Tutorial LED lights or flash?

[Garry Edwards]

Garry Edwards submitted a new resource:

LED lights or flash? - Which type of lights should we use for still photography?

This a question that often gets asked in the Lighting Forum here and the experienced members always advise against using LED lighting for almost all types of still photography. There are good reasons for this advice, but the nature of forums means that answers tend to be both brief and constantly repeated, so I thought it might be a good idea to make the information more complete so that people can refer to it when they want to. So, we advise people to use flash and to avoid all forms of...

Read more about this resource...

 

[learningtofly]

Very informative article, thanks, and I wouldn't even be capable of arguing against any of the techical points that you make. That said, I did invest a while back in some LED lights - two Nanlite Forza 60s and one Godox VL150 - as I wanted to experiment with them.

I won't waste time listing the specs as you've already demonstrated that it's of debatable value but suffice it to say that both models produce an incredible amount of light in relative terms and are far less heavy than studio flash heads. In fact, the Nanlites literally fit into the palm of my hand and weigh next to nothing so hand-holding them if I want to is a piece of cake. All take the full range of (Bowens) modifiers too, the Godox direct and the Nanlites via an adapter (or alternatively they'll take their own range of modifiers with a mini Bowens-type fitting).

I did actually post the two shots below elsewhere, but thought it might be of interest in demonstrating that these LEDs are quite capable of producing really good results in a still-life set up. The first shot was taken with just the two 60W Nanlites, details as follows:

Camera: Sony a7RII
Lens: FE 90mm F2.8 Macro
Aperture: f/6.3
Shutter speed:1/60
ISO: 400

This next one was taken after I'd added the Godox (150W) as I didn't feel that the two 60 watters were giving me the amount of light I wanted. Again, details as follows:

Camera: Sony a7RII
Lens: FE 90mm F2.8 Macro
Aperture: f/13
Shutter speed:1/250
ISO: 100

All in all I think the results are pretty good, especially with the third light which obviously gives a bit more leeway in terms of shutter speed and aperture. I suspect that limitations would be felt fairly quickly once the lights were moved further away from the subject, though; far more so than with flash, anyway. Notwithstanding this, the huge advantage for me is in respect of size, weight and maneuverability, and for table-top photography I'd argue that these advantages over flash make them well worth considering.

 

[Garry Edwards]

Thanks for your constructive comments, and you've made some good points.
All that I can say in my defence is that the article could have been 100 times longer and far more comprehensive, and I didn't attempt to cover specialist subjects like these watches, which are shot as close-ups, with the lighting far closer than is either normal or practicable than for either larger products or people. And it probably doesn't matter at all (especially in the second shot) that the reds may be a bit off.

 

[learningtofly]

Thanks for your constructive comments, and you've made some good points.
All that I can say in my defence is that the article could have been 100 times longer and far more comprehensive, and I didn't attempt to cover specialist subjects like these watches, which are shot as close-ups, with the lighting far closer than is either normal or practicable than for either larger products or people. And it probably doesn't matter at all (especially in the second shot) that the reds may be a bit off.

Yes, all good points and accepted. I don't think that the reds aren't off, though - the watch (in the second photo) is about 35 years old and the various elements have aged/patinated in different ways (and are consequently displaying various shades of red bordering on orange).

I should also have added that the lights stay very cool, and are near-silent even with the fans on.

 

[riddell]

The huge advantage for me is in respect of size, weight and maneuverability, and for table-top photography I'd argue that these advantages over flash make them well worth considering.

Why does size and weight matter? If your table top is in a studio then you setup, adjust and change as needed. Size and weight have very little meaning here.
And if you are transporting to shoot on site, then you are rarely carrying your kit for very long. I wouldn't compromise on image quality for just 5 minutes of comfort carrying them from the car to the location.

And don't want to critique your images, but I would say that it instantly jumps out at me that improvements to the images could be made with the use of studio flash.
[If you want me to retract this line, as its close to unasked critiquing I will, but I think it stands well in the context of the discussion]

 

[learningtofly]

Why does size and weight matter? If your table top is in a studio then you setup, adjust and change as needed. Size and weight have very little meaning here.
And if you are transporting to shoot on site, then you are rarely carrying your kit for very long. I wouldn't compromise on image quality for just 5 minutes of comfort carrying them from the car to the location.

And don't want to critique your images, but I would say that it instantly jumps out at me that improvements to the images could be made with the use of studio flash.
[If you want me to retract this line, as its close to unasked critiquing I will, but I think it stands well in the context of the discussion]

No need to retract any comments although you're correct in that I'm not asking for a critique of the shots. I was merely offering an alternative view of LED lighting for tabletop photography. As for the advantages I mentioned, though, please don't speak for me. I work in very confined spaces and if I use the lights elsewhere I don't want to be lugging much bigger and much heavier lights around with me. You may not see an advantage in that, but I'm sure there are others who will.

Finally, and in a general sense, I'm in no way suggesting that the quality or output of LED lights is comparable to decent studio flash; it isn't. I'm merely saying that in some circumstances, and for some people, it can be a viable alternative.

Edited to add: These shots were relatively experimental. I expect they'll get better after I've used the lights a few times.

