More Studio Thoughts

Over on the tech page, I ahve outlined my studio aspirations.

I dont want much :).

I would like small space to feel infinately large, to have a brilliant light spac eor dark and moody one and i, knowing me, have to accomodate my many moods when it comes to colour and texture.

All in an 8x10’ space?

Wall colour has become critical (I am writing this while putting off the first strokes of white paint).

My thinking is this;

If my backdrop can be basically any colour based on a white and grey roll of paper/vinyl/cloth and C1 processing, gels or RGB LED’s, then I can create on that wall any mood. Texture is another matter, but I have other plans there involving separate panels.

If I then have a white wall on the right side and a dark (green/grey/blue?) wall on the left side, then all I have to do is modify one or the other to get a solid light or dark environment. For the right wall I have a 12’ Neewer black background cloth and for the left I have a selection of white cloth or panel reflectors.

The respective sides. The window light starts low right, moving up to the left by mid morning, so the white right wall will catch it.

If I am using both as painted, then one becomes the fill wall, the other, the negative fill wall.

Conversely, if I paint the whole room one colour (shade), then I will have problems when i want the opposite effect, needing to fill it all with white or black panels.

Ok, time to paint.

EM1x Rig Completed

The last bits of the EM1x rig are here.

They consist of a quick release adapter for the universal half cage, so I can now remove the EM1x by simply unscrewing the base plate screw and loosening the QR adapter, then just slide the camera out. This is just right.

A wonder of Camvate, Smallrig, Niceyrig and a little Neewer, it is mostly left-overs with a few needed parts.

A massive brute, but heavy like a pro camera and well balanced, especially with the weights attached.

Three leftover weights from my gimbal. They take seconds to add and make all the difference.

The camera is very secure in its housing, but it previously felt like I have to pull the whole thing apart to get it ready for stills. Basically from 5 screws to 2 and I only need a coin for a screw driver, not two sizes of hex key.

The final part, the quick release, joining the rig top plate to the hot shoe. Without this i had to unscrew two small hex nuts after taking the handle off.

Another nice touch is that the 197mm long side stem is now a perfect fit for this rig.

The Smallrig mini top handle, originally purchased as a protective side handle for the G9 has been replaced by a wooden handle (the one I bought the Camvate half cage with), but its true purpose seems to be here doing exactly what it as bought for, protection for a screen and a contact point for the AF by touch screen, hand.

The two Camvate cold shoes are just for options. They are very tight fitting, so I will have to double check anything I might want to add on using them (cannot take a Smalllrig heavy duty ball head or Neewer plastic shock mount, but fine with most else).

Even the upside down printed Camvate plate has a use. This cold shoe takes the Zoom F1-SSH6 mic combo.

The side-on profile is neat with no protrusions or left over stems.

I had mostly turned my back on Olympus for video, but recently a few things have changed my mind;

• Processing the flat files in DaVinci is very easy and pleasant.

• The stabiliser and heft of the EM1x are way better than the G9 except in static stabiliser mode, where the G9 draws even.

• The colours and look add another dimension (but needs 4k).

• The touch AF is very reliable as is the auto WB. The WB always falls within flat grading range.

• I can now match the look of the three cameras (EM1, G9, OSMO) better after acquainting myself with DaVinci’s options.

The Real Advantages Of Being A Still Photographer

Still photography and videography are obviously different forms of related media, but after a rocket six months of video adoption, I can honestly say that on the whole, the stills shooter has the easiest road to travel.

Formats;

Shooting in RAW is daunting for some photographers, but seriously, the power so easily at hand is a real gift. I almost never have to worry about miss-cued exposures or white balance in my stills work and with the quality of light meters, even on my lowliest cameras, there are few genuine stuff-ups. To be hinest the dynamic range of an MFT sensor and RAW, I can almost always retrieve something workable.

Video has the dual issues of multiple formats on several levels and for most of us, limited file flexibily. Just to add salt to the wound, different brands all have their own formats, that are actually different in processing response and processing is equally varied and more complicated than stills.

RAW to jpeg with all the quality you would want.

Delivery;

This brings us to delivery, or the end process and what it supplies you or your client (or self). Single images, often single shots taken from sequences or even entire shoot are simply a matter of open minded perseverence, adaptability and practice. Being creative is often just a matter of remembering a different lens, bending down or changing angle and the whole time you are thinking/looking/moving, you are not expected produce work, just the moments you commit.

Video delivery, like formats and processing has multiple options, so choices have to be made. Unlike an still image, not every format plays on every device. On top of that, I cannot upload the huge files, my Dropbox would hate me, so I have to hand deliver them.

Lighting;

Fast glass with fast AF in all but the most extreme circumstances will get any user of any format pu tof trouble. You also have more than enough pixels to shoot wide and stabilisers for single sots are getting better and better. Time it well and even a 1/8th of a second shot of an animate subject can work and of course that may come from a dozen or more images. Flash units are powerful for little outlay, super grunty for a little more. It is possible to overpower the sun with a $100 flash unit and modifiers are all the choices videographers have and many more. The assumption is also that these lights will be daylight balanced unless gelled or modified otherwise.

