Re: Question on flash and power or intensity measurement.

Jan Faul <jan@xxxxxxxxxxx> · Sat, 19 Oct 2013 11:32:31 -0400

My Dad shot pictures of antiques for various books he wrote about restoring furniture and all he used was a 200W bulb in a reflector. He shot a Speed Graphic, put it on a tripod,set the shutter for T, and walked around with the bulb lighting things here and there while wearing a black outfit. The shots look great, and although I now have the negs,  I can’t see any part of him in any of the shots.

So if you’re not shooting things that move, shoot hot lights.

On Oct 19, 2013, at 10:34 AM, Randy Little wrote:

Well Jan  the math is that 1 sec of 500 Watts = 1 strobe pop.  So of course if you can fire your strobes many times in 1 second then you get A LOT of light.   I can get 5 pops a second with my packs set at 500 ws.     BUT if you just need to you know have a space heater in a room with a blonde 2k and possibly burn people or melt stuff around amateurs and non crew then then Hey HOT lights might be the way to go.   Just remember to bring your Gaffer gloves.     

Randy S. Little
http://www.rslittle.com/
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2325729/

On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 7:10 AM, Jan Faul <jan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Did you do well in math? Can you explain how a 500 watt tungsten bulb can deliver the same light as a 500ws flash delivering light in 1/175th sec? 

Take one second and divide by 175 = and multiply the result by a big enough number to equal 500. Got it? That’s how many tungsten watts equal a 500 ws studio strobe.

On Oct 19, 2013, at 10:00 AM, Santa Fe Imaging wrote:

    There are all kinds of
        mechanical and electronic considerations that come into play but
        it seems to me that a 500 watt tungsten lamp exposed for 1
        second should give the same amount of light to the sensor/film
        as a single 500ws flash exposure.

    On 10/19/2013 7:34 AM, Andrew Davidhazy
      wrote:

      I think that something vexing is the fact that the electronic flash delivers its light over a short time while tungsten lamps can (or do) deliver it over a long time. If one compares them at the assumed duration of the flash then the tungsten bulb will come out the weaker of the two by far. But if you compare them during an exposure time of a second or a minute or more then the tungsten lamp wins. It seems to me anyway.

Andy from Rochester

Art Faul

The Artist Formerly Known as Prints

------
Art for Cars: art4carz.com

Stills That Move: http://www.artfaul.com

Greens: http://www.inkjetprince.com

Camera Works - The Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/battlefieldparks/front_qt.htm

ArtNet: http://www.artnet.com/artists/jan+w.-faul/

.

Art Faul

The Artist Formerly Known as Prints
------
Art for Cars: art4carz.com
Stills That Move: http://www.artfaul.com
Greens: http://www.inkjetprince.com
Camera Works - The Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/battlefieldparks/front_qt.htm
ArtNet: http://www.artnet.com/artists/jan+w.-faul/
.