Jump to content

Why the heck do grids ruin light quality?


FHDcrew
 Share

Recommended Posts

I really enjoy my 47" parabolic softbox, but I've not used the honeycomb grid for most projects.  While I love that it reduces light spill greatly, it also creates undesirable hot spots that seem to ruin the ultra-soft quality of light.  Is this normal, and is there a way to prevent the hot spots while using the grid?  This is a shot of me on a Nikon Z6 shooting NLOG to the Ninja V, with a Tamron 45mm 1.8.

Here is a shot with the grid:

706900819_ScreenShot2022-12-30at10_11_55AM.thumb.png.f0f01a0f0cd235bba7a5218ab2a0171b.png

 

Here is a similar shot but without the grid:

422224983_ScreenShot2022-12-30at10_12_05AM.thumb.png.bbe24f0cfdd221115f2d09aa0cab7d38.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EOSHD Pro Color 5 for Sony cameras EOSHD Z LOG for Nikon CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

I wouldn’t say they ruin the quality of the  light but they do indeed change the characteristics a bit. Consider this - when you’re looking into the source from a slight angle there will be less surface area visible witch leads to a “harder” feel of the light hitting your subject. Not always bad though, and I don’t see any hotspots (except what to expect from an harder light) only slightly more defined shadow areas. This is where makeup can help a lot of you want a look that’s a bit more punchy but stay out of trouble with shiny areas.

 

So - consider it’s a tool to both reduce spill in a quick and easy way with the slight change in characteristics and then use the knowledge to create the moods you’re aiming for. And like PPNS says - if you want to keep the softness use good old cutters and flags. Happy new year!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe it's just me and my background as a doc guy, but you're being incredibly particular there as the two shots are pretty similar.  Your shadows are only slightly more defined from one to the next.

If you're looking to be a wildly accomplished and precise gaffer and you are OCD by nature, I suppose you could be this discriminating, but even then?  Debatable.  In fact, it might be a liability on set, depending on the production you're doing. 

Personally, if I had crew fretting about lighting issues and THIS was the thing they were worried about, I'd be, like, yeah, I'm not going to be able to work with anyone that precious ... I don't know ... ain't too many narratives I've ever done wherein I'd be upset about this technical result if t was the look I wanted.

I'd be much more worried about the storytelling, the acting.  Heck, even the craft services table (seriously, gotta keep the crew happy) than this lighting difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fuzzynormal said:

Maybe it's just me and my background as a doc guy, but you're being incredibly particular there as the two shots are pretty similar.  Your shadows are only slightly more defined from one to the next.

If you're looking to be a wildly accomplished and precise gaffer and you are OCD by nature, I suppose you could be this discriminating, but even then?  Debatable.  In fact, it might be a liability on set, depending on the production you're doing. 

Personally, if I had crew fretting about lighting issues and THIS was the thing they were worried about, I'd be, like, yeah, I'm not going to be able to work with anyone that precious ... I don't know ... ain't too many narratives I've ever done wherein I'd be upset about this technical result if t was the look I wanted.

I'd be much more worried about the storytelling, the acting.  Heck, even the craft services table (seriously, gotta keep the crew happy) than this lighting difference.

Thanks for the reality check that was honestly good to hear 😂 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, fuzzynormal said:

Maybe it's just me and my background as a doc guy, but you're being incredibly particular there as the two shots are pretty similar.  Your shadows are only slightly more defined from one to the next.

If you're looking to be a wildly accomplished and precise gaffer and you are OCD by nature, I suppose you could be this discriminating, but even then?  Debatable.  In fact, it might be a liability on set, depending on the production you're doing. 

Personally, if I had crew fretting about lighting issues and THIS was the thing they were worried about, I'd be, like, yeah, I'm not going to be able to work with anyone that precious ... I don't know ... ain't too many narratives I've ever done wherein I'd be upset about this technical result if t was the look I wanted.

I'd be much more worried about the storytelling, the acting.  Heck, even the craft services table (seriously, gotta keep the crew happy) than this lighting difference.

Agreed. I got lost in the details on my first set as DoP. The director set me straight really quick and things were better for it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • EOSHD Pro Color 5 for All Sony cameras
    EOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
    EOSHD Dynamic Range Enhancer for H.264/H.265
×
×
  • Create New...