Video, being constant requires strong, continuous and colour corrected light. Strength is not an issue unless colour is, then the big, cheap flood lights builders use become an issue. Modifying these lights is also harder.

Easily balanced with a naturally lit still image, but hard work for video.

Storage;

I can chew through 5-800 images in a big project, which usually takes up the bulk of a 16gb card and maybe some of another. These cards are often base grade as I do not need more. A series of 20mp RAW images may tax the buffer, but I do not shoot that way.

After editing, I often ditch at least half of these images, storing the better original RAWS for later and putting the submitted ones into the cloud. Even with my relatively slow internet, they go up fast enough. I once lusted after a jpeg work flow, likely to be a Fuji based one as they at time produced jpegs that were close to their RAW images (sometimes better in Adobe), but I could not break the RAW habit.

Video eats up capacity and requires speed. Even 1080 with a reasonable bit rate and colour depth can be taxing. A reviewer of the new GH6 worked out that a full wedding day shoot with two cameras and backups at 900mb 6k would cost him $8500us in cards!

Quality;

20mp does all I need. I have supplied images for a billboard, several 6’ wide signs and a minibus, all from 20mp MFT files and all were cropped to some extent. Quality is not an issue these days. Too much quality can be, but no real risk of falling short in a techncal sense.

Most of us only need 720p for net use or 1080p for better, but the call of 4k and higher is getting stronger. The irony is, video needs less improvement in resolution than stills, but tends to be more obsessed by it. Ironically, we often chase the “cinematic” look, which requires sharpness reducing filters! Good video seems to walk a fine line between realism and objective quality. Too sharp and it is too digiatl video for most people. Too soft and it looks low grade.

Channelling The Early Days Of Colour Film

There is something about early (50’s to 70’s) colour that really talks to me. Reds, yellows and green-browns in particular jump out, partly for their iconic relevance and partly because Kodachrome film favoured them.

Kodachrome circa 1975? Maybe even a little William Eggleston, Harry Callahan or Harry Gruyaert.

Not sure about this one, but it screamed “film” to me.

Fuji Velvia maybe, the next wave of films that championed blues and cool greens, but struggled with skin tones.

Back to Kodak colours.

The early Olympus sensors and processors had a very Kodachrome feel.

Teal And Amber

Watch any current Hollywood or upper end TV production at the moment and you will see, more or less, a lot of ‘complimentary colour” technique. The current combination “on trend” is Teal and Amber or something close. I think one reason these two are so often used is they are commonly found in highlights with Anamorphic lenses, but it is likely more primeival, representing the sky and fire.

The clean, cool brilliance of Teal blue-green contrasted with the euphorically warm and comforting Amber, is addictive and a lot of current movie makers seem to have the addiction.

My wife is getting a little sick of my pointing out how it is used, but just in the last few weeks we have seen so many examples of theis. “The Responder” set in a night shift UK city setting is effectively shot exclusively with a tense contrast of these, the latest “Bond” movie, Star Trek, Most Marvel movies, to “Van De Valk” and even the last series of “Vera”, a show not often taken to using visual tricks, and so many more, use these two colours (or similar) to set and balance mood.

Meg in Melbourne. This is the little 17 f1.8 wide open and razor sharp in close. Love this lens.

Ticket shock.

The most common combination available to us all every sunny morning.

The New And Improved Zoom F1 Dynamic

The F1 Zoom looks to be a real game changer.

It has a few real benefits, some unrealised before purchase and some small niggles, but nothing that cannot be fixed.

• It has made the SSH-6 a fully realised shotgun on camera or hand held. The reality is, I would have struggled long term with the H5/SSH-6 shotgun setup, likely buying a whole other mic like a Diety D3 or MKE 600 Sennheisser, which to a fair extent would have negated some of the point of the SSH, which I consider to be a very good mic for the money if you have a Zoom to put it on.

• It is a better, more focussed recorder for the shotgun (or Lav), carrying less “fluff” and therefore less bulk than the H5. This means the menu is simplified, ideal for run-n-gun, as you have plenty to worry about already and some settings like the mid-side control as a one touch with clearer settings (increments of degrees rather than -25 to +6) are well thought out.

• It uses small batteries and small cards, same as the H1n, my other on the go mic. Consistency is great. I have one kit with these two in it and one with the H5 and its bigger batts and cards.

• Having it reduces dismantling and mount ware. The SSH-6 on the H5 needed to be dismantled to pack away and having no cover for the H5’s contacts, I replaced it with the XYH5 mic each and every time. These things are well enough made, but I could see this being a likely failure point sometime in the future. I will swap them out occasionally, but its nice to not have to.

• It looks cool.

