Joseph S. Wisniewski wrote:
It's cheap, and big, and that makes a great "foundation". That's why Paul has a sock for it, so you can switch it from the original 18 degree (more or less) collimation to 150 degree. It's also why he (like all soft box makers) has grids for his soft boxes and octas, so they can go from that 150 degree collimation to 40 degrees.
So the equations involving softboxes/octaboxes and a PLM umbrella are:
PLM with diffusion sock = softbox + grid + 3-4 f-stops of light
PLM without diffusion sock = softbox + 2-3 f-stops of light
Is this, not including the different in cost, an essentially correct assessment? Sure, the catch light is not quite as nice, but civilians (non-photogs) never seem to be aware of the catchlights in photos.
I am planning on using PLMs when I buy my first set of studio equipment, but I had some questions about them:
1. The PLM cannot direct the light upward much, while a softbox suffers the opposite limitation, correct? While a baby boomer will solve this issue, in what situation would one need to direct their lights upwards?
2. Are PLMs useful for evenly lighting backgrounds? If so, what sizes and configuration would be the best for, say, a 9' wide backdrop?
3. If one is using the optical slaves on the lights and triggers the first light, does the PLM - particularly the 86" - obstruct the sensor of another light enough to cause it not to fire? Remotes are on my shopping list, but I was just curious about this.