Fresnel modifier for photography

[ronscuba]

In my photo class, got to use the large 30 cm 11.8" Profoto Fresnel modifier. Was very impressed. In addition to being able to focus the light into a small area, the light was a combination of hard and soft.

Theorizing: the physics of the lens gives it the spot focusing abilities, since the light is going through frosted glass, it is getting a little diffused and softened ? The hardness comes from the small size of the glass lens ? Is this accurate ?

I see small options for photo available, but nothing larger than 6". The lens on Profoto I used is 30cm or 11.8". For photo applications, how would an 8", 6", 4" fresnel compare ?

 

[cdembrey]

Elinchrom FS30 is 30cm. Broncolor Flooter is 340cm. There have been many made in this diameter over the years. There was one made in the USA that looked like a Broncolor Flooter that sold new for about $500.00 (1970s??).

12 inch is a common Hollywood motion picture fresnel. They were made by both Mole-Richardson and Bardwell & McAlister during the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s. A Bardwell & McAlister would be the easiest to convert as a DIY project.

 

[ronscuba]

Elinchrom FS30 is 30cm. Broncolor Flooter is 340cm. There have been many made in this diameter over the years. There was one made in the USA that looked like a Broncolor Flooter that sold new for about $500.00 (1970s??).

12 inch is a common Hollywood motion picture fresnel. They were made by both Mole-Richardson and Bardwell & McAlister during the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s. A Bardwell & McAlister would be the easiest to convert as a DIY project.

The Elinchrom and Profoto are over $2k new.

I know I could go the DIY route, but the real question is for photography applications, how does a 5" or 6" fresnel compare to a 12" ? The premade 5" and 6" are inexpensive.

 

[Michael H]

If you like DIY fresnel take a look here: https://www.markkitaoka.com/latest-news/converting-a-mole-junior-412-fresnel/

Towards the end of the entry Mark mentions other options available.

 

[cdembrey]

The Elinchrom and Profoto are over $2k new.

Ever heard of e-bay? It is possible to buy used at a considerable discount. The reason I mentioned that they had been making them a looooog time is that there should be many older used available.

I know I could go the DIY route, but the real question is for photography applications, how does a 5" or 6" fresnel compare to a 12" ? The premade 5" and 6" are inexpensive.

But that's not the question you asked. Have a nice day.

 

[Ellis Vener]

Elinchrom FS30 is 30cm. Broncolor Flooter is 340cm. There have been many made in this diameter over the years. There was one made in the USA that looked like a Broncolor Flooter that sold new for about $500.00 (1970s??).

12 inch is a common Hollywood motion picture fresnel. They were made by both Mole-Richardson and Bardwell & McAlister during the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s. A Bardwell & McAlister would be the easiest to convert as a DIY project.

There is also The 24” Big Eye Fresnel from K5600. It was designed for K5600 JOKER HMI lights but works very well with Speedlight a and bare tube monolights . Reasonably easy to collapse and transport too. http://www.k5600.com/products/bigeye/index.html

 

[Ellis Vener]

In my photo class, got to use the large 30 cm 11.8" Profoto Fresnel modifier. Was very impressed. In addition to being able to focus the light into a small area, the light was a combination of hard and soft.

Theorizing: the physics of the lens gives it the spot focusing abilities, since the light is going through frosted glass, it is getting a little diffused and softened ? The hardness comes from the small size of the glass lens ? Is this accurate ?

not quite. Fresnel lenses do focus light but not with a hard well defined edge. Most of the softness results from the size of the lens.

the lower end 5 and 6 inch diameter Fresnel s work much the same but as the lens is a smaller diameter it’s not quite as soft.

 

[bwheeler350]

You ask about hardness/softness characteristic. The best definition of that relates to the edges of shadows cast by objects (in portraits, cast by the nose for instance). A point source casts a shadow that is all umbra (the dark part) with very sharp edges. A larger light source casts a shadow that has penumbras (the fuzzy part at the edges, as we see in outdoor shadows with the sun being about one half degree width in the sky and not a point source). The larger the source is relative to the subject, the wider the penumbras and the “softer” the shadows. That is geometry of how light rays travel (softness is not caused by diffraction and not caused by diffusion material except when the material is used to make the effective size bigger, like with a soft box). A light source close to a subject appears relatively larger than the same light source moved further away. A 12” modifier would be close to the size of a human head, so medium soft shadow edges if close to the head and harder shadow edges if further away where it has a smaller effective size relative to the subject.

Distance has another (different) effect simultaneously. Illuminance (light falling onto the subject) decreases in proportion to the square of the distance from the source. Start with a light one foot away from a subject who extends one foot further away from the light (some heads are almost this size). The close part has one unit of light while the far part only has 0.25 units of light (inverse of 2 squared). That is a dramatic fall off. Move the same light to seven feet away from the subject. Now the close part has 0.20 units of light while the far part has 0.16 units of light. Adjust exposure accordingly and see that the difference of illuminance between the sides is now hardly noticeable. That is gentle fall off. At seven feet away (compared to the initial one foot away), the subject is in the flatter part of the inverse square curve - where there is much less fall off per unit of distance.

