Jump to content


Photo

Anyone know anything about these LEDs claiming to be HMI Replacements?

hmi led replacment f-485

  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 Roger Alexander

Roger Alexander
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 20 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Atlanta

Posted 25 November 2016 - 11:59 PM

Their claim seems pretty blasphemous to me. But I would love if it were true and if I could see proof of it.

 

They claim this dimmable LED light Intellytech F-485 puts out the same of light as a 4k-6k watt HMI, I call BS. They have 1 or 2 videos circulating that talk about the lights but no tests out there that show a head to head comparison against the 4k-6k hmi light. If I could see that they were equivalent I'd maybe give it a go but I don't see any proof.

 

 

I left a comment about doing a test, no answer. Anybody know anything about these lights or tried them?

 

-Dimmable

-Bi color

-Low Power

-no heat

-DMX control

-low fan noise


  • 0




#2 Michael Rodin

Michael Rodin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 62 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Riga, Latvia

Posted 26 November 2016 - 05:15 AM

From their site:

 

20 Degrees 1 Meter / 38,220 Lux 2 Meters / 10,000 Lux 3 Meters / 3.095 Lux 50 Degrees 1 Meter / 18,265 Lux 2 Meters / 4,675 Lux 3 Meters / 2,000 Lux 70 Degrees 1 Meter / 14,240 Lux 2 Meters / 4,000 Lux

3 Meters / 1,442 Lux

 

 

That's nowhere near a 4K Compact fresnel, let alone a big-lens Arri Apollo or a par light. 

Neither does it match a tungsten 5K - it's roughly 1/5 the output. This light is barely brighter than a good studio 1K.


  • 0

#3 Jean Gonzales

Jean Gonzales
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 30 posts
  • Electrician
  • Antwerp, Belgium

Posted 26 November 2016 - 06:35 AM

Yeahh, no way.


  • 0

#4 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11387 posts
  • Other

Posted 26 November 2016 - 06:56 AM

This is normal.

 

Some of the claims made for LEDs are absolutely insane, and it isn't just about output. There's at least one product out there, by an unfathomably well-respected manufacturer, which actually claims to have some quite advanced technical features which simply don't work - can't work - they're completely mis-designed.

 

The rule of thumb for output are that LED has an efficiency advantage of about 4:1 over tungsten, so when he describes it as roughly a 2K that's possibly just about reasonable. LED doesn't really have an efficiency advantage over fluorescent or HMI at all, unless you're taking into account some of the optical efficiencies that can arise from a more directable light source.

 

Also, that's not a book light.

 

P


  • 1

#5 JD Hartman

JD Hartman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1540 posts
  • Gaffer
  • Edison, N.J. U.S.A.

Posted 26 November 2016 - 08:05 AM

What Phil says is true.  I watched the video in the link and gave it a thumbs down, I suggest that others do the same to any and all dubious YouTube content.


  • 0

#6 Michael Rodin

Michael Rodin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 62 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Riga, Latvia

Posted 26 November 2016 - 10:11 AM

Seems that these guys aren't consciously lying about the output of this light. They bought a pile of these lights from a Chinese vendor who provided them with bullshit tech specs, and now they're advertising those specs on their website. 

Sure they haven't compared it to a 6K HMI - I guess they've never actually used or seen one. Because they're not electricians or gaffers - they're amateurs. 

 

Just look at that light: people who designed it have never been on a film set. The knobs won't survive a month of location shooting. That indoor-appliance power socket is completely unapproriate - it doesn't fix the plug and is prone to shorting/arcing when dirty. Touch screen is a nonsense - how do you use it wearing gloves? 

 

Then look at the second video. The camera guy calls that "fresnel+octobox through light grid" a booklight!

 

Then at 1:11 he's complaining about the shadow on the face. The key is obviously a little low - he could have brought it higher to a steeper angle, diffuse to taste, fill with foam, add eyelight and get a "proper" flattering interview portrait. Now this would sell a lighting fixture.

But he just "fixes" his light with lots of diffusion, getting spill all over the location. 

