Moonrise & Aurora

Moonrise & Aurora

by Jakub

submit your photo


Picture of the Week Themes
Suggest and vote on themes

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Tell me more ×
Photography Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional, enthusiast and amateur photographers. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote 18 down vote favorite
1

There are a number of "mini-softbox" products on the market. These are meant to mount on a hotshoe flash (usually with an elastic band).

fair-use small image from lumiquest
Lumiquest Softbox III


Are these worthwhile portable and low-space light modifiers, or are they more gimmick than useful? Are they large enough to meaningfully diffuse light for portraits? Are they too close to the flash?

Are any particular designs better than others?

share|improve this question
1  
I'd love to see somebody compare one of these in lighting the same subject vs a normal size softbox - moving the softbox back and adjusting the power to keep the same apparent size and magnitude. Mainly to compare the 'hot spot'. – rfusca♦ Jun 22 '11 at 0:40
There's a related specific-recommendation question at photo.stackexchange.com/questions/1028/…. – mattdm Jun 22 '11 at 15:28

3 Answers

up vote 13 down vote accepted

I have the Lumiquest Softbox III that's mentioned, and I find it useful as a super-portable softbox that's better than nothing. Given the option to have a huge softbox that would be my first choice, but the small softbox, placed very close to a subject, works really well and provides a much softer directional light than one would get with a bare flash or with just a simple diffuser such as an Omni-Bounce.

share|improve this answer
+1 for the 'placed very close to the subject' - as far as size goes, its the apparent size of the light to the subject thats important. – rfusca♦ Jun 21 '11 at 19:54
+1, but the key phrase for me is "better than nothing". Great for use in a pinch since you can use them on-camera, but if portable softness is what you need for a large-ish amount of your work, then a larger unit (Westcott, Photoflex and Lastolite offer good ones) on a bracket, wand (if you have an assistant) or lightstand will give better results. – Stan Rogers Jun 21 '11 at 20:45
up vote 5 down vote

Let's put it this way: even a cheap softbox is better than nothing. That said, the larger the softbox, the better, although it will look a bit odd on your flash. (I have one that's like 8in. square.) And, in those situations where you don't have much else, it is better than nothing.

Like @dpollitt says, I would first attempt to bounce the flash, but when it isn't possible these are your next best thing.

share|improve this answer
So would you say that the 8' size is within the "a bit odd" range? Just curious. :) – mattdm Dec 15 '11 at 4:21
up vote 2 down vote

I have had great success with the Gary Fong Lightsphere. You can see by the reviews on B&H that is is a very popular light modifier, especially among the wedding photography enthusiasts.

When they work the best for me is when I am in low light situations where bouncing my flash off of a white ceiling is not practical or possible.

They are not going to replace off-camera options, but when you have to stay portable and move around areas, and your camera is already at its highest light gathering capabilities, these are a very valid solution.

I think portrait work is going to be the best opportunity to use these light modifiers. If you are in a close cramped quarters, such as an apartment, you should still be able to bounce your flash or setup a simple lighting kit.

share|improve this answer
2  
The lightspehere only works as a large diffuse light source if there's something to bounce it off of - walls, ceiling, something. It is not itself a large or diffuse light source - it can create a large source. Light modifiers like @mattdm is referring to try to create a large source themselves. Just different. – rfusca♦ Jun 21 '11 at 19:18
1  
@dpollit - Outdoors in the sun, I imagine its mostly just filling in harsh shadows against an already harsh sunlight - I'm not sure the quality of the light would be noticed as much since its just fill. I'm not saying its not a good product or doesn't have its place, its just functionally different than a directional softbox. – rfusca♦ Jun 21 '11 at 21:31
2  
I'm not criticizing or saying its a bad choice of product, or that it can't create soft light source in the right situation - just that its different product than a mini softbox. – rfusca♦ Jun 22 '11 at 1:02
2  
There is a huge difference between a lightsphere and mini softbox and that is the softbox is highly directional. If you have nothing to bounce off the apparent size of the lit surface as seen from the subject will be the same, giving very similar results as a softbox. But if there are surfaces to bounce off you'll get a very different result as the lit area as seen from the subject will contain these surfaces as well. For this reason you can't classify the lightsphere as a small softbox! – Matt Grum Jun 22 '11 at 8:00
1  
@Matt Grum: Sure it is. It's not a very good softbox, but you can point a flash at the subject with the Fongbong on it and shoot through the lid... – Jay Lance Photography Jun 22 '11 at 20:56
show 9 more comments

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.