The inverse square relationship supposes a light that spreads out in all directions. The lens modifier concentrates the light beam. Mathematically that makes the "effective source” of the light act like it is out behind the actual source (for inverse square purposes). So the inverse square relationship with respect to the "effective source" means the flatter part of the curve happens closer to a physical fixture that uses a concentrating lens compared to one that does not. So you may be noticing a gentle fall off effect, which many people find desirable in portraits. Less fall off means less light-dark contrast from one side to the other, but that is not a softening of the edges of shadows (which are only softened by a larger effective size of the source relative to the subject).

 

[ronscuba]

I am going to try buy the Impact or Aputure versions. They are only 5"-6" but cost $55-$120. Worth a try.

Here is a shot I did with the 12" Profoto Fresnel. Light is 5-6 feet from the subject. I like how it focuses, but the quality of the light is not harsh.

 

[tugwilson]

I am going to try buy the Impact or Aputure versions. They are only 5"-6" but cost $55-$120. Worth a try.

Here is a shot I did with the 12" Profoto Fresnel. Light is 5-6 feet from the subject. I like how it focuses, but the quality of the light is not harsh.

There are two Aputure versions. The MK 1 has a single fresnel lens at the front and fits on most Bowens mount lights. If you are using a studio light with a protruding modeling light bulb it's best to remove it. People have smashed these bulbs when moving the fresnel from spot to flood settings. It's got quite a lot of ventilation holes so you can get a fair bit of light spill. It has a tendency to image the tube of the flash at some settings. Putting a bit of diffusion in front of the bulb helps with this.

The MK 2 (the 2X) has a rear lens. This causes problems when you put it on a strobe as the tube hits the lens before the bowens mount engages. I have used it with an AD200 with the round head pushed as far back as it will go in an S-Type bracket. What I now do is to put a Bowens to Profoto adapter on it and use it with an AD400 with the Profoto adapter or an AD200 with a the round head in an AD-P. It's worth the trouble as it's far easier to adjust, has lots less light spill and produces about a stop more light than the MK 1.

 

[sharpblur]

This is the one I got and I like it. Lens is between 10 and 11 inches. https://www.linkdelight.com/3307240...V-for-Studio-Light-Photography-Equipment.html

 

[ronscuba]

I am going to try buy the Impact or Aputure versions. They are only 5"-6" but cost $55-$120. Worth a try.

Here is a shot I did with the 12" Profoto Fresnel. Light is 5-6 feet from the subject. I like how it focuses, but the quality of the light is not harsh.

There are two Aputure versions. The MK 1 has a single fresnel lens at the front and fits on most Bowens mount lights. If you are using a studio light with a protruding modeling light bulb it's best to remove it. People have smashed these bulbs when moving the fresnel from spot to flood settings. It's got quite a lot of ventilation holes so you can get a fair bit of light spill. It has a tendency to image the tube of the flash at some settings. Putting a bit of diffusion in front of the bulb helps with this.

The MK 2 (the 2X) has a rear lens. This causes problems when you put it on a strobe as the tube hits the lens before the bowens mount engages. I have used it with an AD200 with the round head pushed as far back as it will go in an S-Type bracket. What I now do is to put a Bowens to Profoto adapter on it and use it with an AD400 with the Profoto adapter or an AD200 with a the round head in an AD-P. It's worth the trouble as it's far easier to adjust, has lots less light spill and produces about a stop more light than the MK 1.

How does the ad200 barebulb work with the aputure ?

 

[ronscuba]

This is the one I got and I like it. Lens is between 10 and 11 inches. https://www.linkdelight.com/3307240...V-for-Studio-Light-Photography-Equipment.html

That looks perfect. It seems to be discontinued or out of stock everywhere.

 

[jlafferty]

You ask about hardness/softness characteristic. ... A 12” modifier would be close to the size of a human head, so medium soft shadow edges if close to the head and harder shadow edges if further away where it has a smaller effective size relative to the subject.

What you’ve written is a decent overview except this part. A fresnel creates a path of light that is parallel, not conical (which is what a reflector does instead). As a result, the 6 vs 8 vs 12” diameter is more about coverage at a given distance (face only, 3/4, or full length) and less about shadow edge softness. In practical photo terms a fresnel is the answer to a question that is something like “I want the hardness of a point source with the coverage and contrast of a larger modifier in close, and what modifier does this?”

 

[Ellis Vener]

I am going to try buy the Impact or Aputure versions. They are only 5"-6" but cost $55-$120. Worth a try.

Here is a shot I did with the 12" Profoto Fresnel. Light is 5-6 feet from the subject. I like how it focuses, but the quality of the light is not harsh.

There are two Aputure versions. The MK 1 has a single fresnel lens at the front and fits on most Bowens mount lights. If you are using a studio light with a protruding modeling light bulb it's best to remove it. People have smashed these bulbs when moving the fresnel from spot to flood settings. It's got quite a lot of ventilation holes so you can get a fair bit of light spill. It has a tendency to image the tube of the flash at some settings. Putting a bit of diffusion in front of the bulb helps with this.

