Garry Fong Lightsphere

I am taking a lighting course which is really excellent. The instructors don't back the lightsphere because they say it does not do what it claims.

The instructors stated that the size of the light source makes the difference when it comes to eliminating shadows. The lightsphere is not much bigger than the flash screen. To really do the job you need a larger diffuser say 2 by 5 feet or bigger. Of course this size is just a reference for discussion.

I just watched the video and Garry F. Said it bounces light all over the room making the light falling on the subject softer. I guess if you have a white room with low ceilings it should be fine.

One of Garry Fongs videos shows him using it in a dark room. What about a room with dark colored walls or high ceilings. I wonder what then would be the advantage here? I have one and I do notice it changes the quality of the light or maybe a better term is the skin tones are different. Based on what the instructors stated if I shot with it outside there would not be much of a difference between it or just my flash. Perhaps it being a tad higher would eliminate red eye. I find the diffuser screen on my Canon 580 does a nice job of spreading the light out.

Of course these are the instructors opinions. Many people use the spheres and just because they don't support it does not mean I'll stop using it.

Thanks in advance. Just starting to explore lighting which is fascinating.

--
The solution is always simple. Getting there is the hard part.

It has good and bad points good for 10 to 15 feet of difused light must go +1 to +2 on the flash in ettl to get enough light. I always piont head at group. turn it up when under 3 feet

One of my partners took my camera with a Lightsphere on it out to take a picture of a man this week, and came back with a great shot.

Because, contrary to the nonsense fed to you by instructors -- is it too late to get your money back? -- it works just fine, when used properly, under the right conditions.

But, like much in photography, having a clue about what the right conditions are helps matters greatly.

BAK

LISTEN to your instructors! Join Kelby training and LISTEN to the MASTER photographers. The simple truth of the matter is that the larger the light source in relationship to your subject, the softer the light. Period. Bounce flash diffusers (including the Lightsphere) work by bouncing the light (go figure) off a wall or ceiling. The wall or ceiling then becomes the light source which will be larger than your subject. It's the same wall or ceiling no matter what bounce diffuser you are using. Then it is a matter of how much fill light your shoe mount flash is sending forward and this is just one of the drawbacks to the Lightsphere: you have no control over this. If you prefer using a Lightsphere as your bounce tool, great. But don't be fooled by the marketing: it's bouncing light off the same wall or ceiling. A Demb Flip It will do the same and allow you to flag your flash (often much more useful) as well as control the amount of forward fill light. But no matter which tool you choose just remember: the larger the light source in relationship to your subject, the softer the light!

There are so many laws of physics to understand.

I just heard friom a student of a photog/photoshop class where the instructor stated "sharpening in post processing" is NEVER necessary.

Absolutes may protect the novices from occasional successes and disasters, but they rarely dissuade the pro (constantly learning purvayer of the craft) from learning when and where and what conditions ARE right for using the Lightsphere (or sharpening).

On the surface - the larger the PRIMARY light source relative to the subject, the softer the shadowing. If a point light source is behind a diffusion panel, then it's the size of the illuminated area of the diffusion panel that becomes the primary light source.

In practice - Softer shadows can also be achieved by light from secondary light sources... generally called FILL. There's "fill flash" often used. In studio you hear of MAIN and FILL light sources. In the case of flash modifiers like better bounce cards, flips, fongs, etc... the modifier redirects (some of) the light source in different directions, with the hope the conditions are right for some to bounce back and "fill" in the shadows from a variety of angles.

Also - You can often HIDE the harsher shadow cast by your primary light source if it's "on camera axis" by raising it higher than the lens...thus casting the shadow down behind the subject. If the primary light source is off camera axis... the hadow goes to one side or the otehr of the subject.

The Lightsphere itself does NOT offer significant diffusion. Instead, it turns your directional light source into an omnidirectional light source, throwing the light is many directions at once. If there are sufficient surfaces to receive light, that surface becomes a larger light source itself, reflecting larger, softer light upon your subject. It's a similar thing that happens when you simply bounce your flash on the ceiling, but with the Lightsphere the light also bounces off of sides, too.

The cost of all this bouncing, of course, is POWER. Your flash will have a great deal of power sucked out of each shot compared to direct flash.

