Photographer
Rp-photo
Posts: 42711
Houston, Texas, US
After having a stand blow over again yesterday, I once again wondered why no manufacturer has come up with "tough" umbrellas that can take more abuse. Specifically, the ribs and shaft could be made of fishing rod-type material that would flex to aborb the falling stand energy and return back to a straightness. Another option would be to put flexing springs/joints in conventional ribs and shafts. Even if it cost 2x more than a regular umbrella it would seem worth it. Or can a beauty dish be considered the answer?
Photographer
Christian Nyback
Posts: 987
West Palm Beach, Florida, US
The answer is sand bags... :-)
Photographer
MartinImages
Posts: 3872
Los Angeles, California, US
Photographer
Rp-photo
Posts: 42711
Houston, Texas, US
Christian Nyback wrote: The answer is sand bags... :-) My stand yesterday had a Vagabond II on it, which weighs 20 lbs. and reduces blowovers at least 90%. Once and awhile a gust still hits just right. The only true answer is resilient materials of construction or acceptance and planning that unbrellas are "consumables".
Photographer
AVD AlphaDuctions
Posts: 10747
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
the basic umbrella design was invented (i think) by da vinci. I doubt he or anyone else envisaged someone deliberately putting an umbrella sideways, which just risks catching the wind too much. Sandbags and heavier stands just mean you have that much more force getting exerted on the umbrella instead of pressure getting relieved by movement. I just can't see that as a good thing. Something has to 'give'. If you dont want the stand falling over you can clamp an umbrella on scaffolding. If the scaffolding falls you are probably in winds so strong you should have been seeking cover a long time ago. But again, all that does is make your expensive umbrella at risk of breakage. They make monsoon umbrellas for Singapore but I've never seen one there for photographic use. I think it would be prohibitively expensive (not just more expensive).
Photographer
Rp-photo
Posts: 42711
Houston, Texas, US
AVD AlphaDuctions wrote: They make monsoon umbrellas for Singapore but I've never seen one there for photographic use. I think it would be prohibitively expensive (not just more expensive). Blowovers can never be 100% prevented by other than extreme measures such as scaffolding, but resulting damage could be mitigated by using resilient materials of construction. I've come to realize that there are only three viable options for outdoor lights: 1. Umbrella or other large modifier with strobe and Vagabond II. 2. Flash with small modifiers like Lumiquest Mini Softbox. 3. Bare strobe or flash.
Photographer
Time to Shoot
Posts: 4724
Arlington, Virginia, US
softboxes do use flexible non-metal ribs but weighing down the stand is one's best bet
Photographer
Photography by BE
Posts: 5652
Midland, Texas, US
rp_photo wrote: Blowovers can never be 100% prevented by other than extreme measures such as scaffolding, but resulting damage could be mitigated by using resilient materials of construction. I've come to realize that there are only three viable options for outdoor lights: 1. Umbrella or other large modifier with strobe and Vagabond II. 2. Flash with small modifiers like Lumiquest Mini Softbox. 3. Bare strobe or flash. Have you ever considered available light only? I seldom take any sort of lighting because: 1)windy west texas. 2)I work too fast and in too many different locations to have the time to set lights up. 3)I never have problems with anyone other than an occasional guy who whistles, if I am shoooting a girl.
Photographer
FKVPhotography
Posts: 30064
Ocala, Florida, US
rp_photo wrote: After having a stand blow over again yesterday, I once again wondered why no manufacturer has come up with "tough" umbrellas that can take more abuse. Specifically, the ribs and shaft could be made of fishing rod-type material that would flex to aborb the falling stand energy and return back to a straightness. Another option would be to put flexing springs/joints in conventional ribs and shafts. Even if it cost 2x more than a regular umbrella it would seem worth it. Or can a beauty dish be considered the answer? I like the fishing rod idea. I'm thinking some flow through baffles would let most of the air blow through without too much affect on the light output.
Photographer
Kevin Connery
Posts: 17824
El Segundo, California, US
rp_photo wrote: After having a stand blow over again yesterday, I once again wondered why no manufacturer has come up with "tough" umbrellas that can take more abuse. They do. Larson Reflectasols are much more robust than typical umbrellas. They've been available for over 30 years--some of mine are over 20 years old.
rp_photo wrote: Even if it cost 2x more than a regular umbrella it would seem worth it. That's in the ballpark. $120 for a 36" square, $140 for 42" square. (They seem to have discontinued their hexagonal ones.) But you can interchange fabrics easily, so you can switch looks if you want--soft silver, reflective silver, white, etc--and they can be used flat as reflectors as well.