The MK 2 (the 2X) has a rear lens. This causes problems when you put it on a strobe as the tube hits the lens before the bowens mount engages. I have used it with an AD200 with the round head pushed as far back as it will go in an S-Type bracket. What I now do is to put a Bowens to Profoto adapter on it and use it with an AD400 with the Profoto adapter or an AD200 with a the round head in an AD-P. It's worth the trouble as it's far easier to adjust, has lots less light spill and produces about a stop more light than the MK 1.

How does the ad200 barebulb work with the aputure ?

Does anyone make a sort of extension tube with Bowens-S prongs on the back, and Bowens-S receiver on the front)?

 

[tugwilson]

How does the ad200 barebulb work with the aputure ?

I haven't used it with the Aputure fresnels for some time. They are designed to work with a COB LED which the round head simulates far more closely than the bare bulb.

 

[rfsIII]

Here is a lesson you should learn sooner rather than later. In photography you're constantly making tradeoffs between money, time, and your personal sanity.

The reason Profoto gets $2,500 for that modifier is because it produces a unique and beautiful old-Hollywood look that will make certain clients drool and if it's like most Profoto stuff, it will hold up well under the demands of studio work.

So here are your choices.

1. Buy a used 12-inch Mole-Richardson or Arri for $200 and spend another $100 to $500 for professional-looking, bulletproof way to mount strobe inside. Time: 8 to 16 hours for sourcing, designing, and building.

Results: Astounding Sanity: Not bad, could be fun

2. Buy a bare 12-inch fresnel for $100 and spend $100 to $500 to create a bracket and enclosure that holds everything together. Time: 12 to 24 hours for sourcing, designing, testing, redesigning, and building.

Results: Anyone's guess Sanity: Might go OK, might drive you to the brink of mental breakdown

3. Buy a cheaper alternative: $500 (or whatever). Time 1 minute to click the "buy" button.

Results: 80 to 90 percent as good as Profoto Sanity: Very good but with chance of regrets when small plastic parts start breaking and turn out to be un-replaceable

4. Buy the real thing for $2500 or $1500 used. Time: 1 minute to click the "buy" button. But time to get the money together ranges from 5 minute call to rich relative to weeks of work. Once it's bought, however, setup is seamless and operation is trouble free.

Results: Beyond fantastic. Sanity: Wonderfully clear sense of purpose.

 

[tugwilson]

Does anyone make a sort of extension tube with Bowens-S prongs on the back, and Bowens-S receiver on the front)?

Yes, I have one. I bought it for a project that didn't work I have tried it on the MK 2 fresnel it's 5.5 inches long. I used it with an AD200 in the S-Type bracket with the AD200 quite far forward in the bracket. Then I discovered the Profoto/AD-P configuration which is easier to use.

Mine was branded Rocwing but I can't find a listing of it now.

 

[Rico Tudor]

Here is a shot I did with the 12" Profoto Fresnel. Light is 5-6 feet from the subject. I like how it focuses, but the quality of the light is not harsh.

Good application of a fresnel key. Because the light is highly directional, you can allow greater skin specularity. Fresnels are my fav type of source: I have 3" and 7" versions. It will never qualify as a large source like SB, or even BD, so an inch or three difference in diameter is no biggie. Here's the Profoto 7" showing the stippled lens surface:

--
Canon, Nikon, Contax RTS, Leica M, Sony, Profoto

 

[ronscuba]

Here is a lesson you should learn sooner rather than later. In photography you're constantly making tradeoffs between money, time, and your personal sanity.

The reason Profoto gets $2,500 for that modifier is because it produces a unique and beautiful old-Hollywood look that will make certain clients drool and if it's like most Profoto stuff, it will hold up well under the demands of studio work.

So here are your choices.

1. Buy a used 12-inch Mole-Richardson or Arri for $200 and spend another $100 to $500 for professional-looking, bulletproof way to mount strobe inside. Time: 8 to 16 hours for sourcing, designing, and building.

Results: Astounding Sanity: Not bad, could be fun

2. Buy a bare 12-inch fresnel for $100 and spend $100 to $500 to create a bracket and enclosure that holds everything together. Time: 12 to 24 hours for sourcing, designing, testing, redesigning, and building.

Results: Anyone's guess Sanity: Might go OK, might drive you to the brink of mental breakdown

3. Buy a cheaper alternative: $500 (or whatever). Time 1 minute to click the "buy" button.

Results: 80 to 90 percent as good as Profoto Sanity: Very good but with chance of regrets when small plastic parts start breaking and turn out to be un-replaceable

4. Buy the real thing for $2500 or $1500 used. Time: 1 minute to click the "buy" button. But time to get the money together ranges from 5 minute call to rich relative to weeks of work. Once it's bought, however, setup is seamless and operation is trouble free.

Results: Beyond fantastic. Sanity: Wonderfully clear sense of purpose.

Good points and nice summary.

Clarification on your item 3:

- cheap 5" Impact version cost $55, 6" Aputure version costs $120.

I just ordered the 6" Aputure. If it gives me 80% of the Profoto, I will be very very happy.