 

[riddell]

I work in very confined spaces

Again for me, that's another compromise.
I've worked in some very small locations before, shooting tabletop and yes I had to compromise, but I've been forced to compromise on using a smallwe softbox or bouncing a light off a wall or something. I've never thought 'I wish my lights were smaller'

 

[learningtofly]

Again for me, that's another compromise.
I've worked in some very small locations before, shooting tabletop and yes I had to compromise, but I've been forced to compromise on using a smallwe softbox or bouncing a light off a wall or something. I've never thought 'I wish my lights were smaller'

Horses for courses, innit

 

[learningtofly]

Just to add, for anyone who'd like easy access to both options there are flash heads that don't cost a lot yet come with decent power in respect of combined flash and LED. For example, Interfit's Honey Badger boasts a flash output of 320Ws and LED (via the modeling light) of 60W. Two heads with 60x60 pop-up softboxes can be had for £440 before any available discounts which is a pretty cost effective way to get into both types of lighting at once.

@Garry Edwards, I know that Godox make at least one hybrid light, but is there currently any intention for Lencarta to go down that route?

 

[riddell]

there are flash heads that don't cost a lot yet come with decent power in respect of combined flash and LED.

The modelling light doesn't contribute to the 'power' or 'brightness'
In fact you'll not notice a difference if you turn the modelling lights on or off.

Generally*

Modelling lights do have a lot of use though, they are there so you have a basic preview as to the shape of the light, and can be invaluable in dark situations to help focus, or even just to light the room up to work in.

*I say generally, because there are a few situations where the modelling light would make a difference, though its still not contributing to the overall 'power'
Long exposures for example where the modelling light will continue to light well after the flash has ceased.
Or with a situation with multiple flash heads where most of the lights are perhaps restricted down with snoots, gobos, flags but one light is being used perhaps with a beauty dish, with the flash set very low, but the modelling light right up. If the head is being pointed into one of the deliberately darker areas, then modelling light may contribute a bit.

So why is this? Look at the difference. Flash is quoted as Ws (Watt seconds) and light bulbs simply as watts.

 

[Garry Edwards]

I know that Lencarta sells a Godox Hybrid light, https://www.lencarta.com/godox-fv200-200w-high-speed-sync-flash-continuous-led-light but because of the current pandemic situation I haven't tried it out yet, or even seen it, and I haven't discussed it with them.

I do see very useful benefits for this type of product, although they're maybe a bit niche. For example, I used to produce tutorials on lighting, and of course I lit the actual subject with flash and the overall scene with LED lights, which were essential for the video production. But of course, although the flashes used to light the products also had modelling lamps their relatively low power meant that the effect couldn't be seen in the video, so the lighting effect on the subject, as shown in the video, is completely different to the lighting effect in the actual shots. Using these new hybrid lights will should be a big help with this.

There is, I suppose, also a benefit in terms of WYSIWYG, effectively using the very bright LED light as extremely bright modelling lamps. Normal modelling lamps can never be bright enough to give a true indication of the effect of the flash, unless the shooting environment is totally unlit - light pollution from other light sources doesn't usually stop the modelling lamps from giving an indication of where the light and shadows will fall, but the visual effect is diluted. Experienced photographers allow for this, so it isn't a problem, and all digital photographers can make the problem go away simply by chomping. And anyway, we don't want to dazzle our poor living subjects by pointing LED lights at them.

 

[learningtofly]

The modelling light doesn't contribute to the 'power' or 'brightness'
In fact you'll not notice a difference if you turn the modelling lights on or off.

Generally*

Modelling lights do have a lot of use though, they are there so you have a basic preview as to the shape of the light, and can be invaluable in dark situations to help focus, or even just to light the room up to work in.

*I say generally, because there are a few situations where the modelling light would make a difference, though its still not contributing to the overall 'power'
Long exposures for example where the modelling light will continue to light well after the flash has ceased.
Or with a situation with multiple flash heads where most of the lights are perhaps restricted down with snoots, gobos, flags but one light is being used perhaps with a beauty dish, with the flash set very low, but the modelling light right up. If the head is being pointed into one of the deliberately darker areas, then modelling light may contribute a bit.

So why is this? Look at the difference. Flash is quoted as Ws (Watt seconds) and light bulbs simply as watts.

I think you misunderstood the point I was making in my post. I was talking about using it as a hybrid light, i.e. either flash OR LED. I appreciate the explanation regarding modeling lights, but I'm actually well used to shooting with studio flash heads so understand how they work (albeit that the clarification might be useful for others).

 

[learningtofly]

I know that Lencarta sells a Godox Hybrid light, https://www.lencarta.com/godox-fv200-200w-high-speed-sync-flash-continuous-led-light but because of the current pandemic situation I haven't tried it out yet, or even seen it, and I haven't discussed it with them.

I do see very useful benefits for this type of product, although they're maybe a bit niche. For example, I used to produce tutorials on lighting, and of course I lit the actual subject with flash and the overall scene with LED lights, which were essential for the video production. But of course, although the flashes used to light the products also had modelling lamps their relatively low power meant that the effect couldn't be seen in the video, so the lighting effect on the subject, as shown in the video, is completely different to the lighting effect in the actual shots. Using these new hybrid lights will should be a big help with this.

There is, I suppose, also a benefit in terms of WYSIWYG, effectively using the very bright LED light as extremely bright modelling lamps. Normal modelling lamps can never be bright enough to give a true indication of the effect of the flash, unless the shooting environment is totally unlit - light pollution from other light sources doesn't usually stop the modelling lamps from giving an indication of where the light and shadows will fall, but the visual effect is diluted. Experienced photographers allow for this, so it isn't a problem, and all digital photographers can make the problem go away simply by chomping. And anyway, we don't want to dazzle our poor living subjects by pointing LED lights at them.

Thanks for your thoughts, Garry, much appreciated.