• It turns on much faster. Turning off is the same 2 second hold, but on is super quick. There have been a few times, I have thought the H5 was on when it wasn’t and even a few when the delay has mixed me up a bit (it does not help that you cannot see the screen from any angle but above. The F1 has a little conformation light at the rear that helps.

• For the $400au it cost (all up), I could have an MKE 600 with 3.5 adapter, but I would not have all of the other features and benefits available like Lav recording, self contained recording, other capsule configurations etc (or the guarantee of a better pre-amp).

• It gives me a compact X/Y option. This is even smaller, cleaner and more robust than the H1n and with a dedicated shock mount.

• It allows me to have both capsules in action at the same time. Two mic options, so no tough choices to be made.

Ready for battle, the balance of the rig and mic itself is much improved and that dead critter really works.

• The buttons happen to be on the right sides (mostly the right side) for my usage. This is of course subjective, but the H5’s on/off is on the left side and hard to reach with the rig shown. The F1’s is on the right avoid the handle side.

• It recognises Lithium batts, the H5 does not.

Negatives (nothing terminal).

• The F1 is simpler and more compact than the “hub” H5, but with that comes a reduction in deeper specs, such as no -20db pad (not really needed for it’s input options), no equalising or modifiable attenuation and it records in stereo only. This makes menu navigation cleaner than even the H1n and leaves tons of room for it’s capabilities to shine.

• The shock mount is really solidly attached, but a pain to remove so I likely won’t unless I use it as a remote Lav. This makes the assembled unit too long and deep for my small travel cases, but I have been putting off buying one good hard case for all my mics anyway.

• The volume setting on the unit (not used with a capsule) is in ten steps, but rather than just setting ten numerical steps, Zoom have used Low-, Low, etc to High++. Why not just use 1 to 10 like their capsules?

The Struggle Continues

Colour or Mono?

I have fallen mostly on the side of mono for my personal work and colour for work (not much choice there).

Street tends to fall into a difficult place for me. Colour is my core process, mono becomes the fall back or change of pace, but sometimes an image forces my hand.

Not sure here. I saw mono when I shot it, colour when I processed it, then mono again when I revisited the file.

The Leaf Test

When starting out as a photographer or videographer, learning how light works is equally the biggest hurdle and the door to most advancement.

As an example, do this simple test.

Go outside on a sunny day. Photograph a leaf with the sun behind you (do one in shadow and one in full lght). Then shoot the same leaf into the sun, using the leaf to block the direct sunlight, or shoot at a slight angle if needed as you will likely also discover the full effect of “flare” on your lens.

The difference should be obvious and the effect on how you see light, just as strong.

Shooting into the light can cause you some technical issues, but there is no denying the added drama it offers.

My favourite lens for this type of shooting is the robust and versatile Olympus f1.8 17mm. It is not immune to flare and glare, but it can take a bit of pain.

The light does not have to be strong, just coming your way.

“Into the pink”. This is about the worst I will use, but is thankfully rare enough.

Mise En (Street) Scene

It struck me, coming from far too much time absorbing video and movie making terms and techniques, that my street photography process has much in common with the core of movie making, “Mise en Scene”, literally “setting the scene”.

Setting the scene and “blocking” (coordinating the angles and movements of the players within the scene) are the foundatons of film making. Still photography can often be directly linked to this, being a small slice of this taken mid-process and street photography, to me anyway is very much an exemplar of this process.

I realised this on the Melbourne trip when my basic process for street shooting seamlessly merged with my thinking and visualisation for “setting the scene” with video.

Find the space, set the light, place the subject(s) and allow the movement to happen.

Light, camera and action, except that the movement is arrested leaving your mind to play scene out.

Time and again, I found myself composing a still image, that would likely have been better employed as a stage. This also came with the realiseation that I am often composing images without people in them, capturing the stage the actors will enter.

This closes a loop for me, helping me to understand why I like to shoot spaces both empty and occupied. They are effectively the same thing, a stage, empty or “blocked”. It makes no difference to me in any real sesne. People are assumed.

There can be many ugly places in a big city, but thee are many pionts of beauty also.

“This way or that?”

Light in large cities can be very stage like. Reflections can bounce around creating both even and interesting effects. I like living in a large town/small city, but this light, reserved for bigger centres, is addictive.

Breaking the rules is part of the process with mixed results.

More light as an essential element of scene setting.

Like A Film Set

Setting the stage with street photography, becomes a matter of finding the stage, then waiting for the actors to enter.

Melbourne tends to throw up a lot of these “stages”.

Timing is all. Being there at a good time, waiting then grabbing any moments that move you. My standard operationg proceedure tends to be wander, see, grab, which misses the main point, patience. Occassionally, I get lucky, often I have to compromise.

Just Folks

My major draw for street imaging is people. Sometimes my images lack people, heroing instead the places people do or will use, but either way, people are the thing.

I have said before, that a strong street image needs three things happening before I feel it is fully developed. Any less and it needs a very strong subject and message, but ideally, it should have both.

