Softboxes and umbrellas.

I currently have 3 umbrellas, two are white shoot through, one is both a white shoot through and a black bounce umbrella. I've been interested in a softbox for a while, but haven't justified the expense. I got to play with one today, and I was really digging the shadows from it. I found a really cool 24x24 that mounts well with my speedlight, but its a little different than the one I got to use, which was something like 24x42. Will I still see the awesome shadow transition on this 24x24, more noticable than the umbrellas? does that flat nylon diffuse it wider than some rounded tapered nylon??

Getting a larger softbox to mount on a speed lite is mucho expensive and ugly set-up, so that is out of the question. Anyway, its $93 at the local shop, I'm feeling torn between getting it and considering it a waste of money considering how different it may be from a 42" bounce or shoot through..

I can't help you a bit here, but I think you might get a better response in the studio and lighting forum.

Moved your post for you :)

I've been using nothing but softboxes for a decade now. I really like them for product photography. If I want harder shadows I can move one closer or remove the front. I am curious to hear what someone who uses both has to say, though. Steve?

You mentioned a bigger softbox on your strobe being an "ugly" setup. That shouldn't be a concern. The only thing that should matter is the light quality.

Thanks guys.

The ugly setup isn't a major concern of mine, its an extra device that attaches a speed lite to something a speed ring can mount to, then you attach the softbox with the speed ring. Its a lot bigger, but yeah, that isn't a major detraction to me, the only reason it is even mentioned is that I primarily use it for portraits and so I make it very portable. But, with that speed ring set up its abotu 4 times as much, and I just cant justify that expense right now - I could almost get another flash with that. I was wanting the rectangular shape but from all I've seen 24x24 is as large as it gets for a shoe-mount flash setup, without the extra speed-ring stuff. Its also one of those fold-out things that pops open, its pretty nifty.

Do you use any 24x24 softboxes John? Do you see a major differene between them and larger ones?

Aaaah well, I couldn't contain myself, I went and got it. If it ends up being total crap I can always return it, but I expect it will be a very fun and useful tool. I know that I will have more control over the light without all that spillover, and I'll certainly like bringing the light closer to the subject.

Most often when I use umbrellas, its in a relatively small room, white walls or cielings, so the light sort of just flies everywhere, I'm excited to try this out!

The different sizes do different things, but it's hard to beat a 24x24 for portrait work. Love getting the thing right up close to the subject to create that extraordinarily fast light drop off, producing soft yet very dramatic shadow detail. The softbox will definitely give you more control over where the light goes - it doesn't have nearly as much "spill" as an umbrella. :thumbsup:

All softboxes do the same thing in different ways and produce different results. A 24x24 is a nice softbox but you did not mention what your intended use was.
The general rule with softboxes is that the bigger they are and closer they are to the subject the softer the look.
So if you plan on doing 3/4 people shots a 24x24 may not be the correct tool for the job.

Thanks for the input guys!

the intended use of the softbox is primarily solo portraits. But, ultimately I'll use it for whatever it works well with. I'll have to get accustomed to the way this thing throws light. It seems that the best use of this opposed to the umbrellas is whenever I want to bring the light really close to the subject.

Jet - it was the light falloff that made me interested in this in the first place. I'll need to develop my ability with it so I can have the kind of control of light and the falloff I'm looking for. I've been experimenting with placement of the box to the face, which isn't as simple as it has been before for me with broad/narrow lighting. There is a lot more variety when this close to the subject.

I did some experimenting with self-portraits to start this thing out. Now I just need a pretty face to try this thing out on.

My local grocer had pink lady apples for 77 cents a pound, so I bought 10 pounds.

And 4 jars of peanut butter. Peanut butter + apples = GOOD!

So for these shots, how close did you have the SB? These look really nice by the way.

Right above the apple, perpendicularly intersecting the core. Something like a few inches away. Heres another, master chief.

Here is a shot taken with an umbrella that i turned into a softbox 20x20.

one more B/W

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by christos

The general rule with softboxes is that the bigger they are and closer they are to the subject the softer the look.

---

This is the third time I've heard this line repeated in 2 weeks and it's not exactly right. I'm not picking on you, just trying to dispel the myth.

Every softbox has a specific distance in relation to the subject that produces the *softest* light. It's arrived at by a mathmatical equation based on total square inches of surface area.

Some standard sizes:
1' square = 2' distance
2' square = 4' distance
3'x5' = 8' distance
4'x6' = 10' distance
3' octabox = 5.5' distance
5' octabox = 8.75' distance

Putting them closer doesn't make the light softer, it only makes it fall off faster. The light doesn't have the ability to "wrap" which is the essence of "softness".

Jetrim, so is it that doubling the distance of the softbox (from 2' square to 4' distance) lets the light warp around the subject? or is it that it is one stop of light away from the source? what i mean to say is with a 2' square but at 8' distance would the light fall more (wrap)around the whole subject or just be 2 stops less with less warp around?

At 2' square but 8' distance the light starts to harden, due to it's perceived size relative to the subject and starts to create specular highlights just like a 7" reflector would when placed close up.

With diffused light, it will wrap around more by moving it back (to a point) but you'll need more power to maintain the same level of light, due to the inverse square law, which says the intensity varies with the square of the flash-to-subject distance, this way:

2x the distance is 1/4 as bright, and 1/2 the distance is 4x brighter (2 stops)
3x the distance is 1/9 as bright, and 1/3 the distance is 9x brighter (8x is 3 stops)
4x the distance is 1/16 as bright, and 1/4 the distance is 16x brighter (4 stops), etc.

[edit to add:]
This is written in a book I have from Steven Danzig:

The theoretical ideal distance would be the hypotenuse of the right triangle. The Pythagorean theorem tells us that the hypotenuse (C) is obtainable via the following equation: A2 plus B2 equals C2 . Let’s assume that A=40 inches and B=30 inches for a fairly standard 30x40-inch softbox. A2=1600 and B2=900, so C2=2500. The hypotenuse, C, is determined by taking the square root of 2500, which is 50 inches.