Differences in Light quality: direct, bounce card and different diffuers and softboxes

[Ellis Vener]

If you see a flaw or failure in my procedure, I welcome your feedback and look forward to hearing from you.

Based on the discussion in the "A question For pro : Straight Flash vs Card bounce Flash difference?" thread from last week, https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/68167477 ,

I decided to do some testing using a low power (100 watt-second) Profoto A2 Monolight. The set up was in an average size room with a 10 ft high white ceiling.

I locked down every variable I could from setting up the light and the camera (Nikon Z6III set to DX crop, ISO 100 and 1/200th, with Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2,8 VR S at f/8); target and background. I took care to maintain a constant distance from the front of the light to the bridge of the mannequin's nose at five feet, and the output level of the light at 7.5 (18.75 w-s) even when using a softbox.

The original raw files were processed identically in Lightroom Classic, including white balance and the color to b&w conversion. They were then exported as JPEG. The composite image was created using Photoshop 2025. I decided to do the color to b&w conversion to simplify what I wanted to see, the primary qualities of light.

Things I think are worth thinking about: modeling of the shadow of the nose on the cheek, contrast, shape and edge quality (umbra and penumbra) of the shadow on the background.

--
Ellis Vener
To see my work, please visit http://www.ellisvener.com
I am on Instagram @EllisVenerStudio
“It's not about the f-stop." -Jay Maisel

 

[jonby]

Thanks for this helpful and useful test series.

Shot #7 appears to be very similar to #6 - are you sure #7 is the correct image? I would only expect anything similar to this if the diffusers were removed from the soft box.

It is helpful to see the relative exposure from each set up, but this does make it a bit harder to compare light quality. It would also be useful to have a set where the power level was adjusted for consistent exposure at the subject, as this would reflect real-world usage. But this would take more time, which I'm sure you don't have!

Lastly, would be helpful to know about reflective surfaces out of shot - distance and colour of walls/ceilings, as bounced light could have an effect.

 

[Harvey M43]

I'm surprised your small shallow, silver lined Plume 75 transmitted so little light. My small shallow, silver lined Chimera is one of my more efficient light modifiers.

 

[Ellis Vener]

That surprised me too.



which flash units are you using?

 

[Harvey M43]

Godox AD200 or their speedlight (TT685). My most efficient modifier, the Paul C. Buff PLM 64" extreme silver gives 1 stop more undiffused, and 1 stop less with diffusion sock.

 

[Ellis Vener]

Thanks for this helpful and useful test series.

Shot #7 appears to be very similar to #6 - are you sure #7 is the correct image? I would only expect anything similar to this if the diffusers were removed from the soft box.

It is helpful to see the relative exposure from each set up, but this does make it a bit harder to compare light quality. It would also be useful to have a set where the power level was adjusted for consistent exposure at the subject, as this would reflect real-world usage. But this would take more time, which I'm sure you don't have!

Lastly, would be helpful to know about reflective surfaces out of shot - distance and colour of walls/ceilings, as bounced light could have an effect.

Thanks for catching that, that was a stupid mistake.

I am rerunning the tests today and will repost either later today/tonight or tomorrow as a new thread.

This is the set up

--
Ellis Vener
To see my work, please visit http://www.ellisvener.com
I am on Instagram @EllisVenerStudio
“It's not about the f-stop." -Jay Maisel

 

[jonby]

Thanks for this helpful and useful test series.

Shot #7 appears to be very similar to #6 - are you sure #7 is the correct image? I would only expect anything similar to this if the diffusers were removed from the soft box.

It is helpful to see the relative exposure from each set up, but this does make it a bit harder to compare light quality. It would also be useful to have a set where the power level was adjusted for consistent exposure at the subject, as this would reflect real-world usage. But this would take more time, which I'm sure you don't have!

Lastly, would be helpful to know about reflective surfaces out of shot - distance and colour of walls/ceilings, as bounced light could have an effect.

Thanks for catching that, that was a stupid mistake.

I am rerunning the tests today and will repost either later today/tonight or tomorrow as a new thread.

Thank so much - very kind of you to re-run the tests.

Great to see your setup. I expect the light ceiling and floor to have some effect on the contrast in some of the shots (as it often would in the real world) - we shall see!

 

[Ellis Vener]

Thanks for this helpful and useful test series.

Shot #7 appears to be very similar to #6 - are you sure #7 is the correct image? I would only expect anything similar to this if the diffusers were removed from the soft box.

It is helpful to see the relative exposure from each set up, but this does make it a bit harder to compare light quality. It would also be useful to have a set where the power level was adjusted for consistent exposure at the subject, as this would reflect real-world usage. But this would take more time, which I'm sure you don't have!

Lastly, would be helpful to know about reflective surfaces out of shot - distance and colour of walls/ceilings, as bounced light could have an effect.

Thanks for catching that, that was a stupid mistake.

I am rerunning the tests today and will repost either later today/tonight or tomorrow as a new thread.

Thank so much - very kind of you to re-run the tests.

Great to see your setup. I expect the light ceiling and floor to have some effect on the contrast in some of the shots (as it often would in the real world) - we shall see!

I thought about using a black or medium gray butterfly above the set, but then I would not have been able to conduct a bounce light test, which will be part of todays testing.

 

[Ellis Vener]

Godox AD200 or their speedlight (TT685). My most efficient modifier, the Paul C. Buff PLM 64" extreme silver gives 1 stop more undiffused, and 1 stop less with diffusion sock.

That’s good to know Harvey M43. The primary factor I’m looking at is quality of light with smaller, easy to transport modifiers. . Large modifiers like your 64-inch Silver PLM or my 72” inch PLMs, or my Elinchrom inverse Octa are a different kettle of fish.

 

[Ellis Vener]

Here's the link to that thread: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/68172044

 

[Bogie 1]

...with Nikkor Z MC 105mm

Hi Ellis,

How do you like the Z MC 105mm for portraiture? The longest lens I have is the Z 85mm S and I was wondering about the 105mm macro- for headshots. I don't do macro photography.

Thanks,

Joe

 

[Ellis Vener]

I like it. good sharpness and bokeh.

 

[Bogie 1]

I like it. good sharpness and bokeh.

Thank you.