For the benefit of our younger members. Things you can do with flashbulbs that you can't do with ordinary electronic flash units. Or those cute little LED lights...
O. Winston Link at the Danziger Gallery
(Don't just skip over this link without at least clicking and looking at the fourth photograph.)
:w00t::w00t::w00t:
Ken
But still not sure he used those massive bulbs in his work
Note that a lot of those photographs were made in the 1930's, and Link was famouse for his use of Flashbulbs.
Oh, he used them, all right.Thanks I was lost about the comments..
But still not sure he used those massive bulbs in his work, the article didn't say he did. But if the look was purposeful and similar to Gregory Crewdson, then I can see the bulb being used.
Since we've drifted into flashbulb history. Here's what the Iaeger Drive In (3rd picture at the earlier Link link) site looked like a few years ago:
I have an older friend who was actually still using flash powder occasionally into the 70's because he could get more light even than with bulbs. Color yet.
Magnesium powder and potassium nitrate. Pretty powerful stuff.
When my son was in Boy Scouts we issued each scout a small bar of magnesium metal. In an emergency they had been taught to use the files in their all-purpose knives to file off a small pile of shavings and powder, then cover with as close to dry moss as they could find. Once lit it would start almost anything on fire. It will even burn under water. Very handy up here in the PNW rainforest climate.
Fans of the Calumet C1 8x10 metal camera know that Calumet switched from magnesium to aluminum, thus adding about three pounds. The urban legend reason was that one day the local fire marshal arrived for a surprise inspection. The story goes that when he walked in and saw huge piles of magnesium shavings everywhere from the tooling being used, each almost fainted from shock.
Ken
A reprise of an earlier flashbulb post of mine. Flashbulbs rock...
:w00t:
Here's an example of an entire aircraft hanger lit up nicely by a single Sylvania Press 25 bulb in a modest 5-inch reflector. You can see the shadows up behind the spotlight housings in the rafters to get an idea of just how much light was thrown. The camera was my Pacemaker Crown Graphic 4x5. The photo was made handheld at 1/200 sec. Sorry about the missed hotspot on the nose...
The aircraft itself is Paul Allen's* B-25J Mitchell medium bomber restored to its ground attack configuration. The nose insignia is a tribute to Steven Spielberg's father, Arnold. During World War II, Arnold Spielberg served with the 490th "Skull and Wings" Bombardment Squadron, known as the "Burma Bridge Busters" and became a Communications Chief. He was the inspiration for many of his son's later WWII-based motion pictures.
I'm told that on occasion Mr. Allen has closed down his Flying Heritage Museum and cleared everyone out of this hanger so that he and his good friend Mr. Spielberg could sit under this aircraft's wing while eating picnic lunches. Note that this bomber is not a static museum display piece. It is fully restored, fully air worthy (note the engine drip cans), and next scheduled to fly for the public this upcoming May 17th, weather permitting.
Ken
* Microsoft co-founder along with Bill Gates.
Cool! Is that one on the left a UV bulb!?? Good for what? Wet plate or tintype or something?
A reprise of an earlier flashbulb post of mine. Flashbulbs rock...
:w00t:
Here's an example of an entire aircraft hanger lit up nicely by a single Sylvania Press 25 bulb in a modest 5-inch reflector. You can see the shadows up behind the spotlight housings in the rafters to get an idea of just how much light was thrown. The camera was my Pacemaker Crown Graphic 4x5. The photo was made handheld at 1/200 sec. Sorry about the missed hotspot on the nose...
The aircraft itself is Paul Allen's* B-25J Mitchell medium bomber restored to its ground attack configuration. The nose insignia is a tribute to Steven Spielberg's father, Arnold. During World War II, Arnold Spielberg served with the 490th "Skull and Wings" Bombardment Squadron, known as the "Burma Bridge Busters" and became a Communications Chief. He was the inspiration for many of his son's later WWII-based motion pictures.
I'm told that on occasion Mr. Allen has closed down his Flying Heritage Museum and cleared everyone out of this hanger so that he and his good friend Mr. Spielberg could sit under this aircraft's wing while eating picnic lunches. Note that this bomber is not a static museum display piece. It is fully restored, fully air worthy (note the engine drip cans), and next scheduled to fly for the public this upcoming May 17th, weather permitting.
Ken
* Microsoft co-founder along with Bill Gates.
The one that gets me in that picture of bulbs on display is the middle one, with two small blobs of...what, magnesium powder? at the end of the wires. I'm guessing that's a long-burning bulb for focal plane shutters, but someone else will undoubtedly know.
I'm not the OP, but I'll give some reasons from personal experience...
First, the quality of the light is markedly different. This is primarily because of the much longer "burn" time of bulbs. At the shutter speed you choose you get the same exposure effect as natural sunlight because the light is present during the entire time the shutter is open. What you don't get is the strobe effect of ultra-high-speed xenon flashtubes producing maximum, clinical sharpness at 1/10,000-second bursts of light. Click (there was a url link here which no longer exists) for an example of that maximum sharpness. The platform was in free fall at the moment of exposure. Such sharpness is appropriate for some subjects, but not for all.
Second, using bulbs allows you to vary the GNs by varying the shutter speed. The higher the shutter speed, the lower the GN, because of the lower slice of the total bulb output that is caught on the film. Electronic flashes which implement a "power ratio" feature can simulate that same performance. But not all units have this feature.
Third, the output from portable bulbs is generally higher, and in most cases much higher, than portable electronic flash units. Studio lighting trumps this, but with all of the disadvantages of equipment bulk and weight. The lowly Sylvania Press 25 and its cousins are rated by various manufacturers between GN 200-240 (tungsten, in feet) for 1/100-second shutter speeds at ASA 100. This surpasses just about all portable electronic units, including the monster Sunpak 622 Super handle-mount. (Rated by Sunpak at GN 200, but like almost all portable electronic units is actually a little less than that in the real world.)
Fourth, when paired with older (antique?) cameras, bulbs affect almost total compliance from potential subjects. Most have never seen them, let alone seen them work, let alone been photographed by someone using them. It's like an amazingly alien magic trick to most. I always reward my subjects with the offer of either a scan or print, AND the used bulb popped from its reflector (after it cools). I suspect many are more interested in the burned bulb than the photograph it made possible. Go figure...
Fifth, and not least important, the display and use of ultra-cool vintage flashbulbs and equipment is a highly effective chick magnet. Mostly because the guys are way too embarrassed to admit their ignorance about them. And the girls are often genuinely curious, and not afraid in the least to just walk right up and ask questions.
Ken
What gets me is the even-ness of light... If you used a modern on camera speedlight, the bright light would all be on the subject on the foreground and the background would be much darker...
Is this a product of the press shutter being slower or the bulb itself?
The one that gets me in that picture of bulbs on display is the middle one, with two small blobs of...what, magnesium powder? at the end of the wires. I'm guessing that's a long-burning bulb for focal plane shutters, but someone else will undoubtedly know.
Oh great something else to spend money on. And they are not easy to find. gee thanks.
Oh and BTW cool link to the O. Winston Link site too.
Maybe "old hen magnet"
What gets me is the even-ness of light... If you used a modern on camera speedlight, the bright light would all be on the subject on the foreground and the background would be much darker...
Is this a product of the press shutter being slower or the bulb itself?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?