Umbrella versus soft box

DrGed

Suspended / Banned
Messages
847
Name
Ged
Edit My Images
Yes
I have been trying simple portraiture using off camera flash and a shoot though umbrella. I am quite encouraged by the results even to the extent of posting a photo on relevant section of this forum.

However, unless I'm mistaken, I'm sure someone on here has said that a soft box will be better than a shoot through umbrella.

Is this true and, if so why?

Cheers,

Ged
 
In a single word, control. Umbrellas tend to spray light all over the place in a very uncontrolled way. Often where you don't want it. This is especially true in a small space. Softboxes tend to allow for a bit more control in the direction of the light. Control can be further enhanced by using a grid on the softbox.

Regards...
 
Last edited:
Have you tried using a reflector brolly. Still throw light around, but not nearly as much as a shoot through. Softboxes are great by the way, especially when you grid them...
 
Last edited:
It's all about spill and control. If you set up a portrait outside at night, with zero light reflected back from the surroundings, using a 100cm shoot-through umbrella, white umbrella, softbox, and gridded softbox, all at the same distance, you'd be hard pressed to tell them apart in terms of light quality. Exposures would be different though.

Indoors however, especially in a smaller studio, there would be tons of spill from the shoot-through as half the light bounces straight out of the back and from the front it's spread over a very wide area. This light bounces around the room, picking up a tint from any bright furnishings along the way, and comes back to lighten shadows. Result is even softer light, that might be attractive, but will reduce control of shadows and influence everything else like a background light etc.

The white umbrella wouldn't spill nearly so much, the softbox less still, and the gridded softbox hardly any spill and a clearly defined pool of light.

The main contributor to the quality of the light is the physical size of the source, ie bigger equals softer shadows. Or rather 'effective' size - a smaller source used close will be the same as a larger source from further away.
 
Many thanks for the replies.

I am now gaining confidence with my current very simple set up of speedlite, umbrella and reflector. Would the next step be to use a soft box instead of the umbrella? I'm assuming that the addition of another speedlite now would constitute trying to run when I've only been walking a very short time?
 
Many thanks for the replies.

I am now gaining confidence with my current very simple set up of speedlite, umbrella and reflector. Would the next step be to use a soft box instead of the umbrella? I'm assuming that the addition of another speedlite now would constitute trying to run when I've only been walking a very short time?

The softbox is a better tool to 'learn' with, basically with a shoot through brolly you've just been getting 'some soft light', with a softbox you'll be able to think about feathering, about lighting from alternative angles and filling in with the reflector etc.

When the angles you're working at get so acute that the reflector is struggling to keep up, put a flash through the shoot through brolly at the camera position as fill (start on min power and increase till it spoils the effect of the keylight, then back it off a bit).

MOst people stop experimenting once they've got a usable setup or 2, whilst you're still learning push yourself, remember the best stuff is what happens close to crap. Mediocre is fairly easy to achieve
 
Many thanks for the replies.

I am now gaining confidence with my current very simple set up of speedlite, umbrella and reflector. Would the next step be to use a soft box instead of the umbrella? I'm assuming that the addition of another speedlite now would constitute trying to run when I've only been walking a very short time?

Maybe. Depends what you want to achieve, but you should certainly experiment when you're ready. One step at a time.

Going by the portrait you posted on your other thread, you could try moving the light closer, then closer still - just to see the difference.

A cheap way to experiment is with umbrellas (eg Kood, from Premier-Ink). Try a white one, and then a silver one that's quite similar to a beauty dish with a harder core of light but with a kinda a softer surround. Definitely a punchier light with crisper shadows. Maybe more 'manly' if you follow, and tends to show up less good skin.

Other differences are that umbrellas take up less working space, both less height and width/depth if that's tight, while softboxes can be used very close. Sotboxes also give cleaner catchlights (no flash head in the middle) and you can get square ones if you prefer that, a bit more like a window shape in terms of the catchlight.

Then change the background colour, or with the shot you posted, add a hair light to separate the dark hair from the background. That kind of thing. Lots of options :thumbs:
 
Last edited:
Most people stop experimenting once they've got a usable setup or 2, whilst you're still learning push yourself, remember the best stuff is what happens close to crap. Mediocre is fairly easy to achieve
Today 16:08

Thanks, Phil.

I think you're right. The same principle also applies in guitar playing, which I teach, and so I can understand how it works in photography.

A soft box plus imagination it is, then!

Ged
 
Different modifiers are different, not better.

Sometimes, I want the 'auto-fill' spill of a white shoot through. Other times I want the tight rim of a gridded strip softbox.

Don't look for answers, look for questions.
 
After many years I still can't see the point of shoot through umbrellas, 1/2 the light is wasted except for the odd exception of a white walled flat (ie residence not theatrical set)
Personally silver umbrella or softbox
 
In addition to what has already been said, a brolly is so much more portable. :)
 
Back
Top