Is the Lightsphere the only way to acheive this sort of bounce effect? Absolutely not. A Stofen works much the same way. In fact, a white paper cup would even provide virtually the same effect. I've used the semi-clear Crystal Light tubs (the sugar free drink mix).

Gary is an entrepreneur, and a very good one. I'm not putting him or his product down. But, realistically, the Lightsphere is essentially an expensive piece of tupperware that does about the same as much cheaper methods. That said, it's specifically designed for its intended us, so it MAY offer greater convenience or longevity.

Zee Char said:

I am taking a lighting course which is really excellent. The instructors don't back the lightsphere because they say it does not do what it claims.

The instructors stated that the size of the light source makes the difference when it comes to eliminating shadows. The lightsphere is not much bigger than the flash screen. To really do the job you need a larger diffuser say 2 by 5 feet or bigger. Of course this size is just a reference for discussion.

I just watched the video and Garry F. Said it bounces light all over the room making the light falling on the subject softer. I guess if you have a white room with low ceilings it should be fine.

One of Garry Fongs videos shows him using it in a dark room. What about a room with dark colored walls or high ceilings. I wonder what then would be the advantage here? I have one and I do notice it changes the quality of the light or maybe a better term is the skin tones are different. Based on what the instructors stated if I shot with it outside there would not be much of a difference between it or just my flash. Perhaps it being a tad higher would eliminate red eye. I find the diffuser screen on my Canon 580 does a nice job of spreading the light out.

Of course these are the instructors opinions. Many people use the spheres and just because they don't support it does not mean I'll stop using it.

Thanks in advance. Just starting to explore lighting which is fascinating.

--
The solution is always simple. Getting there is the hard part.

Click to expand...

--
Michael Thomas Mitchell

Michael Thomas Mitchell said:

The Lightsphere itself does NOT offer significant diffusion. Instead, it turns your directional light source into an omnidirectional light source, throwing the light is many directions at once. If there are sufficient surfaces to receive light, that surface becomes a larger light source itself, reflecting larger, softer light upon your subject. It's a similar thing that happens when you simply bounce your flash on the ceiling, but with the Lightsphere the light also bounces off of sides, too.

The cost of all this bouncing, of course, is POWER. Your flash will have a great deal of power sucked out of each shot compared to direct flash.

Is the Lightsphere the only way to acheive this sort of bounce effect? Absolutely not. A Stofen works much the same way. In fact, a white paper cup would even provide virtually the same effect. I've used the semi-clear Crystal Light tubs (the sugar free drink mix).

Gary is an entrepreneur, and a very good one. I'm not putting him or his product down. But, realistically, the Lightsphere is essentially an expensive piece of tupperware that does about the same as much cheaper methods. That said, it's specifically designed for its intended us, so it MAY offer greater convenience or longevity.

Zee Char said:

I am taking a lighting course which is really excellent. The instructors don't back the lightsphere because they say it does not do what it claims.

The instructors stated that the size of the light source makes the difference when it comes to eliminating shadows. The lightsphere is not much bigger than the flash screen. To really do the job you need a larger diffuser say 2 by 5 feet or bigger. Of course this size is just a reference for discussion.

I just watched the video and Garry F. Said it bounces light all over the room making the light falling on the subject softer. I guess if you have a white room with low ceilings it should be fine.

One of Garry Fongs videos shows him using it in a dark room. What about a room with dark colored walls or high ceilings. I wonder what then would be the advantage here? I have one and I do notice it changes the quality of the light or maybe a better term is the skin tones are different. Based on what the instructors stated if I shot with it outside there would not be much of a difference between it or just my flash. Perhaps it being a tad higher would eliminate red eye. I find the diffuser screen on my Canon 580 does a nice job of spreading the light out.

Of course these are the instructors opinions. Many people use the spheres and just because they don't support it does not mean I'll stop using it.

Thanks in advance. Just starting to explore lighting which is fascinating.

--
The solution is always simple. Getting there is the hard part.

Click to expand...

--
Michael Thomas Mitchell

Click to expand...

Thanks everyone. An excellent conversation. Based on what I have learned I probably will not use it for the weddings I shoot this summer. Not that it is a bad product if you have perfect conditions but you can't bank on that unless you scope it out. I don't know much about physics but I think only black holes can bend light . The rest I guess is the size of the source or where you can bounce the light.

