|
LED obsession - Indie kit?
Thought I'd start a new discussion so as not to detract from the Z96 LED light thread.
My Pro 160-LED should arrive next week and I'm going to order the Z96 soon. I'd like to build a kit that could be totally battery powered and really portable. I am posting links to various lights that look interesting and I'd like some feedback if you have any thoughts / experience with these lights. We know about Coollights - great quality, limited availability. Now the 900 LED version of that light is out: Then there is this light that looks powerful, but who can tell? Then I just found these - 10W & 12W respectively: Two Comer 1800 videos: 3 point lighting with three 1800s: YouTube - 3-Point Lighting Setup using 3 Comer CM-LBPS1800 lights A single 1800 lighting a stage: YouTube - Using Comer CM-LBPS1800 LED Light On Stage And finally to add the Home Depot element - the 2;20 mark get interesting: YouTube - Stanley 35w HID Spotlight in action |
Forgot to add this groovy ring light:
|
I like the idea of this thread.
For outside daylight interviews we currently run 2 Flolight 256 LEDS, but i would have to have something like the: For the odd studio / night shoot we do. |
The 35W HID looked interesting from the point of view of a really horrible, splotchy almost parallel beam.
As far as I can tell, so far LED technology is still lacking in beam quality. Brightness is creeping up gradually, but this brings problems in itself. If you have a twenty year old Redhead or Arri 1K Fresnel, you can buy a new one and they match quite well with the old one - so if you damage one of the ones you use to light your greenscreen, you can buy another. If you buy two or four LEDs to wash your new greenscreen, and one dies, the chances are you will need to buy multiples to ensure the replacements all match. Even identical models, bought a few months apart exhibit differences because the manufacturers buy the LEDs in batches, and each batch is slightly different. The things produce very uneven light, and although with a bit of diffuser on the front they're much better - they are still quite random in nature. Look at the traditional tungsten kit - all the manufacturers provide proper photometric data. LED manufacturers don't. Maybe the odd brightness figure but in general, they're very keen on power consumption of the LEDs - so many 10W LEDs or more 3 W LEDs. What does the beam look like? No idea. Will it look the same as a Tungsten fixture? No. You can dim a tungsten lamp, all that happens is the colour temp drops. LEDs that do have DMX control start to get flickery, so look even worse. All these new bits of kit are quite interesting, and the heat reduction alone is good reason to buy some - but the beam quality as an illumination source is not really up to it. (Yet). It's interesting to note that in the entertainment industry, LED is working really well - not so much as illumination tools, but as interesting things to look at. However, when they want to throw even light onto a large white cyc - people moan about the evenness. In pubs and clubs, however, they're great for throwing colour onto a stage. |
Hey Paul,
So you're saying I should buy them all ;) Sorry, I couldn't resist. Each of your points are real concerns that we should be thinking about. I had not considered color matching down the road. I'm still going to pick up some inexpensive lights to mess with; I can't help myself. You're right about that HID - it is ugly, but would look great as searchlight. |
This is new... and interesting. 3000 lumens.
He's using this panel here that I've been seeing: |
Led light CN-160 L.A. Color Shop
I got my CN-160 in the mail yesterday from L.A. Color Shop
Tried all of my Sony batteries. The only one that fits is the NP-F750 ! ...it's loose fitting and I have to put a piece of plastic wedge in the case to keep it on. Poor design...dont think I could trust it working on a shoot. Guess I will have to use the AA batteries..havent tried them yet. Jeff |
Jeff,
Bummer about the battery fit. My 160 should be here any day now. I'll check it out and let you guys know. |
I think one of the big problems with LED lighting in the present state is that unlike our older tools, LED lighting has somewhat vague specifications - so it's really difficult to make sense of X number of Lux, or Lumens, or Footcandles - and nobody really has yet come up with a system for assessing lighting fixtures that have multiple individual sources. This is especially true when some fixtures handle brightness by selective switching of individual circuits of LEDs - so as they get dimmer, the field gets worse. If on the other hand you start to dim LEDs, then the darn things flicker.
