Lambency Flash Diffuser

[gstark]

As many of you will know, I've been playing with the Lambency flash diffuser for the last few days. This sort of diffuser fits onto the typical standard accessory flash head that you get from Canon or Nikon (SB800, 530EX etc).

The current versions of the Lambency come with options such as a yellow diffuser, a white ("cloud") diffuser, and a chrome vault.

I've not used the yellow diffuser in these images; it seems to be more for use as a colour correction aid, and there seems to be, when used with the SB800, a slight warming of the tones produced in the images.

Direct flash, D300, Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 at f/6.3




Chrome Vault, D300, Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 at f/6.3

More rounded light and shadows, greater falloff on the background





Cloud Diffuser, D300, Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 at f/6.3

More rounded than direct, but there appears to be some blown highlights. The raw image doesn't show these highlights as being blown, so I suspect that this may be a product of the conversion to jpg. Note the warmer colour rendition.





Direct flash, D300, Sigma 30mm f/1.4 at f/6.3





Chrome vault, D300, Sigma 30mm f/1.4 at f/6.3

More rounded, note the falloff. This is a very wide angle lens, but similar falloff, on the edges, was noted when using a Nikkor 50mm f/1.4





Cloud diffuser, D300, Sigma 30mm f/1.4 at f/6.3

More rounded, warmer tones, no falloff but again, blown highlights. This time, in looking at the raw, the shoulder appears to me to be blown, but Capture NX shows no "lost highlights".




One very interesting aspect of the chrome vault is that its construction incorporates an internal reflector, so that, if you have your flash pointing straight up, a higher portion of your flash output will be directed, diffused, towards your subject. I see this as being a very useful feature.

What I also thought though was that this very same feature - the internal reflector - might also be useful in macro photography.

These final two images have the flash removed from the camera with the camera set to TTL mode, and the flash set to be used as a slave. The lens used was a very old Nikkor 55 micro, which is not compatible with the D300. Therefore, all settings are manual.

However, they demonstrate what I was able to achieve in terms of a simple macro lighting setup. Not a ring flash, nor a replacement for a light tent (for product style shoots) by any stretch of the imagination, but certainly better than many other alternatives, and much easier and quicker to set up.

[sirhc55]

Interesting shots Gary but this Lambency diffuser really does not work for macro. The shot of the lens shows a single lighting band in the middle of the pic which does not IMO enhance the overall feel of the shot. . .

[Oz_Beachside]

I think shot #3 brings out more personality into Leigh's DVD collection...

porn aside, ive found the cloud verison to work well to soften and bounce indoors. still working on outdoor open air technique to get somehting I like.

[gstark]

Interesting shots Gary but this Lambency diffuser really does not work for macro. The shot of the lens shows a single lighting band in the middle of the pic which does not IMO enhance the overall feel of the shot. . .

Chris,

While I basically agree - I'm not suggesting this as a macro lighting solution - but I do see it more as a potential tool that might be suitable when you need something that's close at hand and quick and easy to set up.

I think that for a non-reflective subject, it may be better than nothing, and I think that it's certainly way better than direct flash, which for many would probably be the other option.

The real idea I think I'm presenting is that we need to think about our tools, and how we can use them besides the obvious.

Cheers.

[gstark]

Bruce,

I think shot #3 brings out more personality into Leigh's DVD collection...

porn aside

Anything you've not yet seen?

still working on outdoor open air technique to get somehting I like.

The chrome vault, with its internal reflector, will be very useful outdoors, I think.

[Oz_Beachside]

im going to try inserting alum foil in the back half for outdoor open air use, to bounce a little more forward. does the chrome lid do similar?

[gstark]

im going to try inserting alum foil in the back half for outdoor open air use, to bounce a little more forward. does the chrome lid do similar?

Yes.

Consider lining the inside of the dome with foil, and then extending that down about 50% along the rear surface as well.

[the foto fanatic]

Gary, could you show us an image of what this thing looks like mounted on your flash please?

EDIT: Don't worry - I googled it. It's a Gary Fong Lightsphere lookalike, isn't it?

[gstark]

Gary, could you show us an image of what this thing looks like mounted on your flash please?

EDIT: Don't worry - I googled it. It's a Gary Fong Lightsphere lookalike, isn't it?

Yes, which is why I've not included an image of it.

I may shoot the chrome vault though, and post an image of that for you.

Bruce ... you might want to consider something like the aluminium foil inlays that you can get for electric stoves.

[Oz_Beachside]

Bruce ... you might want to consider something like the aluminium foil inlays that you can get for electric stoves.

wow, I havent seen those since the 80's. but that sounds like it would work well, and a nice thick foil.

[Matt. K]

Gary
The lighting seems to be robbing the image of form. The images of Leigh lack 'roundness' and the modelling seem flat. Do you see the same effect or is it a conversion for web problem?

[wendellt]

youd get more modelling if the light was held much higher
get that butterfly shadow under the nose

as a difusser its o.k but it's more of a spreader than a diffuser from my tests
more portable than a softbox though