bounce light hitting the floor from outside.
In the first photos I posted I also placed some white board above the the doors curled up onto the ceiling I bounced a flash into them fitted with a reflector dish to lift the overall light.

I have uploaded a photo of the space.

Gaz


 
I'm jealous, my space is smaller and cluttered with furniture . . .
Don't underestimate the negative effects of unwanted ambient light. You should be able to reduce it very significantly, perhaps even completely, by shooting at night
 
Hi Garry

You are totally correct. I was hoping to take them in the morning as it were overcast and the sun comes up behind the cabin.
As always you have great practical advice. Lots of times the most obvious remedies pass me by.

Yes we are very lucky to have this space. I recently put the rubber roofing and pvc fascia on it. It's 16 years old now and was showing it in a few areas, all repaired now. It looks really good again and should last another 16 years hopefully.

Gaz
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top