With proper optics, measurement is far easier, because the quality of the light is taken for granted. We're only interested in condensing or spreading it, or maybe diffusing it, or even chopping bits of it out. With LEDs, the individual sources don't have any verifiable standard. Ok - a fixture might have a certain amount of White (or coloured) 3W LEDs - but rarely are we treated to any info on these. 3W power consumption? Presumably. How much output, over what individual angle? My (admittedly limited) experience is that a single led does not have a symetrical light distribution, it's rather ragged, with a few visible darker areas and maybe a highlight or two - but an identical one has these defects in different orientations - so making a fixture from a cluster is rather a random product. The other thing is that they have very long lifespans, measured by MTBF - but in a quick check recently, out of 12 fixtures, each one with 150 odd LEDs, there were two individual elements missing. I'm positive LEDs will become the best tool - I'm not sure they're quite there yet. The Chinese seem to simply be building them as a piece of electronics, easy for them - and to be honest, I suspect that making one could be a DIY kit for anyone who could solder competently - and what have we got? $400 pieces of kit in a $10 case, using maybe $50 worth of electronics? No complex, expensive optics, not problems with heat constraints - simply a power supply, a bag of cheap bits and a box! Look at cheap childrens LED toys, Christmas Trees - rubbish like that. It costs small change to make - and these things we see on ebay are really very overpriced for the content. A 3W LED can be sourced for pennies! |
Paul,
I appreciate the time you have put into your well thought out and reasoned opposition to the current state of LED lights. This was / is not a debate of the pros and cons of LEDs. I was merely interested in people's experience with the current lights on the market. I agree that LEDs have a ways to go. However, that is another conversation entirely. Anyone else have actual experience with these any of these lights? |
It now looks as if the 1200 LED light is being sold:
On a side note, I got my Pro 160-LED on Friday. I'll echo what everyone has said, it is light, flimsy and of dubious quality, but it does put out some light. I'll post a side by side comparison with my Z96 when it arrives, hopefully, this week. |
Need a standard test for comparison
The problem with many products from Asia, and it seems particularly from China, maybe because they export so much, is that they start off by filling a void and they're constructed of what ever materials there are. This happened back in the days of sailboats in Taiwan in the 1970s and now it is China with the LED lights discussed in our forum. They look good in pictures but when you finally get to touch one it is a little less than what you had hoped for.
What is needed is some testing, and since no test lab has stepped forward to do it, maybe it could be done with individuals. For example: 1. Light pattern. Lay out a standard grid on a white wall, use push-pins and dark string or thread, mark off a grid, say 1-ft for the USA or 1-meter for the rest of the world, set up the light on a stand at a certain distance from the wall, then take a picture of the pattern. Submit the picture of the test setup and light pattern to the forum which could make these available for viewing by the cast of thousands. 2. Provide a discussion of the construction of the light fixture, kind of materials, quality of construction, functionality, etc. 3. Light output: color, quantity - now this would be harder - open for discussion. Unless the tests use the same measuring instruments or meters it would be just order of magnitude. |
CN-160 v Z96
Quote:
|
Quote:
Mind you manufacturers have ZERO interest in demystifying light output and making it possible to compare apples to apples. |
Interesting concept Mark but it won't give you anything but a comparison between fixtures tested, no usefull photometrics. What your suggesting is essentially an anechoic chamber for light, the desire is to only record the original light source without any influence from reflected or incident light on the readings, an 8' wide painted box just ain't gonna do this for you. You would still get a good comparrison between fixtures because the testing environment is repeatable and controllable but it will not provide any data to compare with anyone elses data for comparisons outside your environment. If you look at the Creamsource website they have a similar LED testing method showing the results as a fun tool to view certain fixture side by side.
If you want to ramp up your idea add 45degree angled slats along your trailer walls angled back towards the source to kill most of the incident reflections. Looking forward to your results. |
I'm curious if anyone's tried the ePhoto lights that were referred to on Amazon. $229 for the 500LED seems like a good deal.
|
Grip-LED light by DZP Video
1 Attachment(s)
This is the light that I am selling. Here it is on ebay....