--
The solution is always simple. Getting there is the hard part.

ArtZAngel said:

LISTEN to your instructors! Join Kelby training and LISTEN to the MASTER photographers. The simple truth of the matter is that the larger the light source in relationship to your subject, the softer the light. Period. Bounce flash diffusers (including the Lightsphere) work by bouncing the light (go figure) off a wall or ceiling. The wall or ceiling then becomes the light source which will be larger than your subject. It's the same wall or ceiling no matter what bounce diffuser you are using. Then it is a matter of how much fill light your shoe mount flash is sending forward and this is just one of the drawbacks to the Lightsphere: you have no control over this. If you prefer using a Lightsphere as your bounce tool, great. But don't be fooled by the marketing: it's bouncing light off the same wall or ceiling. A Demb Flip It will do the same and allow you to flag your flash (often much more useful) as well as control the amount of forward fill light. But no matter which tool you choose just remember: the larger the light source in relationship to your subject, the softer the light!

Click to expand...

Thanks. I'm going to print this put and give it to them . They will enjoy it.
--
The solution is always simple. Getting there is the hard part.

A few months ago, saw someone using a light sphere and became curious. I asked a lot of questions here and elsewhere. As much as I think they are useful, they are not doing much that I can't do with other cheaper or better methods. My simple $5 dome diffusers do a pretty good job. A bounce surface, bounce card and a flag are all dirt cheap or free and give me the light I want.

One of the things hat convinced me was looking at people like http://www.planetneil.com/tangents/ . His results are much more about experience and technique than any specific product. He and others get stunning results with a flash and a flag used properly.

--
-Dan Rode
http://rodephoto.com

LOL - And I would be more likely to state that sharpening in post processing is ALWAYS necessary since I don't do any (optional) in camera processing.

slowhands said:

I just heard friom a student of a photog/photoshop class where the instructor stated "sharpening in post processing" is NEVER necessary.

Click to expand...

--
-Dan Rode
http://rodephoto.com

You wrote > The lightsphere is not much bigger than the flash screen.

Sez who? Someone needs a new ruler.

The Lightsphere, whether placed in the upright position, or turned so that the round cover points forward, is about four times the area of the flash head on a Canon 580EX.

This is based on my real ruler and a Aurex EDC 4530 light-powered calculator.

You write > The instructors stated that the size of the light source makes the difference when it comes to eliminating shadows. ... To really do the job you need a larger diffuser say 2 by 5 feet or bigger.

The Lightsphere is not designed to eliminate shadows. It reduces shadows, and it moves shadows, and it only eliminates them when uise very close.

So, what's the goal?

If the goal is to take a picture of a person close to a light-coplred wall, and you want no shadows, you need a big softbox and probably a b ackground light, too.

And no, a Lightsphere won't handle that project.

But iof the goal is to soften shadows from fairly close distances, it's fine... bearing in miond that Lightspheres come in clear and cloud models.

So i you are comparing the size of a flash head pointed straight ahead and the size of a Lightsphere, you also need to factor in the diffusion of a cloud Lightsphere, or skip the factoring if the Lightsphere is a clear model.

Now the next factor that gets mixed in is the position of the light source.

Softboxes and umbrellas are not mounted on top of the camera, and because they are not, the light hits the subject at angles that can be set so the shadows drop far down behind the subject, or go off to one side.

When a flash, like a 580EX, etc., is attached to the camera, the flash's shadows is a lot closer to the head and shoulders.

Put a Lightsphere on top of a flash on top of the camera, and the lightsource is now another few inches higher than the non-Lightsphere lightsource.

These few inches mimic the increased height of a flash brac ket, and a flash bracket is the standard tool of good wedding photographers, who use it to get shadows moved down and behind the people.

You asked about dark rooms -- you're right. In a dark room, the Lightsphere is less effective than in a smaller room.

High ceilings cut effectiveness of a Lightsphere, but they cut the effectiveness of a bounced flash even more.

The Lightsphere can be used with a chrome back when the room is big and/or the ceilings are high and/or the walls are dark. The chrome back shoves a lot of light forward, and if the Lightsphere is a cloud model, the light is still starting out at four times the area, through diffusion material.