Maybe that's a new way to light, and I just don't get it.

 

P.S. Reread the thread - Phil has already commented about the "booklight". 


Edited by Michael Rodin, 26 November 2016 - 10:13 AM.

  • 0

#7 JD Hartman

JD Hartman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1540 posts
  • Gaffer
  • Edison, N.J. U.S.A.

Posted 26 November 2016 - 11:17 AM

Seems that these guys aren't consciously lying about the output of this light. They bought a pile of these lights from a Chinese vendor who provided them with bullshit tech specs, and now they're advertising those specs on their website. 

Sure they haven't compared it to a 6K HMI - I guess they've never actually used or seen one. Because they're not electricians or gaffers - they're amateurs.

 

Do you want to find yourself on a low-budget shoot and have to work with this crap?   Vote their video down and leave a comment as well, if you feel inclined.


  • 0

#8 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11387 posts
  • Other

Posted 26 November 2016 - 11:34 AM

Actually, that sort of shoot is more or less what many of us have access to... and the portrait didn't end up looking too bad, I thought.

Yes it spilled everywhere, that's tough when you don't have a massive pile of black tat.

P
  • 0

#9 Michael Rodin

Michael Rodin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 62 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Riga, Latvia

Posted 26 November 2016 - 02:10 PM

J.D.,

Sure I can (and will) rate this nonsense on Youtube, but, really, do you think it'll change anything?

 

People may read our comments and turn away from this exact product, but after that they'll happily buy another crap fixture. They - and they're producers, countless "production studio" owners, even (now this is a shame!) DPs, - just don't have the knowledge to choose the right stuff.

Some have nobody to consult, and some are so full of it, they think they know better. Better than pro gaffers/sparks, of course...

 

 

So there will be crap gear on low-budget sets anyway. And we need to somehow make do with it.

I've made up a small electric kit with Dedos, 300w to 2K fresnels, couple redheads and small HMIs. It doesn't make profit or pay off fast, but makes gaffing on micro-budget projects more comfortable, as I don't need to rent to light an interview or a small interior. 

 

P.S.

By the way, I've noticed the industry is somehow getting used to amateur equipment. 

I've seen Manfrotto fluid heads on pro sets (national ads, etc), which I can't explain, as they're rubbish. I mean, they could have rented an OConnor, but the DoP chose the Manfrotto toy, as that's what he had used before. 

There are DoPs who rent no-name resin camera filters, scratched and filthy as ***t, as if they're OK with ruining the image.

Worse, there are rental houses which rent out broken Chinese stuff and used expendables.

 

So it's not only a problem in G&E. But it's MORE of a problem in grip&electric, because while a cheap fluid head won't kill you, a defective lamphead/ballast/dimmer/distro easily can. 


  • 0

#10 JD Hartman

JD Hartman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1540 posts
  • Gaffer
  • Edison, N.J. U.S.A.

Posted 26 November 2016 - 02:37 PM

J.D.,

Sure I can (and will) rate this nonsense on Youtube, but, really, do you think it'll change anything?

 

People may read our comments and turn away from this exact product, but after that they'll happily buy another crap fixture. They - and they're producers, countless "production studio" owners, even (now this is a shame!) DPs, - just don't have the knowledge to choose the right stuff.

Some have nobody to consult, and some are so full of it, they think they know better. Better than pro gaffers/sparks, of course...

 

 

So there will be crap gear on low-budget sets anyway. And we need to somehow make do with it.

I've made up a small electric kit with Dedos, 300w to 2K fresnels, couple redheads and small HMIs. It doesn't make profit or pay off fast, but makes gaffing on micro-budget projects more comfortable, as I don't need to rent to light an interview or a small interior. 

electric, because while a cheap fluid head won't kill you, a defective lamphead/ballast/dimmer/distro easily can. 

 

Better to try and fail than not try... 

Some will find those videos where we have left comments and decide to buy better gear.  After all, if it sounds too good to be true, it usually isn't.  Maybe Phil will pen an honest review of these cheap-ass  lights for Red Shark.