Respect for a pair of shooters ready to go. No lens caps, camera on. The man on the left was sporting a big white lens on an SLR. Hard to hide, but what ever works for you I guess.

At least an image should have an emotional element.

None of the images above are what I would call strong, but each has one or more elements of a decent street snap, somethng that made them stand out enough to go the next step, so they deserve a little light.

A Short Trip, Big Effect

We took a short trip to Melbourne in the weekend. This is for me the first time on a plane in over two years, which is a record of some sort (but I am sure I am not alone).

The unplanned, unguided and basiclly unscripted trip, totalling a late flight in, a day wandering and an early morning out had a much stronger effect on me than the short duration would indicate.

I photographed for the first time in over two years with absolutely no pressures applied. No work requirements, no self inflicted expectations, no “theme” or “style” assumed. Just wander and shoot*.

Nice to see people out, without the tell-tale COVID requirements.

Melbourne supplied relatively exotic sights, great light and a street friendly populace.

Big cities, especially on sunny days early or late, tend to glow with reflected light.

I must admit to feeling a little unsettled the whole trip, which I put down to the novelty and relative fragility of travel these days, but once moving, it melted away, replaced by exploration and anticipation.

“Glowacious” as one of the Western boys would say.

The trip even seemed to stir something more up in me. Hot on the heels of a general malaise I have been feeling with both my photography and gaming (not video, loving that), I hatched a sceme on the plane trip home that was realised today, netting me two rooms of the house better employed for both hobbies/jobs.

I now have a nicer space for gaming, with no monster table dominating the space (switching to Matts has allowed me a “set up-pull down” table dynamic) and a small studio. Small meaning upper body portraits and tests only, but enough room to do these well (roughly 4x3m) and my growing collection of photo/video gear is well organised finally. There is also plenty of room to set up my 7x5 table in that space when needed.

*EPM-2 on a 60” cross body strap, 17mm f1.8 in aperture priority ranging from f1.8 to f5.6 and either in AF (wide central area) or zone focus MF set to 2m.

Selens Win?

I got the Selens light today.

The box is unbranded, but otherwise the same as the Neewer SL-60w (although their are two fronts pictured, one the same as the Neewer, one different and the actual light is the different one).

The casing is the same except for the red light on top (that does not seem to do anything), but is again, unbranded and the light has two names, one on the box and a different one on the instructions. I guess we all know that brands like Neewer just brand generically mass produced stuff, but is this a level below Neewer or the same thing in plain wrap?

The LCD is identical, although the dial seems smoother, watch this space as this theme keeps recurring.

The cable is the same 4m length but the plug is nicer. The light end is also a nicer fit. Both Neewers needed a good push to make contact, the Selens just went in smoothly.

The remote is light and plasticky like the Neewers, but seems nicer, more modern and has more buttons for more intuitive operation. I have not yet checked to see i fit will run the Neewers, but I bet it will.

The light output looks to be close, so as I suspected, the devil is in the (hidden) detail. Two identically exposed images below, the Selens on the right, which may have a tiny bit more grunt and is more open-less focussed. Maybe a half stop more, but not the 3x more that was advertised.

Interestingly, the model number on the box is 150, on the instructions it is called the KW-200. Maybe 100w is most accurate. I thought it may have been brighter out wide, but it looked (and read on camera) much the same. They look matched for colour balance, maybe a little warm, which is fine and expected. The slight difference in angle is me “mr lazy science experiment” moving.

It is heavier. I did not notice until I was swapping them, but it feels about 1/3 heavier, and denser inside. You can see into the Neewer thanks to some air space and internal lights, the Selens is solid, dark and mysterious.

Here is the biggie.

The Neewers have an audible, though quiet enough fan which activates pretty much immediately when the light is set to 100% or running at most other settings for a short time.

I shot an interview the other day with the subject on the other side of a brolly to the light at 2m and the mic aimed roughly straight at it at 3m. The subject had his back to an open door and I could hear vehicle noises, children playing and birds outside up to 200m away, but no fan noise.

The Selens was silent.

Still and silent.

Dead maybe?

No internal light, no fan? I really thought it was a dud even with the front end putting out too much light to look at.

Not an award winning image. The Selens (left) seems to have maybe more brilliance, just lacks the reflector plate of the Neewers. Looking directly at these two was not pleasant.

I left it running at 100% for about ten minutes and went back to check. The fan was running and the light was cool to touch, but was still barely audible (I had to touch it to make sure my ears were not making stuff up). This will now become my “A” light when using one close to the talent, the Neewers acting as secondaries, othewise I will flog the Neewers.

So, it looks like I have 180 to maybe 200w total output by Neewers measurements, which I have learned to trust, but one light that looks on the surface to be genuinely better built or at least more heavily built.

Will I get another? If I use this a bit and it proves to be what it seems, then I think I will.

The Background Matters

I have traditionally processed my images using the default black background in Lightroom or Capture 1.

I initially responded to the strong and clean look of the black surround and even use a black base for this site.