My Lightsphere spends a fair bit of time on top of a flash gun that's in turn ontop of a lightspand. That gives me softer light, aimed better as far as moving the shadows goes.

And under some circumstances -- here's where thinking and the recognition as mentioned by another poster that photography is hard -- comes into play. I'll add an umbrellas to the lightstand.

So now I've got four times the area as my source, diffused by the cloud plastic, supplemented by the light from the sides and back of the Lightsphere hitting the umbrella and then bouncing forward.

A flash on a lightstand with an umbrella, connected to a Canon with a Canon off camera shoe cord 3, is a highly portable, easily movable, great way to light people, but again, only under the right circumstances.

As for 5 feet by 2 feet; Leaving aside the weird ratio (most softboxes are more square, but there are "strip" boxes of the 5x2 ratio) the nearer the softbox is to the subject, the softer the shadows are.

But the farther the soft box, the less the fall off, so your front row person is closer to the same brightness as your back row person.

Anyway... softboxes and Lightspheres are for differnt purposes under different circumstances. And Lightspheres usually don't need a light meter, and softboxes, used professionally, do, more oftn than not.

Hope this helps.

BAK said:

You wrote > The lightsphere is not much bigger than the flash screen.

Sez who? Someone needs a new ruler.

Click to expand...

I should have been more clear. Compared to a larger diffuser like a 2'x 5'.

BAK said:

The Lightsphere, whether placed in the upright position, or turned so that the round cover points forward, is about four times the area of the flash head on a Canon 580EX.

Click to expand...

Agreed

BAK said:

This is based on my real ruler and a Aurex EDC 4530 light-powered calculator.

You write > The instructors stated that the size of the light source makes the difference when it comes to eliminating shadows. ... To really do the job you need a larger diffuser say 2 by 5 feet or bigger.

The Lightsphere is not designed to eliminate shadows. It reduces shadows, and it moves shadows, and it only eliminates them when uise very close.

Click to expand...

They told me the closer the source the more shadows the shadows are reduced.

BAK said:

So, what's the goal?

If the goal is to take a picture of a person close to a light-coplred wall, and you want no shadows, you need a big softbox and probably a b ackground light, too.

And no, a Lightsphere won't handle that project.

But iof the goal is to soften shadows from fairly close distances, it's fine... bearing in miond that Lightspheres come in clear and cloud models.

Click to expand...

That makes sense based on what they told me.

BAK said:

So i you are comparing the size of a flash head pointed straight ahead and the size of a Lightsphere, you also need to factor in the diffusion of a cloud Lightsphere, or skip the factoring if the Lightsphere is a clear model.

Now the next factor that gets mixed in is the position of the light source.

Softboxes and umbrellas are not mounted on top of the camera, and because they are not, the light hits the subject at angles that can be set so the shadows drop far down behind the subject, or go off to one side.

When a flash, like a 580EX, etc., is attached to the camera, the flash's shadows is a lot closer to the head and shoulders.

Put a Lightsphere on top of a flash on top of the camera, and the lightsource is now another few inches higher than the non-Lightsphere lightsource.

Click to expand...

Makes sense. I purchased a bracket. They also told me most people naturally line up

against wall at weddings, etc for general shots. Bad thing. Putting your back to the wall or corner and bouncing (if you can) off the wall behind you is a better option.

BAK said:

These few inches mimic the increased height of a flash brac ket, and a flash bracket is the standard tool of good wedding photographers, who use it to get shadows moved down and behind the people.

You asked about dark rooms -- you're right. In a dark room, the Lightsphere is less effective than in a smaller room.

High ceilings cut effectiveness of a Lightsphere, but they cut the effectiveness of a bounced flash even more.

The Lightsphere can be used with a chrome back when the room is big and/or the ceilings are high and/or the walls are dark. The chrome back shoves a lot of light forward, and if the Lightsphere is a cloud model, the light is still starting out at four times the area, through diffusion material.

Click to expand...

I have seen the chrome back. Makes sense.

BAK said:

My Lightsphere spends a fair bit of time on top of a flash gun that's in turn ontop of a lightspand. That gives me softer light, aimed better as far as moving the shadows goes.

And under some circumstances -- here's where thinking and the recognition as mentioned by another poster that photography is hard -- comes into play. I'll add an umbrellas to the lightstand.