Photographer
Click Hamilton
Posts: 36555
San Diego, California, US
I use a pair of very tough, high quality umbrellas ... solid center shaft, heavy chrome shaft and chrome tips, heavy cloth of something like satin or silk, heavy ribs, mechanically perfect. They have nice slide on storage covers made from the same soft-white material. The cloth is not nylon. I use the one layer cloth for both shoot through and reflect. Unfortunately, there is no name or trade mark on them. It looks like German manufacturing quality. I bought them at an estate sale with a trailer load of other high quality photo equipment.
Photographer
Chicago Digital Images
Posts: 167
Wheaton, Illinois, US
FKVPhotoGraphics wrote: I'm thinking some flow through baffles would let most of the air blow through without too much affect on the light output. I like this one.
Photographer
Rp-photo
Posts: 42711
Houston, Texas, US
Photography by BE wrote: Have you ever considered available light only? Not as much as I should and here's why: 1. I started out with natural light and took a lot of crappy pictures (not always the light's fault). 2. Other photographers introduced me to reflectors, which certainly helped but required an assitant and couldn't always get light where needed. 3. Once I got a DSLR, I began using the built-in flash on TTL as fill, which seemed to give quantum leap improvement to image quality. 4. From there I progressed to SB-600 on-camera, SB-600 off-camera, multiple Sunpak 383's, and AB800's
Photographer
Rp-photo
Posts: 42711
Houston, Texas, US
Click Hamilton wrote: Unfortunately, there is no name or trade mark on them. It looks like German manufacturing quality. I bought them at an estate sale. Probably decades-old, from the days when craftsmanship still mattered.
Photographer
Click Hamilton
Posts: 36555
San Diego, California, US
rp_photo wrote: Probably decades-old, from the days when craftsmanship still mattered. Exactly. I'm surfing around to see if I can find anything similar. http://www.photoflex.com/Photoflex_Prod … _Umbrella/ These are satin shoot-through and claim to be high quality. They come with a cover like I just described mine as having. The price is quite reasonable. I would like to first call them to ask if the center shafts are solid or hollow. If solid, I would like to go see one with my own eyes. I've had Chinese hollow center shafts before that collapse when I try to tighten down the clamp. The crappy quality drives me up the wall. Shoot through satin fabric is far superior to the nylon we see everywhere, in my opinion, and at least in terms of durability. The quality of light is very nice. I looked at mine again .. there is a heavy plastic grommet/washer built into the end, just below the chrome tip where the satin fabric comes together at the shaft. So at least we know it was build during the age of plastics.
Photographer
Fashion Photographer
Posts: 14388
London, England, United Kingdom
Christian Nyback wrote: The answer is sand bags... :-) Yep - carry them empty and fill them up with loose dirt with a trowel from a garden or park.
Photographer
Kelvin Hammond
Posts: 17397
Billings, Montana, US
Photography by BE wrote: Have you ever considered available light only? I seldom take any sort of lighting because: 1)windy west texas. 2)I work too fast and in too many different locations to have the time to set lights up. 3)I never have problems with anyone other than an occasional guy who whistles, if I am shoooting a girl. To me, available light always looks kinda flat-ish, and non-dramatic, and pretty much non-commercial. And... it forces you to work based on the sun's position, instead of any time or at any angle you want to. For high winds, I just shoot with the 7in reflector, and then bump the ambient exposure up or down for the effect I want. The difference between a 7in reflector and an umbrella is pretty negligible in daylight if you know how to set ratio's between flash and ambient. (but both provide more drama and a neutral color balance then available light does).
Photographer
Click Hamilton
Posts: 36555
San Diego, California, US
A beauty dish cuts down significantly on the wind problem for outdoor shooting.
Photographer
ARTFORMS
Posts: 571
Greenville, South Carolina, US
A reliable photo assistant works great when there is too much wind.
Photographer
Rp-photo
Posts: 42711
Houston, Texas, US
Post hidden on Sep 28, 2009 01:12 pm Reason: violates rules Comments: Don't hijack. Not even your own thread.