Contrasting any image against black can do that. It can make colour pop and increase depth, sometimes even intimacy, but the result can tend to be quite darkly editied images, especially when used by others in other circumstances.

I decided to switch to a ehite editing background recently and it had an immediate effect.

My images look more defined on the page, helping with cropping and composition checks (they look much like an image on a book page), and my perception of image brilliance and density has also improved. I am happier to take an image to near white, making them look “happier“, which makes sense for images of school children.

An example of an image that just jumps out on white.

It also helps with pre-visualising for printing.

Another odd thing, probably not related, is that I often miss typos when writing my blog posts on white, but spot them the second I see them on the black publish page. Probably more Freudian than that.

Lessons From A Harder Road Travelled

As a RAW stills shooter, I push my files quite hard as a matter or course. I expect to and often need to.

The image below was shot basically into the sun, creating a semi-silhouette out of the subjects, then bought back cleanly and brilliantly in post.

Taken while breaking several rules of common sense, but with little option, I was confident going in that what ever came image wise, I could deal with it. Not the case with video.

In video, especially using non RAW or even full LOG, just Semi LOG or basic colour styles, this is nearly creative suicide.

Having said that, I am very impressed by the relative flexibility of my files in Da Vinci compared to jpeg stills in C1 or similar. I am constantly reminded why I shoot RAW, but at the same time, I am learning to deal with a fine balance. Flat profile on the EM1x, properly exposed, takes processing well and Natural in the G9 is pretty good stright out of camera and has room (with modified settings), for a little more. I know if I bought a Black Magic camera, RAW video would be possible, but that’s when, knowing me, I would realise how close I could get with less flexible files.

I have made some mistakes early on. White balance, exposure and colour, even processign work flow, all have sufferred equally. From there Da Vinci has still managed to produce some decent results from the worst files.

My learning curve has revealed itself over time to include a need for a heightened awareness of importing and exporting parameters and the need to learn many new terms whilst inside the programme.

I will get there, but I must admit, everytime I feel I have a handle on something, I am reminded that I have already started to lose track of other things recently learned. This is how it goes and a problem of my own making in a world (for me ) free of other troubles.

My goals are simple at this point. Files in, processed for good sound and image quality, exported, passed on to higher authorities to do with as they will. So far, generally speaking, am doing these basics well enough. There are whle pages of DaVinci I am not even familiar with (Nodes?), but this will come as my natural curiosity to know more drives me there.

Patience Grasshopper. Patience and relentless determination.

Zoom, Zoom.............. and Zoom

Like a Formula 1 team, there is more Zoom coming to the kit (and some F1).

The SSH-6 shotgun mic has really delivered for me, becoming the reliable and versatile mainstay for a series of interviews, performing above expectations. The only issue with the combination is camera mounted run-and-gun shooting, where the shotgun capsule and H5 become too bulky and unbalanced on camera and my other shotgun options are basic in comparison (and still really need the H5 or H1n as a pre-amp).

The H5 adds a lot of length to the already decently long mic capsule and the shock mount adds height as well as being a little front heavy (it is a Boya one which is effective, but not purpose designed for this combo).

I am also concerned that constant assembly and dis-assembly of the two mic-capsules for different combo’s and to fit it into the case, will wear out or damage the capsules/H5 prematurely. basically, with a lack of protective covers, I always re-mount the X/Y, to fit in the case then switch them over for most shoots, 2-8 times a week. It would be great to have two mics set up for their respective capsules, with the ability to switch if desired.

The H5 was also a good buy, basically an H1n for the next level up, offering so many different capabilities and combinations and with the SSH-6 it has proven to be a great static interview mic, but there must be a better way of using both on camera?

Option one is to grab a dedicated shotgun mic (Diety D3 or dearer MKE 600).

This does not sit well with me already having the SSH-6, especially considering the quality I have been getting out of it. I am also used to the Zoom interface and would miss the control and pre-amp quality, especially compared to the mediocre EM1 mk2’s amp.

Option two is a to further add to my recorder options.

The Zoom F1 (LP kit) adds a mini recorder from the “field” series, so an excellent pre-amp (possibly better than the H5’s) in a very small form factor. The other way to buy it (SP) includes a shotgun mic, the SGH-6, but the SSH I already have is the better and more versatile capsule. I only need the dedicated shock mount to make it work (the F1 has no tripod socket, but the special mount looks very efficient), and I also get the decent Lav option also. I picked up the F1 locally on sale and a deal online on the mount for $250au all up.

This means, I go from a versatile, but not always ideal H5 for area, interview and event recording, with its X/Y or shotgun capsules and/or the Lewitt condensers in X/Y, A/B or non linear config or the option of external feed, but a compromised shotgun form for on camera work, to the same options, but with a better shotgun configuration with the SSH or a smaller one wth the Neewer as boom mic on the F1 and the option of a small talent worn Lav form, then the H1n as backup or X/Y area recording with the F1 (both share sd card and battery size).