|
Quote:
LED lights are, by far, the most efficient in terms of illumination per watt cost. The are also, by far, the MOST difficult to work with - at least for someone who understands and practices quality lighting for video. LED lights are essentially a dense row of spotlights. As such they put out what appears to be a relatively constrained, relatively flat field of light in a single direction. That light, once it hits any object or surface works like any other light - spreading and diffusing while simultaneously losing power. Unfiltered they have nice "reach." HOWEVER unlike traditionally designed instruments (e.g. tungsten) the beam shape and spread is TOTALLY different. You can't CUT a beam from an LED source like you can from a traditional open face or fresnel fixture. You cannot get a clean line and therefore control spill and spread. Barn door a LED fixture and you get STRIPES of light. Worthless unless you're attempting to do a window blind special effect. Also, the color output of today's LEDs are NOT well balanced. You often need to color correct the output if you're in mixed lighting circumstances. (Most of them skew noticeably GREEN) For me, this puts them squarely into the category of SPECIAL USE lights. For what they do - they are very much superior to any other technology. For the areas where they do POORLY - they are a very poor substitute for other instruments. I don't know a single pro who I would call on for professional lighting at a high quality level who depends exclusively on LED lights. Again, that doesn't mean they aren't good lights. If ALL I aspired to was mediocrely lit one person or two person interviews - and valued portability above all else - than an all LED kit might make moderately good sense. But as a working pro - there's just WAY too much that LED fixtures can't do that I find NECESSARY to my practice. That same statement, BTW would be just as true about an ALL HMI kit - an ALL fluorescent kit - or any other kit that dismisses all the options that make truly great lighting possible. It would be as silly as a guitar player that ONLY owns one single guitar. What a Stratocaster is superb for is well and good. But if you need to play something classical - it's about the WORST tool you could reach for. Owning and all LED kit is to me, about the same as someone who aspires to become a quality guitar player owning only a DROBRO guitar. It's just too limited. YMMV. |
Sigh,
Where to start. (Please understand I'm NOT trying to be hyper-critical here - it's just that with so many people buying lights and trying so hard to teach themselves - without ever going through any sort of true training or apprenticeship programs - it stands to reason that many will look at a picture like the one posted here and never even know what a professional eye would look for and try to correct. In that spirit, I'll point out a few obvious (to me at least) flaws in the lighting of this picture. I'm NOT saying it's incompetent OR even poorly executed. I'm saying that there are areas where it does NOT meet my individual standards for portrait lighting. Those standards are debatable. Judge for yourselves whether or not my comments are worthy - AND ask yourself whether some of these issues MIGHT be the result of the TYPE of lights being used.) Initially, the whole pictures looks unacceptably FLAT to my eye. The background has little depth and interest. Clearly it's a hung purchased background - which is fine - but it LOOKS like a hung purchased background. That to me is a very poor choice. In the hands of a pro - a background such as this can subtly suggest texture and depth. This shot's background has neither. Moving on to the subjects. What's with the ball cap shadow on the kid? Yes, ball cap shadows are natural and often unavoidable - but would it have killed anyone to lower the light so the shadow didn't cut the kids eye socket in half! Kids generally have BEAUTIFUL eyes clear and often unnaturally colorful. This kids eyes are set deep and don't POP at all. This is exactly why pros carry the odd 150 fresnel. Perfect chance to make the kid look GREAT - rather than just "there." On to the woman. Two MAJOR issues for me. Look at her lips. You'd NEVER get that upper lip thing that looks like a white virus if you used a true soft source. (not to mention the larger version on her lower lip) You've GOT to pay attention to shiny places - and lip gloss is SHINY! I'll bet this is one LED that's reflecting directly back from her lip to the camera lens. NOT flattering. And then there's the ORANGE backlight. There's a place of this kind of thing - but PLEASE - NOT on the fleshiest part of the poor woman's arm. This simply makes her look OVERWEIGHT. Same unfortunate things about the FACIAL highlight. It hits her right on the fleshiest part of her cheek. It DRAGS your eye to the very area that many women are sensitive about. Now imagine that someone took a moment to re-set the lighting plot so that the face and arm fell into shadow in the very places where this rim light POPS the shape out. THAT would be like slimming makeup applied to the shape of her arm and face. Same story with her hips. How hard would it have been to tuck her dress in on the key light side to provide a slimmer shape to her lower body? Or, again, with REAL lighting control, to leave her hips in shadow