So now I've got four times the area as my source, diffused by the cloud plastic, supplemented by the light from the sides and back of the Lightsphere hitting the umbrella and then bouncing forward.

A flash on a lightstand with an umbrella, connected to a Canon with a Canon off camera shoe cord 3, is a highly portable, easily movable, great way to light people, but again, only under the right circumstances.

As for 5 feet by 2 feet; Leaving aside the weird ratio (most softboxes are more square, but there are "strip" boxes of the 5x2 ratio) the nearer the softbox is to the subject, the softer the shadows are.

Click to expand...

Again this is what they told me. The closer the source the more shadows the shadows are reduced.

BAK said:

But the farther the soft box, the less the fall off, so your front row person is closer to the same brightness as your back row person.

Anyway... softboxes and Lightspheres are for differnt purposes under different circumstances. And Lightspheres usually don't need a light meter, and softboxes, used professionally, do, more oftn than not.

Hope this helps.

Click to expand...

Yes it did and thanks for taking the time to write. I think instructors point was that as long as you are aware of what the product can and can't do there is nothing wrong with it. They felt the advertising states is solves all the flashes hard light problems. People who are less aware buy it thinking it will.

Not being a pro and not shooting these types of events regularly I'm going to keep things as simple as I can. Bounce as much as I can and use the white flip up card, etc.

--
The solution is always simple. Getting there is the hard part.

I may as well not start another thread. The 580 manual states that when
it is is Auto Zoom and turn you the head the coverage is set to 50mm.

It does not say anything about tilting the head. I can be in manual or auto zoom and every time I rotate or tilt the head the coverage numbers disappear. I assume in each of these scenarios the coverage sets to 50mm?

Thanks in advance

--
The solution is always simple. Getting there is the hard part.

I got it.

--
The solution is always simple. Getting there is the hard part.

Check out Strobist David Hobby. He makes a good point.... buy yourself some soup in a cheap "Tupperware" type bowl, for $1.99, enjoy the soup, then use the container as your light sphere.

There is nothing magical about the sphere... your flash doesn't know you spend $60 for it. It has no clue if you use a similar object like a free container.

Many even use the bottles that rubbing alcohol come in. Cut off the top 1/3 of the bottle, and it slips over the head of your flash.

The lightspere does nothing amazing, all it does is allow light to be broadcast in ALL directions, just as a soup container would do.

Sure, you'll look more professional using the Fong sphere vs using a soup container, but that's about it, the difference ends there.

There are many many knockoffs of this product, at 1/4 the price, check eBay, and other photographic online stores.

Fong is a master at marketing, that's why he' a millionaire now. He figured out you could use a 20 cent soup bowl, but nobody would buy it, so make it look fancy, promote it, market it correctly, and make a million.

Is it a bad product ? ... no, does it work ? sure it does, but a free soup container works just as well.

Zee Char said:

To really do the job you need a larger diffuser say 2 by 5 feet or bigger. Of course this size is just a reference for discussion.

Click to expand...

The ceiling and walls are bigger than that. In fact one thing you have to watch with a lightsphere is that it can do such a good job of evening up the lighting it'll make a dark dancefloor look like someone turned all the lights on and ruin the atmosphere. By tilting it forward you can make it more directional.

Zeee said:

I just watched the video and Garry F. Said it bounces light all over the room making the light falling on the subject softer. I guess if you have a white room with low ceilings it should be fine.

Click to expand...

You can use high enough ISO and wide enough apertures so darker walls or high ceiling are fine.

Zeee said:

One of Garry Fongs videos shows him using it in a dark room. What about a room with dark colored walls or high ceilings. I wonder what then would be the advantage here? I have one and I do notice it changes the quality of the light or maybe a better term is the skin tones are different. Based on what the instructors stated if I shot with it outside there would not be much of a difference between it or just my flash.

Click to expand...

Outside you get positionally slightly higher fill, esp shooting in portrait orientation, slightly softer fill and a larger catchlight. Outside is when you will have problems with the power. When pointing a lightsphere fully forwards make sure you use a lens with a hood so that you can't flare your lens with the flash. A small 35/2 with its small hood is shorter than a lightsphere on a 580EXII pointed forwards.