Photographer
FKVPhotography
Posts: 30064
Ocala, Florida, US
Click Hamilton wrote:
Exactly. I'm surfing around to see if I can find anything similar. http://www.photoflex.com/Photoflex_Prod … _Umbrella/ These are satin shoot-through and claim to be high quality. They come with a cover like I just described mine as having. The price is quite reasonable. I would like to first call them to ask if the center shafts are solid or hollow. If solid, I would like to go see one with my own eyes. I use PhotoFlex. The shafts on mine are solid! Great umbrellas, especially the removable covers which lets you shot through them.
Photographer
Will King Photo
Posts: 1895
Virginia Beach, Virginia, US
Kevin Connery wrote:
rp_photo wrote: After having a stand blow over again yesterday, I once again wondered why no manufacturer has come up with "tough" umbrellas that can take more abuse. They do. Larson Reflectasols are much more robust than typical umbrellas. They've been available for over 30 years--some of mine are over 20 years old.
That's in the ballpark. $120 for a 36" square, $140 for 42" square. (They seem to have discontinued their hexagonal ones.) But you can interchange fabrics easily, so you can switch looks if you want--soft silver, reflective silver, white, etc--and they can be used flat as reflectors as well. How do you mount speedlites or strobes on these things?
Photographer
Click Hamilton
Posts: 36555
San Diego, California, US
FKVPhotoGraphics wrote: I use PhotoFlex. The shafts on mine are solid! Great umbrellas, especially the removable covers which lets you shot through them. Thanks Frank. Would you say that the ribs of the PhotoFlex umbrellas are strong? .. compared to the typical nylon Wescott umbrellas we see everywhere? In the feedback comments to the Adorama brand satin umbrellas, I see people complain that the ribs crumple when they tip over. I have always enjoyed the quality of my other PhotoFlex products, generally speaking.
Photographer
ChangingFaces
Posts: 198
Dallas, Texas, US
Click Hamilton wrote:
Thanks Frank. Would you say that the ribs of the PhotoFlex umbrellas are strong? .. compared to the typical nylon Wescott umbrellas we see everywhere? In the feedback comments to the Adorama brand satin umbrellas, I see people complain that the ribs crumple when they tip over. I have always enjoyed the quality of my other PhotoFlex products, generally speaking. In my opinion yes, I started out with a Photoflex Umbrella and later picked up the Collapsible Wescott and didn't like the build quality of it and later sold it.
Photographer
Kelvin Hammond
Posts: 17397
Billings, Montana, US
Still, I'm not exactly sure why to even use an umbrella in the wind (or even without wind). I shot this on saturday (senior kid), with an AB1600 with the 7in reflector. It was pretty frickin' windy out. Because of the direction of the wind, the model had to face the sun to keep her hair out of her eyes, and that meant that I would over-power the sun to some degree for the effect I wanted. I remembered seeing some African safari-looking stuff years ago in Vanity Fair, where it looks dusky, and all the colors are rich, but sort of murky at the same time. So, in this case, direct 4:30pm sunlight is the fill. f18, 1/160 I kind of doubt that I would be able to tell this 7in standard reflector shot from umbrella light though...
Photographer
Rp-photo
Posts: 42711
Houston, Texas, US
Smedley Whiplash wrote: Still, I'm not exactly sure why to even use an umbrella in the wind (or even without wind). I shot this on saturday (senior kid), with an AB1600 with the 7in reflector. It was pretty frickin' windy out. I did a portion of my shoot yesterday with just the "spill kill" reflector, and also noticed little difference.
Photographer
SHGfoto- Stefhan Gordon
Posts: 2517
Venice, California, US
In windy conditions...I use a Profoto ringflash off camera with a dish reflector... If I want softer light, rather than softboxes, I'll use a AB shoot through Brolly Box that doesn't catch the wind as much On location, rather than fight mother nature, I usually adapt my equipment to it.....
Photographer
Kevin Connery
Posts: 17824
El Segundo, California, US
Will King Photography wrote:
Kevin Connery wrote: Larson Reflectasols are much more robust than typical umbrellas. They've been available for over 30 years--some of mine are over 20 years old. How do you mount speedlites or strobes on these things? You can mount them the same way as any other umbrella; an umbrella adapter. I use a bent piece of aluminum (L-shaped) with a 5/8" hole in it and clamp that to my handle-mount flash, slip it over the top of a lightstand, and use a grip head or one of Larson's clamps to hold the Reflectasol (or softbox, if I'm going that route). That puts the flash tube in-line with the center of the modifier. I could just screw it onto the top of the lightstand, but it'd be way off-center there; that's probably OK for a shoe-mount flash, though. Larson's clamp is just a lightweight grip head with a built-in clamp; they work with most other umbrellas, too.