to keep the audience focused on her attractive face and figure. Lighting tools are just that. TOOLS. Buying tools is the BEGINNING. Learning to use them properly is the lifelong challenge. And if you buy only hammers - OR only saws - you're going to have a tough time building a wide variety of projects. And you have to look beyond the overall "is this scene lit OK" standard. To learn to see the details like those I've mentioned above and see if there's a fast and affordable way to make things even better. AND, (and this is the most critical point in this thread) when you learn that a type of fixture is making it hard to fix something you don't like (e.g. the glowing lip sore) you need to be FLEXIBLE enough in your thinking to consider CHANGING from using LEDs as un-difused frontal keylights on models with lots of lip gloss. Again, this lighting is NOT incompetent or terrible. It's just limited in it's effectiveness in making the subjects look not just OK - but GREAT. And I see a LOT of lighting like this today. It's lighting by folks who know their limited equipment's strengths and how those can be used to mimic the 3 point lighting paradigm - but who haven't learned to look deeply at the scenes and analyze the small stuff that pushes lighting from OK to Great. It's in that spirit that I'm being critical. So that everyone can better understand what to look for when assessing a picture AND the equipment used to make it. Peace. End of story. |
Lots of new choices
Quote:
I bought two 500 LED panels from ephotodiscounter. I measured color temp with a calibrated color meter. It was way high. 7,000 plus. I measured the light output with a Sekonic 758 Cine - both spot and incident. I got 60 fc at 5 feet. That's pretty close to the Lishuai panel (Cool light's testing) and slightly less than the Cool Lights 256 Spot (5600) which is 74fc at 5 feet. Speaking of the Cool Lights 256 spot, I bought two "barely used" off of Ebay. They really were brand-spanking like new. Measured color temp at 8,000 and 9,000K!!!! Called Cool Lights. They said that was well outside of their tolerance (which makes me wonder what their tolerance really is). I returned them to the seller and suggested that he get a warranty replacement, as they were purchased last April. Also, barn doors are worthless on LED panels. As soon as you start to pinch them, you get patterns developing due to the multiple light emitters. Probably true of most LED panels, not just Cool lights I have also found what appears to be the direct source for the Cool Lights 256 (albeit there is no cool bag) Wholesale LED camera light A bit less, especially in bulk. Here is what looks to be the Cool Lights 600: Wholesale LED camera light I also found that new 1200 model that was mentioned earlier in the thread. Photometrics seem nice. Question to me is color temp. Here is another 1200 model. It is made by Taiyang, which is most likely the Cool Lights manufacturer (as they also have a 150 HID model that even has Cool lights in the name of the model here: 150W Coolightspotlight for professional ? 150W Coolightspotlight for professional photography,small studio . My guess is that Cool Lights will soon officially announce a 1200 LED model. led camera light studio lighting equipment TY ? led camera light --studio lighting equipment TY-LED1200 In fact, here is the Taiyang web site. Its in Mandarin, but you can see the pix. Pretty much right down the Cool Lights product line: 提词器,LED冷光灯 - 郑州泰阳声光电设备工程有限公司 Here is the new Comer LED model: studio light CM-LED5500K - Detailed info for studio light CM-LED5500K,studio light,studio light CM-LED5500K,CM-LED5500K/R on Alibaba.com I have tracked down the Bi-color models that appear to be the same or almost the same as the new Litepanel bi-color models They are made by this company, which was at NAB, so its no secret: 2010 NAB Show: Beijing Feiyashi Technology Development Co., Ltd: Profile Here is a link that has a pair of them mounted together: Google Image Result for http://img.tradeindia.com/tradeleads/1/2356256.jpg Search on your own. Just plug the model # (300 X 600 Bi-Color LED) into google. There is probably a way to buy these bi-color (or any of these models noted above) direct from China and save hundreds if not thousands (A group buy, peerhaps)? Finally, has anybody bought and tested any of these? If you have one and want it tested, I am in the Wash DC area. I have meters and would love to test yours. Thanks, Mike |
Quote:
Also, have you thought about adding a dimming feature, or a way to connect 4 of your units together? Thanks |
Cool Lights manufactures its own products in China and those particular products are not available anywhere else. We have no affiliation with "Taiyang" whatsoever. Please do not mislead people into thinking they are buying Cool Lights products "direct" from somewhere else in China. Its not particularly hard for someone to use "cool lights", "coollights", etc. in their webpages to improve their chances of hits with search terms. In other words, they're simply "spamming" on our hard earned position in both brand and search. Nothing new in that, certain eBay sellers have been doing that since they started and we've had that issue for 4 years now. You can see "cool lights" terms all over video/film lighting on ebay even though we sell absolutely nothing on eBay.
