So much good information. I wouldn't have thought that the harsh light would be desirable, but I can see why it is. I am gathering that fashion photography is different from the commercial portraiture, where people would probably want a softer light. Can't wait to learn about artificial lighting this semester!
A really experienced and effective educator. A very systematic demonstration of differenced with pros/cons of different options. Effective illustrations of her various points. Outstanding.
Why did Profoto go through all the trouble of designing a robust zoom rod system (assuming this is the majority of the cost of a parabolic zoom?) just to provide a run-of-the-mill (?) deep reflector shape? I'm not a parabolic expert, but I wonder if there's a significant engineering/cost effort to provide a true parabolic shape?? Why is it so hard? At any rate, this modifier seems pretty cool. Wonder how it compares with the Godox "parabolic" 128/158?
Lindsay, I'm confused about what the diffusion does with this modifier. Since the "softness" of light is dependent only on the size of the light source, putting the diffusion on while the rod is on the outer position (hence the light fills the entire modifier) must be useless and putting it on while the rod is inside is like shooting yourself on the foot since you put the rod inside to narrow the spread of light but the diffusion makes the light spread all over, so it's the same as putting the rod in the outer position with no diffusion.
To diffuse is to spread. So not only do the diffusion panels add spread to the light being emitted regardless of zoom setting, it also cuts down the specularity of the silver panels for an even softer look. For ideal softness you want to flood the light as much as your applied diffusion will allow. Bear in mind doing this you sacrifice projection with the light being less focused, and more powerful lights may be necessary depending on their distance to subject, and desired effect. This modifier allows how a lot of variety in how soft or hard you may want, in a single unit. That said, get the Parabolix!!! All Profoto did was rebrand their design, with some tweaks, and jack up the price!
@@BrianKRoss101very interesting they make such a disclaimer, especially if you know who they took this almost exact design from, who took their inspiration from Broncolor. None of them make such a statement, same goes for Godox version of this! I guess Profoto is afraid of Carl Taylor coming after them! 😂
"It's a single modifier that allows the quality of light." What a lame excuse to justify a 2500 USD bullshit. -_- You want something of that sort but at the fraction of the cost? Then just buy a jinbei one only at maybe 250USD?
Not being a parabolic you lose a ton of options. If it was a parabolic it would also benefit from a less diffused inner reflective material then they used. Surprised Profoto did this. I have a few different brands of ones like these. They do OK but none give the look of a parabolic with shiny reflective material that the high end fashion photographers use.
The price of this modifier is an absolute joke, just like the price of every other Profoto product. One could get 10x the number of lighting looks for 1/10th of the price with an array of other modifiers.
![АЛАУДИНОВ у Скабеевой: эти их ВСУ нас НЕ ДОГОНЯТ 😁 [Пародия]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/an0anqU4WGQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Glad this pop up again. Good refresher course!! Hope to see other videos by her and other in 2024. Thanks.
So much good information. I wouldn't have thought that the harsh light would be desirable, but I can see why it is. I am gathering that fashion photography is different from the commercial portraiture, where people would probably want a softer light. Can't wait to learn about artificial lighting this semester!
A really experienced and effective educator. A very systematic demonstration of differenced with pros/cons of different options. Effective illustrations of her various points. Outstanding.
Awesome!! Love the information.
Why did Profoto go through all the trouble of designing a robust zoom rod system (assuming this is the majority of the cost of a parabolic zoom?) just to provide a run-of-the-mill (?) deep reflector shape? I'm not a parabolic expert, but I wonder if there's a significant engineering/cost effort to provide a true parabolic shape?? Why is it so hard? At any rate, this modifier seems pretty cool. Wonder how it compares with the Godox "parabolic" 128/158?
I believe there's a patent issue.
informative video
Too much going on with that product feels like is not neccesary such a thing in studio but I love Lindsay ❤ and her videos .
Wonder if you own the Profoto Hardbox in your studio.
Lindsay, I'm confused about what the diffusion does with this modifier. Since the "softness" of light is dependent only on the size of the light source, putting the diffusion on while the rod is on the outer position (hence the light fills the entire modifier) must be useless and putting it on while the rod is inside is like shooting yourself on the foot since you put the rod inside to narrow the spread of light but the diffusion makes the light spread all over, so it's the same as putting the rod in the outer position with no diffusion.
Reduces specular highlights
To diffuse is to spread. So not only do the diffusion panels add spread to the light being emitted regardless of zoom setting, it also cuts down the specularity of the silver panels for an even softer look. For ideal softness you want to flood the light as much as your applied diffusion will allow. Bear in mind doing this you sacrifice projection with the light being less focused, and more powerful lights may be necessary depending on their distance to subject, and desired effect. This modifier allows how a lot of variety in how soft or hard you may want, in a single unit. That said, get the Parabolix!!! All Profoto did was rebrand their design, with some tweaks, and jack up the price!
2600 bucks for a modifier is insane 😭
Can you get light cages for non Profoto? Say Bowens?
Why is it so expensive if it isn't a real parabolic?
profoto's parabolic modifier?
01:13
@@BrianKRoss101very interesting they make such a disclaimer, especially if you know who they took this almost exact design from, who took their inspiration from Broncolor. None of them make such a statement, same goes for Godox version of this! I guess Profoto is afraid of Carl Taylor coming after them! 😂
"It's a single modifier that allows the quality of light." What a lame excuse to justify a 2500 USD bullshit. -_- You want something of that sort but at the fraction of the cost? Then just buy a jinbei one only at maybe 250USD?
Not being a parabolic you lose a ton of options. If it was a parabolic it would also benefit from a less diffused inner reflective material then they used. Surprised Profoto did this. I have a few different brands of ones like these. They do OK but none give the look of a parabolic with shiny reflective material that the high end fashion photographers use.
What would be your example of the ideal Parabolic reflector? Briese or Broncolor perhaps?
The price of this modifier is an absolute joke, just like the price of every other Profoto product. One could get 10x the number of lighting looks for 1/10th of the price with an array of other modifiers.