Photographer
FKVPhotography
Posts: 30064
Ocala, Florida, US
Click Hamilton wrote:
Thanks Frank. Would you say that the ribs of the PhotoFlex umbrellas are strong? .. compared to the typical nylon Wescott umbrellas we see everywhere? In the feedback comments to the Adorama brand satin umbrellas, I see people complain that the ribs crumple when they tip over. I have always enjoyed the quality of my other PhotoFlex products, generally speaking. I've knocked them over a few times and so far no problems.
Photographer
nwprophoto
Posts: 15005
Tonasket, Washington, US
I have had no problems completely destroying Photoflex umbrellas in the wind. I pretty much just use dishes outside now
Photographer
Denis Rule
Posts: 189
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Use a HD C stand with sand bags then you can use an umbrella, a dish or even a softbox without having to worry about them falling over.
Photographer
DBartkowiak Photography
Posts: 202
Houston, Texas, US
Have you tried tent stakes and bungee cords - I use them when I cannot get an assistant (read escort) to hold anything or just would feel more comfortable doing so.
Photographer
Kevin Greggain Photography
Posts: 6769
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
Photoflex umbrellas have fiberglass ribs.. I've had mine fall over a few times and they are still going strong. rp_photo wrote: After having a stand blow over again yesterday, I once again wondered why no manufacturer has come up with "tough" umbrellas that can take more abuse. Specifically, the ribs and shaft could be made of fishing rod-type material that would flex to aborb the falling stand energy and return back to a straightness. Another option would be to put flexing springs/joints in conventional ribs and shafts. Even if it cost 2x more than a regular umbrella it would seem worth it. Or can a beauty dish be considered the answer?
Photographer
Mal at Hidden Creek
Posts: 1227
Lovejoy, Georgia, US
In addition to using heavy stands, shot/sand bags, and on occasions staking the light stand down with tent ropes and engineer stakes -- my wife came up with the best solution. We took two 42" umbrellas and cut & hemmed 6-inch wind vents vertically between the umbrella ribs. Light loss low from wind vents is very small, yet allows wind to pass through umbrellas without getting trapped. Helps that wife is a seamstress.
Photographer
glamour pics
Posts: 6095
Los Angeles, California, US
The umbrellas would be too heavy. They are not, and shouldn't be, regarded as shock absorbers or crash cushions.
Photographer
Visionary Studio One
Posts: 703
Grand Prairie, Texas, US
Mal at Hidden Creek wrote: In addition to using heavy stands, shot/sand bags, and on occasions staking the light stand down with tent ropes and engineer stakes -- my wife came up with the best solution. We took two 42" umbrellas and cut & hemmed 6-inch wind vents vertically between the umbrella ribs. Light low from winds vents is very small, yet allows wind to pass through umbrellas without getting trapped. Helps that wife is a seamstress. +1 Best Idea I've seen yet!
Photographer
YnY Photography Studios
Posts: 1716
Legal, Alberta, Canada
rp_photo wrote: After having a stand blow over again yesterday, I once again wondered why no manufacturer has come up with "tough" umbrellas that can take more abuse. Specifically, the ribs and shaft could be made of fishing rod-type material that would flex to aborb the falling stand energy and return back to a straightness. Another option would be to put flexing springs/joints in conventional ribs and shafts. Even if it cost 2x more than a regular umbrella it would seem worth it. Or can a beauty dish be considered the answer? Personally, I don't worry about it as long as my umbrella can help save my much more expensive lights.
Photographer
Photos by Lorrin
Posts: 7026
Eugene, Oregon, US
Kevin Connery wrote:
rp_photo wrote: After having a stand blow over again yesterday, I once again wondered why no manufacturer has come up with "tough" umbrellas that can take more abuse. They do. Larson Reflectasols are much more robust than typical umbrellas. They've been available for over 30 years--some of mine are over 20 years old.
That's in the ballpark. $120 for a 36" square, $140 for 42" square. (They seem to have discontinued their hexagonal ones.) But you can interchange fabrics easily, so you can switch looks if you want--soft silver, reflective silver, white, etc--and they can be used flat as reflectors as well. Larson is much more rugged -- You also can replace either the frame or the fabric. They also are one of the most even for beam spread and they can go flat as a reflector. The frames are square 3/8 th inch aluminum. the system was origanally designed for children's story boards. they fabrics come in gold, black, white, silver, soft silver and at one time blue for converting tungsten light to daylight.
|