|
Quote:
Certainly LED instruments bring new challenges but they also bring new opportunities. Surely a good craftsman finds a way to deal with the challenges and welcomes the opportunites to solve problems that were previously unsolvable. The core issue is not the tool used but having the critical eye to see the problem and address it....or not. Resources today are limited by time and budget. The lower cost and ease of use of LED instruments should make better lighting easier to achieve not harder. No longer is heat, power consumption and weight a significant factor holding us back from creating great lighting. Of course as you rightly alluded to, if you don't see the problem then you'll never even think about trying to fix it. Directly addressing your comment about using undiffused LEDs as frontal keylights I haven't had a problem adding diffusion to LED lights. One of my LED lights includes quite functional barn doors and does not cast multiple shadows. I can use a wide range of tools to control the light from LED light sources and do so very easily because there is no heat to deal with. BluTack, gaffe tape, paper, aluminium foil, anything at hand can be safely used. I can pull another LED light out of the kit bag and add another light to the scene in seconds, no need to worry about finding power for it, batteries are included :) I can use cheap mic boom stands to hold it or put it on the camera's cold shoe. My apologies to the OP for adding further to the drift in this thread. |
Not sure there's much wrong with drift if it's drift in a direction you wish to go...
That said, for those following the thread - let me delve just a bit further into the issue. One of my criticisms was for the way the light in the exemplar still caused an unflattering highlight on the models' lip. Everyone probably looked at it and said - yeah, that doesn't look very nice, now that you mention it. So the next step is to UNDERSTAND how to make it go away. Someone here has mentioned perhaps adding diffusion to the LED. But will that change things significantly? The answer to that is pretty complex actually. Remember, no matter HOW large or small a light is - at distance, everything (including the SUN for heaven's sake) becomes a point source. So if you're faced with a specular hightlight as in this case, the traditional solution of choice is to SPREAD the light source out as much as possible so that the lip gets hit NOT with a chance to reflect a bright LED - but a chance to reflect light coming to it from as wide as possible an array of "angles of incidence" which will SPREAD out the highlight and make it appear like part of a smoothly highlit area rather than a glowing blemish. In this quest, the issue is that all the affordable LED lights I know of are limited to about a foot square. That's no problem in a whole lot of circumstances. But compared to, for example, a Lowel Tota in a 4x4 chimera - is about 1/12 the the light emitting surface. Even one or Richard's excellent value Fluorescent Cool lights has a better than 3' x 2' light emitting surface if you use the mirror barn doors. Tha'ts 6 square feet of emitting surface compared to the 1 sq ft of the LED panel. Those are SIGNIFICANT practical differences. And the way that LEDS shoot light in a fixed direction with a modest spread - they are NOT typically a particularly good choice in filling up a regular softbox. My point is NOT that LED lights aren't wonderful. They are. But they are NOT a universal solution for lighting anymore than any other single technology. You've GOT to look at what you're lighting - how far you need to be away from it - the surface and texture of it and HOW YOU WISH IT TO APPEAR in order to begin to reach for the proper gear to get the result you want. Sorry, but with that lip glow spot to combat I'd MUCH rather have a bigger light surface array than a smaller one - and right now, LEDs aren't really the best answer for that. Next shoot - that might not be important at all. That's all I'm saying here. You constrain yourself to working with and mastering just ONE lighting technology - you're limiting your thinking AND the potential for the best consistent results. FWIW. |
Quote:
I only have 4x Z96s at the moment. I tried them in a 2x2 array with the supplied diffusers and I have a moderate size soft light source. I have another 10 on order. A 14x1 strip of them will be good for blacklight. Clipped together into a 5x3 array should make for a reasonable sized large, diffused light source. There are lighting scenarios that LEDs are just too expensive for most to use at the moment. None of them are the subject of the current discussion. You want a powerful spot then there's the Komet, at around US $6,000 they're more expensive than HMI at the moment. |
Bob,
I agree as far as that goes. But practically, a 3x4 foot array of, for example, LightPanels will cost you around $18,000.00 - $20,000 (depending on the stands and mounts you require) Yes A Lowel Tota light in a Chimera Medium will burn up more electricity and isn't battery friendly. OTOH, get you the same quality, wrap and spread of light for a total of about $550. 1/40th the price for the same effect is pretty compelling. FWIW. |
Sorry, dup post
|
I think that comparing a single tota and a softbox to 12 1x1 Litepanels is perhaps not an even match. I might be more inclined to compare a tota and a softbox to ONE 1x1 Litepanel. Who would win is up to you and your eye, but the cost and footcandles would be roughly (very roughly) equal, perhaps with the $/ftcandle edge going to the tota.