Three Zoom’s?

The H1n is a mic I highly recommend to anyone looking for a better pre-amp, an event/area recorder or makeshift shotgun, as it really is one of the best bangs for the buck out there. Is it redundant in this outfit? No, I use it as an independant backup, a second wearable Lav mic control, an area recorder to go with the F1’s more focussed options, a post-synchable mic for the OSMO and again adds a backup. The H1n and F1 combined basically add up to the H5 without XLR inputs.

The H5 adds XLR in/out connections, a good X/Y and pre-amp and the ability to record up to 4 tracks at once (technically 5 with the SSH-6 mid-side and XLR’s). The H5 will be matched to the G9, which is the big event camera. For interviews etc I will get the condensers sorted (volume fading at the moment which I think is a power issue).

The F1 fixes the H5’s only real down side, bulk, and adds a wear-able Lav mic. It will be matched and balanced to the EM1x in its “on the go” setup. The EM1x seems to need a lot of H5 line output (-10 to +0), the opposite of the G9 (-35 to -25), so switching the H5 between the two adds another thing to remember.

They all have a role or roles and there is no one mic that does everything they can do individually.

Sticking with Zoom mics gives me depth, consistency of operation while keeping my audio up to a solid B+ across the board or possibly better with the Lewitts (“A” being picky sound engineer level). There are a lot of other Zoom recorders and mic capsules*, but I am happy with these as the best givers available, within my limited budget.

I house all of my audio/video gear in several XCD semi hard cases, which allow me to pack fast as needed and in any bag that is at hand.

This was the current layout, which was not ideal.

In Case 1, the H5 with SSH-6, X/Y capsules, AC adapter and Boya shock mount. This is the go-to at the moment, but I need to take the other case for options I may need.

In Case 2, the H1n and “other” mic case, which usually only gets included if I have time or a need for backups. The little shotgun mics and Lav are never used over the SSH-6 if I have the option (or the X/Y for groups etc) and the condensers are used for tricky, big or high quality recording situations.

The bottom two are basically the same, the top two have changed a lot. Having effectively the opposite dynamic to the Lowe Pro Pro-Tactic 350 (old), which I often find so very frustrating, these cases always seem to hold exactly what i need and pack well into other bags (except the vexing P-T 350!).

The new configurations, that now feel a whole lot more balanced and useful are;

Case 1, the event/group/performance kit with the H5 balanced to the G9, with mounted X/Y capsule and the 2 Lewitt Match 040 condensers, plus an optional small Neewer shotgun and Boya Lav for booming or backup (always have backups). This will also have the AC adapter and the now better balanced Boya shock mount. This kit leans heavily towards large group or area coverage with more intimate options at hand.

Case 2, which is now far more more useful, is the interview/travel/grab-and-go kit, consisting of the F1 balanced to the EM1x with SSH-6 and matched shock mount, Zoom Lav, Zoom H1n for area recording, optional Lav control or backup (always). There is also the Boya mini shotgun for booming or remote work with the H1n. This kit is biased towards single or small group work or general indoor/outdoor field recording, but will also act as a logical expansion for the event kit.

I can now basically grab either case and do any job, but each has a strong and less strong side and of course both cases give me a multitude of options.

My maximum capabilities at any one time are now;

A shotgun with left right stereo mid-side (3 channels) or X/Y (2 channels) with two XLR condensers and two separate Lav or twin mini shotguns mics on bodies (up to 8 discreet mics). Not a Hollywood grade set-up, but way beyond my likely needs. For cabling, I can get the XLR’s up to 40’ away total, and the 3.5 mics up to 90’ away and of course, the Lav’s can go anywhere.

Different configurations or “polar patterns”, important to handle different shooting environments, include true shotgun, short stem shotgun, mid-side stereo, cardioid condenser and omni directional Lavs.

Importantly, everything has back-ups, replacements and alternate plans.

A last thing to add. My OSMO has not been getting the attention it deserves, mainly becasue it has rubbish sound, so, seeing as I have a surplus of small mics, I purchased the mic adapter for it and will add a mini shotgun (and maybe a Lav) to its kit.

*The H2 is a multi mic, probably the best all in one, the H6 is like the H5 but too bulky, the H8 and F6 over the top for me, the F2 is a specialist Lav only, the F3 is the same, but has 32 bit float sound (basically better than RAW sound) and more, including Q and P series and several capsules.

Mat Box Thoughts

I had a case of flare the other day.

Not good flare, not creative flare, just the damaging global veiling flare you really do not want.

I was not even sure at first, but placing my hand just in front of the lens revealed a great deal of lost contrast, in a situation that was already perilously close to unworkable.

My hood was removed to mount a larger thread filter, ironically giving me a larger surface to catch stray light at the expense of the only tool able to help.. I fixed it by moving back into the room further and applying the 2.7x tele-converter option in the G9, but my working distance then became problematic (10ft mic cable at full stretch foced me to use a new extension that turned out to be sub par*, providing a crackly connection to the camera so I spent the entirety of two interviews holding the cable in by hand.

