I'm thinking for a swath of light that covers the full body, head to foot, it might be more cost effective to run an open face light through diffusion, a frame on a c stand. Would the main drawback to that be loss of control? The set is just a white cyc so maybe I can get away with it.

Hey DJ, I have shot lots of bride preps with a Lowel Rifa (the 500 watt version) and had a lot of success with it. The thing I like most about it is that it sets up (and breaks down) in seconds and in weddings this is essential. It fits on a small light stand or can be hung using many kinds of grip clamps, etc . . . I have also shot lots of interviews with it and while it is somewhat small (24x24 I think) it still works pretty well. It is a great travel softbox.

The fotodiox one you mentioned looks like a pain and too fragile to me to lug around for weddings. Especially if you have an assistant breaking it down for you. I can just imagine breaking a couple CFLs in the bridal suite at the Ritz and everything comes to a screeching halt while housekeeping is summoned to remove the mercury contaminated mess left by the videographer. I have seen way to many high maintenance brides for that. :)

The flolight LED is another option you could consider. You can even run if off a battery. Although you will need some diffusion if you point it directly at the subject.

Bradley,

I have thought about the fragility of the cfl's. I am going to either find or DIY a case with foam holes to transport them in.

I had forgotten about the whole mercury thing though. Yikes! You brought nightmare visions to mind.

I really like the idea of the cool light the CFL's put out. I plan on using the 16 bulb fotodiox as the key light then two four bulb fixtures by another mfg. as the fill and back lights. Those two fixtures come with 55 watt cfl bulbs so put out about 800 watts of light with those bulbs. They have a larger 32" x 40" softbox. I would probably replace the 55 watt bulbs in the one used for the backlight with some 23 watt ones.