|
Mike,
In point of fact, the "softness" of any source is directly related to the SURFACE AREA that is producing the light. This is precisely WHY we put small lights in translucent bags - to SPREAD the emitting surface area. So a 4' x 3' Chimera illuminated by a single Total light would produce EXACTLY the same "spread and wrap" as 12 lightpanels arrayed in a 4 panels x 3 panels configuration. In this case, lighting reflects GEOMETRY. (that old high school "angle of incidence equals the angle of reflection" stuff. To make your "comparison" have value, you'd need to compare the lightpanel 1x1 light to a 1' x 1' softbox. Which is pretty hard to find. Simple as that. |
By my crude calculations I can get 4'x3' of LED light from 100x Z96 units at a cost of US $6,000. Sure not cheap but way cheaper than the figures quoted using Lightpanels. That's around 700W of LED light which would equate to say 4KW of tungsten inside a softbox. Not that one could put 4KW of heat inside a softbox, not for very long.
Clearly 700W of LED light is more than a bit over the top, our Creamsource is around 200W of LED light and that is more light than one would need in a room, 700W is plain insane. So less light spread out a bit more would more than suffice with some thin diffusion. Such a light doesn't seem to exit and I'm pretty certain there's no technical reason why not. I strongly suspect it gets back to a point I made quite a while back in this thread. The majority of people using these cheap LED lights don't see the problems they create and therefore they're not trying to fix the problem(s) which leads to no one making affordable solutions, there just isn't the demand. |
Re: LED obsession - Indie kit?
1 Attachment(s)
Just thought I would bring everyone up-to-date on the status of my Grip-LED light, including a picture of the light. It seems that the led panel is not available at LEDwholesalers. And, no one knows for sure when LED Wholesalers will have the panel in stock! I wold love to find out who is the actual manufacturer of this led panel... a company in India or China, no doubt... so I can buy directly from the manufacturer. As you know, the Litepanel company is now selling it's H2 light... the H standing for high power and the 2 for 2 panels (I'm guessing here)... their light has 72 1-watt led's and is 1' x 2'. So Litepanels is basically using 2 36 led panels in a frame... not sure if they are using the exact panel that LED Wholesalers was selling... but could perhaps explain why the panel is not available from LED Wholesalers! Also, the Litepanel H2 light is selling for over $4000, which is way over priced for the indie filmmaker. I was selling my Grip-LED light for $249... 2 of these lights for $500 would equal the light output of the $4000 H2! Here is a picture of my light.
|
Re: LED obsession - Indie kit?
Dave: I hear you and absolutely believe thae LitePanels has done exacty that: taken two of the $150 panels that LEDWHOLESALERs was selling and slapped them in a frame and is attempting ripoff the indie market with a 1,333% price increase.
I actually won three of the panels from LEDWH's ebay auction in February. They never shipped them, refunded my money, and explained that they sold out their stock due to foot traffic (which at the time was 47 units). So, their warehouse south of SFO airport gets a lot of foot traffic. Uhhh, yeah, right. A month ago I called them and they said that they were looking to find an alternative but had no luck and no leads. It is my strong suspician that, either Litepanels bought out that stock so that it would not compete, or that Litepanels created an exclusive supply contract with the Chinese manufacturer/distributor (or both). Its a sad situation. I hope that you find a replacment panel. I was about to publish an article about a DIY Creamsource for under $800 based on these panels. |
Re: LED obsession - Indie kit?
