HMI > Bounce vs Skypanel (2 replies and 1 comment)
The other day I was listening to a team deakins podcast (such a great podcast thank you!) and you (roger) were lamenting the overuse of skypanels. You went on to allude to the differences of say bouncing an HMI or a smaller source light into a bounce compared to filling it up with a skypanel, before the conversation changed tack.
I guess Im just wondering where that thought was going in regards to the different qualities light? is it mostly a result of the type of fall-off you get from a spottier hmi lens opposed to a floodier skypanel when shot into a bounce?
Also, do you think LED cob lights (a 600D for example) can produce similar effects to the HMIs/tungsten lights that you use? Or do they have flaws we are overlooking due to their convenience?
I have no experience of the 600D but it would seem to be equivalent to an open face lamp and would work well as a bounce. I like the Skypanel and plan to use a number of S360s when I start shooting again. My problem with them as a bounce source is that they are, by definition, a wide source. The bounced light they give is fine but it is hard to control the size of that bounce or the spill around the sides of the reflector. With a Fresnel lamp, or an open face such as a Red Head, it is easier to adjust the size of the light source coming off the reflector by flooding and spotting the lamp or simply physically moving it.
I've used Sky Panels as bounce sources, and perhaps it's because I know the source is an LED, but I've never felt totally satisfied with skin tones produced from bouncing LED into muslin compared to a tungsten head or even an HMI as a source. It would be interesting to do a test and compare them. The skin almost seems pasty or plastic to me when the original source is the LED unit, but again, it could be that I'm "just seeing things" because I'm not crazy about LED's other than for their flexibility and ease of use. I know Roger would make them look fantastic regardless!