The problem was highlighted when the very impressive K & F varible ND arrived. Really nice, but I do not have a hood option for it (the proper one cannot accommodate the handy turning tab).

Mat box?

The Smallrig one (3575 mini lite) is appealing, but I have to shell out half its value again to get the 62mm thread adapter meaning I would have 8 useless ones for one I would use exclusively (no 46mm in the kit). I thought stepping rings would work, but the filter thread is on the adapter, so I would have to step up the box adapter ring, then step down the adapter ring to the filter size, which may not work at all. The other feature of the box is a slider to take filters……….$300+ filters.

$140 for a hood laden with accessories I would not use and only shading one angle? No thanks.

Smallrig do make a flexible shade arm (3199) for about $40, which would do the job, but may also just be in the way a lot. Things can get busy on a rig with monitors, mics and lights, without adding a flexi arm.

I have ordered a 62mm screw in hood and a 62-67 step ring for an old 67mm metal hood I have. Either will work well enough and be a whole lot smaller than a mat box.

Already pro enough looking to fool most?

They do look the business though.

This brings to mind another realisation. The monitor I felt I needed seems to have become, a bit like the mat box idea, just something I pull out for big jobs, more to aid the client than myself.

The Pana screen is busy and small, but for most jobs is plenty. Eye detect AF works well for interviews and the EM1x with touch AF is likely going to be my on the move camera. I did use the monitor the other day when a particular person and environment made AF too twitchy, but only once and the extra process of setting it up is uninviting for small jobs.

*yep several lessons there (1) check new stuff (2) bring everything (3) predict possible scenarios. More cables have since been ordered from the brand my first one came from, measuring 3 to 25ft.

Value Of Reality

What would I do with $12,000au for a video lighting kit?

Assuming I would have a video bias*, after a visit to the Apurture shop, I would have a powerful main light (a 2 or 300D), a couple of secondary lights (150/120D’s), a few Amarans as spares, a couple of decent RGD Panels, a handfull of mods and stands to put them on…….just.

I would have a key light strong enough to fight off daylight, and several other options capable of changing the colour of walls, add fill, ambience, hair/rim and creative light or evenly cover a decent sized area. For every 100 watts, controlled and focussed, the cost is about $1000, but I would have quality of spread, build, consistency and application.

Taking into account the need for several trips to the car if using this in the field, maybe an assistant and plenty of insurance plus the assumption that the camera rig would be up to the job (Black Magic 4k Studio Plus or Pocket 6k and good glass at a minimum), this becomes a big commitment.

What can I achieve with a budget of say……….$600au*** all up, and a need to get to the location in one trip, but still with some creative freedom when there?

A 2k lift from a sample taken with single Neewer (not at full power) and the Neewer 4’ soft box, slightly inferior to my newer Godox ones. My wife actually disliked the 26” soft box this close saying t was too powerful.

Turning to Neewer, Selens, Godox and the like, I can actually budget for $100 per 100 watts**. This is the reality of necessity, but still, what is the actual difference?

The lights are cheap and feel it. They will likely not survive a decent drop (although some of YN560 flash units have survived several), may simply stop working mid shoot, can blow-over in strong wind, have less consistent light and their power rating measurements may be a little on the “soft” side.

The best light is of course natural, supplied for free and in great qualtity (different spot, different day).

So, lets budget for a more realistic $150-200 per 100w, meaning you have either upgraded the actual unit on paper for more realistic actual output, or simply added depth.

My current kit consists of 2x Neewer SL-60w, 1 Selens 150w (not here yet so a big unknown), 4x 120cm soft boxes, 2 Neewer and 2 better Godox with grids, several brollies and 5-in-1’s, a 660 Bi-colour and 480 RGB panel, a couple of little 200 LED’s and 6x decent stands to put them on. Not counting the stands, the lights came in at $500 for on paper, roughly** 3-400w total (I may aslo add a 30w 10.6” flapjack for versatility). Add to this some K-mart blankets, shower curtains and curtain rods for bounce/flag options and it can still fit in a long bag on a trolley for the stands etc, a backpack for cameras and mics and a separate bag for lights. I live 500m from work, so this is do-able anytime.

A Neewer 60w in a soft box managed to light a single person in a reasonably well lit room with 4 large sky lights at mid day (I still needed a 3 stop ND filter to achieve f1.8 at 1/50th), shooting into a reverse bounce umbrella soft box at 70% and still provided enough grunt for bounce fill. In a darker room, I managed with a 480 panel through a diffuser disc at 35%.

A second light could either double my coverage, or output or add depth if needed. The Selens, assuming it lives up to its on paper promise, will more then double that again (13000 lm vs 4000 lm) and from one place. If it is really good, i.e. is more powerful than the Neewers, but the same quality, I will grab a second for added depth, which seems a steal at $100 for 150w.