Quote:
I'll end with a question... what kinds of things do you do to make a talking head look interesting? Thanks, I look forward to hearing your comments. I forgot... the youtube link is the final broadcast spot. In this spot Matthew is not wearing a baseball cap. Here is the actual spot that was shown on the jumbotron at Citi Field. It was "Ed Hearn Night". Ed Hearn was a catcher for the New York Mets when they won the World Series. Ed Hearn has FSGS and has had 3 kidney transplants. The disease ended his baseball career. YouTube - ‪Nephcure Spot-CitiField.wmv‬‏ |
Re: LED obsession - Indie kit?
Michael, amazing, isn't it? I'm kind of befuddled with this whole situation. I have sold all of the Grip-LED's I made... 20 so far... I still have 2 of the prototypes that I am using in my own lighting kit. I just bought 2 36-led lights from www.thecinecity.com (India). I did this just to see what kind of panel they used and to add to my lighting inventory. It is similar to the one that LED Wholesalers was selling. But, it is not the same! However, I thought that I got a pretty good deal... the 2 lights cost $550 (+ $175 shipping from India) and I also got 2 light stands, a double header, so you can put both lights on one stand, and each light comes in a case along with diffusion sheets and color correction sheets for tungsten balance. The lights are 5500K and are about 1/2 stop brighter than the panel that LED Wholesalers sold. I am still looking and would like to find who the manufacturer is and deal directly with him.
|
Re: LED obsession - Indie kit?
Dave,
Did you ever figure out how to battery power your lights? Some sort of v-mount or external power supply. The only think shaky about the lights are the laptop like power brick plugs. |
Re: LED obsession - Indie kit?
Shawn: you can simply take a pair of 12v 12A sealed lead acid batteries that run like $10 each and wire them in series to equal 24v (Connecting Batteries in Series or Parallel). Here's a pair that sells for $27 with shipping.
I think these panels draw about 1.7 amps, so those 12 amp batteries will run one panel almost all day. You can also buy a 24v lithium battery like the kind used for electric bikes. Those are more expensive, but prettier. If you want less weight or a smaller form factor, buy a Lithium battery back from Batteryspace or similar online sources. More expensive, but shorter charge times and less cumbersome. If you want to add dimming capabilities, buy a PWM dimmer for less than $20. Here's one that is 24v, like these panels, and can dim up to 4 panels from a single switch. I have one on mine. It dims down to zero or up to full with no issues whatsoever. LED PWM Dimmer 24V for LED lighting With a nearby Radio Shack, an Ebay account, and the most basic soldering skills, a middle school student should be able to build a DIY portable power solution. That Litepanels is charging 3 or 4 thousand dollars for a yoke and a shell plus a set of off the shelf parts that retails for, I said retails, not wholesales, for about $350, is a crime. If I only had 3 more of these panels to compliment my one panel, I'll publish plans on how to build a DIY portable Creamsource-like fixture for less than $700, that be easily built by anybody old enough to drive in one afternoon and that will light up a back yard at night for hours on battery power. |
Re: LED obsession - Indie kit?
Bill Davis and Bob Grant, I appreciated your educated perspectives in this thread very much. Thank you.
|
Re: LED obsession - Indie kit?
Michael,
What about setting up something for v-mount or ab mount? Then batteries can be easily changed out. Or maybe even the sony 970 batteries that are being used for many on camera LED lights. |
Re: LED obsession - Indie kit?
Well, you can buy those mounts on Ebay for about $8. I personally don't have those batteries in the first place because I think they are a ripoff. I make or adapt my own battery power andv distribution systems from parts at Radio Shack and batteries from the major online sources like batteryspace etc...
Honestly, people are letting them selves pay hundreds if not thousands more than they need to simply becuase nobody ever taught them hot to cut, strip, and solder a wire. |
Re: LED obsession - Indie kit?
Michael,
Interesting. How do you keep the batteries nice and neat for on the go shooting? The enclosure of a sony v-mount or the like makes them easy to carry, store and ship. If I could have something small and portable for the three grip lights I have, I would certainly build them myself. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:42 AM. |
DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2024 The Digital Video Information Network