Zeee said:

Perhaps it being a tad higher would eliminate red eye. I find the diffuser screen on my Canon 580 does a nice job of spreading the light out.

Click to expand...

What is red eye? Seriously, its very hard to get with a lightsphere.

Being a larger source its a nicer way to flash people, in the same way the compact tiny flashes leave a nasty small bright after image. With a reasonable ISO for indoors and using 50% ambient contribution and the flash is very easy on the eyes.

For a portable diffuser the lightsphere is hard to beat. Its unbreakable, takes up little space, makes a good small lens protector in a bag and is great at balancing ambient indoor light with the tungsten "amber" cap. Its only problem is the weight of it on the flash tilt mechanism when tilted forwards. Better than the original lightsphere (very soft light) in this respect though.

Btw, getting closer does not always mean you'll get improved shadows on your subject. If you are bouncing then a bit further away improves things. Too close and you'll shadow the eye sockets.

Andrew

Zee Char said:

I am taking a lighting course which is really excellent. The instructors don't back the lightsphere because they say it does not do what it claims.

The instructors stated that the size of the light source makes the difference when it comes to eliminating shadows. The lightsphere is not much bigger than the flash screen. To really do the job you need a larger diffuser say 2 by 5 feet or bigger. Of course this size is just a reference for discussion.

Click to expand...

Diffusers for on camera flash are designed to soften shadows, not eliminate them. And it's the size of the light source relative to your subject that matters, not the actual size.

To your other question, I used a diy fong type diffuser for most of 09. The walls and ceiling in one bride's house was painted a dark maroon. Everything had a maroon cast so I had to switch to a Lumiquest bounce. Light bounced off walls and ceiling will definitely pick up color casts.

I used a diy diffuser made of shelf lining material from IKEA that works the same way. You need power to make it work, AAs are out.

Zeee said:

I just watched the video and Garry F. Said it bounces light all over the room making the light falling on the subject softer. I guess if you have a white room with low ceilings it should be fine.

One of Garry Fongs videos shows him using it in a dark room. What about a room with dark colored walls or high ceilings. I wonder what then would be the advantage here? I have one and I do notice it changes the quality of the light or maybe a better term is the skin tones are different. Based on what the instructors stated if I shot with it outside there would not be much of a difference between it or just my flash. Perhaps it being a tad higher would eliminate red eye. I find the diffuser screen on my Canon 580 does a nice job of spreading the light out.

Of course these are the instructors opinions. Many people use the spheres and just because they don't support it does not mean I'll stop using it.

Thanks in advance. Just starting to explore lighting which is fascinating.

--
The solution is always simple. Getting there is the hard part.

Click to expand...

Robert J. Gonzalez said:

I used a diy diffuser made of shelf lining material from IKEA that works the same way. You need power to make it work, AAs are out.

Click to expand...

Thats a bit odd, I can go 500+ shots with a 580EXII, lightsphere and a set of 2700mAh AA rechargeables.

Andrew

I love the Lightsphere or the Flip-It when I'm shooting in a room with low, white ceilings and white walls. For me, I don't like it as much when I'm shooting in a church with brown ceilings that are very very high. For that, I prefer a Lumiquest-like device which still diffuses the light but makes it at least semi-directional.

NJOceanView said:

I love the Lightsphere or the Flip-It when I'm shooting in a room with low, white ceilings and white walls. For me, I don't like it as much when I'm shooting in a church with brown ceilings that are very very high. For that, I prefer a Lumiquest-like device which still diffuses the light but makes it at least semi-directional.

Click to expand...

I said I would not use it at the weddings I'm shooting but I'll probably bring it. You never know. I could get a perfect sized white room to shoot in .

The flash course I'm taking makes me fell less apprehensive now. I've always been an AV or manual ambient shooter. Two weeks ago I was never comfortable taking the camera out of P mode when using my flash and believe me I hated being in P mode. When I did take it out of P I was never really sure of what was going on. When I got a good exposure I was not sure why. I'm not sure which was worse

Today I could have both camera and flash in manual and have no concerns in getting a good exposure. It just takes me a little longer than a seasoned pro would.

Still have long way to go but at least having control over my equipment makes a big difference. The last two weeks have been very elating.

--
The solution is always simple. Getting there is the hard part.