My camera (G9) capable of decent 4k 10 bit 422 is now served by similarly decent if not exceptional lights and mods. Balance is retained.

Yes I would like better lights, but the reality is, I do not need them for my work. The end product is not cinema grade, just better than average. I see my self more as a run and gun documentor of school life, than a maker of commercial grade footage. I would need to justify the expense and added work flow considerations.

This is not a cop-out. The reality is, with more to spend, I would likely still fall back on cheaper options like battery operated Amaran 60’s or the new Godox ML’s, simply for convenience. My jobs fall into small and fast interviews, documenting life (both done) or large events, outside of my realistic lightng parameters anyway and often handled by outside operators while I handle stills.

Another advantage is I do not have to insure this kit, just myself. Total loss of this kit would not matter and would possibly not even be fully replaced, just parts once I have a better understanding of my true needs or may even coincide with a reduced or increased need. I might even replace it with a single better light and mod and non light based mods for the rest.

This brings up another advantage, the ability to try a cheap version before commiting to a dearer one. I have already experienced this with flash photography. I tried lots of things and settled on some of the cheaper and easier options as favourites. Ask me before this and I wanted big strobe lights and massive soft boxes, ask me now and I am more than happy, prefer even, reflected umbrellas with cheap strobes.

Where could I be in three years time?

With the dearer option, would everything would be fully functional barring insurance covered drops or theft. I doubt however it would be close to paid for.

The cheap option might be in exactly the same shape, or if not, maybe up to half would be replaced if it failed to keep up or to perform as needed. Even if I added a single better light (Amaran 200D or Godox ML150) and mod, the overall would still come in under $1000 total, or if the work load increases, several Amarans. I have already earned its full value in work generated this year, work that replaced a lot of stills jobs cancelled due to COVID.

Ten years? I doubt it will matter.

Making do is a reality at the moment, but the assumption I am missing out or cutting necessary corners may be erroneous. Just like with my stills kit, cheap but workman like on my non-commercial scale is probably smart, not blindly naive.

*Adding strobes for stills would not take much.

**On paper. I know there will be difference in quality, spread and endurance.

***I do already have stands etc for stills, so this is just video empowerment added to an existing kit.

Massive.........Bargain?

Trawling the web, I must have caught someone’s attention as I received an email from ebay for a deal on a Selens 150w cob light, for $100au.

It looks like a Neewer, only slightly different, has a better looking remote and most other offers for the light start at $150au minimum. The seller looks ok as well.

Could it be that there is a decent copy of the Neewer, with even more power for around the same price?

A lot of the details like the blue lock switch, mounting stem, back LCD and basic shape are identical to the Neewer SL-60w, but the chip does look bigger, the remote a little nicer and the heat flanges are a little more involved, all good signs. The little light on top is matched by a blank cover on the Neewers.

No reviews that I can find, but plenty of guarantees from Paypal and ebay, so I will give it a crack and see what we have. I may get another if it is what it says it is.

It is rated at 14000lm, compared to the Neewer’s 4100lm, whcih sound too good to be true. Something I am expecting is a very hot-spot prone light, probably with a noisy fan, but the way I use them (bounce diffused), that should not matter and may even be useful sometimes. If it’s not better, it will hopefully be at least the same as the Neewers for about the same cost.

Mind Sets And Video

Now that video is my semi-obsession and suddenly part of my profession, has my still photography mind set changed?

More importantly, am I a better or worse stills shooter for it and is my intent the same?

I feel that the differences in processes are indeed messing with my head.

Stills shooting is all;

• Identify subject and relevance, generally at the same time,

• refine composition, light and angle,

• set base settings to suit the situation and intent,

• execute fast and intuitively,

• post proces to define the look wanted, with a lot of latitude available.

Some shots are a result of making the best of what you have in front of you.

where video is;

• identify potentially workable subject and location combinations,

• pre-set some settings, then set the rest (more than stills) to make it viable for creative intentions and technical limits,

• identify subject and composition, including movements,

• manufacture or control light,

• execute to the best of your ability, repeating if needed in a controlled and precise manner,

• post process within strict limits for consistency and creative impact.

Some shots (video) can be pre-meditated, waiting to see what develops in a controlled space.

In process alone, there is clearly a difference.

The video process is likely making me a better stills, story teller. I am more aware of the linear nature of a story, with establishing, subject, detail and environment shots all taken into account. This is better and tighter than I usually shoot and something i have been aware of needing of improvement for a while.

On the other hand though, I feel the extra control and different priorities of video are making me a complacent stills shooter technically. I am almost just going through the motions with my stills, which is contrasting strongly with strong moments of still photography nostalgia and video micro control.

With stills for example, shooting RAW, I have never needed to worry at the front end about white balance or exact exposure control, both elements in need of precise control in video.

My videography on the other hand seems to be getting better the more I channel my stills shooting brain. If I think of video frames as good stills frames, I get better video.

Maybe, hopefully, the application of both will empower me to be a constatly developing exponent of both.