  • 0

#11 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11387 posts
  • Other

Posted 26 November 2016 - 06:39 PM

I could probably do that, and the thrust of it would be something like this.

 

If there are safety problems with something - and I mean substantiable safety problems, not a hunch that something looks a bit flimsy - I'd be concerned.

 

Otherwise, most of the filmmaking that is done in the world is not done to the standards of a big American production and it's unreasonable to expect that it is. If the choice is a cheap-ass light or no light, that's no choice at all. 

 

I'm not here to defend shoddiness, and the way some of this stuff is being promoted (by both high and low-end manufacturers) is asinine, but you can't stomp about demanding people do it a certain way.


  • 0

#12 JD Hartman

JD Hartman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1540 posts
  • Gaffer
  • Edison, N.J. U.S.A.

Posted 26 November 2016 - 07:30 PM

Shows produced in the UK were all lighted with two candles, a flashlight and a bare bulb in a cracked plastic socket on a frayed cord?  Dr. Who, Danger UXB, any of the BBC productions, Faulty Towers, etc., etc.


  • 0

#13 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11387 posts
  • Other

Posted 26 November 2016 - 07:35 PM

What's your point?

 

You're still describing the top 1%.

 

There is a place for this stuff. They're not serving the people who would once have bought Arri. They're serving the people who really would do it with an overexcited glow-worm.

 

P


  • 0

#14 Michael Rodin

Michael Rodin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 62 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Riga, Latvia

Posted 27 November 2016 - 02:46 AM

Frankly I don't know who these guys are serving at all. This "Intellytech" gadget actually costs more than a new Arri T1.

And if you need daylight, you can rent a good old choke-ballast Apollo 575 for ages for the money. You can even buy that Apollo used for less - of course, it makes sense to share the purchase with somebody who could service it.  

 

And there are other ways to get a usable lighting kit for cheap - know it, done it. No need to spend on Chinese crap which will fall apart in a month. 


Edited by Michael Rodin, 27 November 2016 - 02:52 AM.

  • 0

#15 Michael Rodin

Michael Rodin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 62 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Riga, Latvia

Posted 27 November 2016 - 03:09 AM

See, the bi-color version costs $1700. For the money, you can buy:

(prices based on European/Russian used market)

2 x used Ianiro Minispots at $150 apiece

4 x used par cans @ $10

2 x used Strand 1K fresnels @ $150

1 x used Strand 2K fresnel @ $250

and still have cash for stands and basic grip.

 

You can already light something with that.

 

When you need daylight, it's more complicated. You'll need help from a G&E guy, but, well, you'll need it anyway if you are going to shoot a film which uses artificial daylight.


  • 0

#16 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11387 posts
  • Other

Posted 27 November 2016 - 06:10 AM

$1700 does seem moderately expensive, although there isn't much else out there which would give you 485W of daylight. The HMI equivalent would be a 575, which would be slightly more powerful, but costs nearly $7000 at B&H.

 

So, yeah. Still:

 

 

 

2 x used Ianiro Minispots at $150 apiece

4 x used par cans @ $10

2 x used Strand 1K fresnels @ $150

1 x used Strand 2K fresnel @ $250

and still have cash for stands and basic grip.

 

Assuming you put 500W in the parcans, that's about 6K of light.

 

If you're in the UK, most domestic houses could run that if you spread it across two rings. If you're in the USA, it might be a bit trickier, especially for the 2K. That is the market they're serving.

 

There is a very narrow gap between meritocracy, which is good, and elitism, which isn't.

 

P


  • 0

#17 Michael Rodin

Michael Rodin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 62 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Riga, Latvia

Posted 27 November 2016 - 06:53 AM

$1700 does seem moderately expensive, although there isn't much else out there which would give you 485W of daylight. The HMI equivalent would be a 575, which would be slightly more powerful, but costs nearly $7000 at B&H.

A used Arrisun 5 will cost around $2K. Takes some more money or a gaffer friend to check it, but it's a whole world of difference. 3-10X brighter  depending on the lens/setup, extremely versatile, built to last.

Well-serviced LTM Cinepars are no more than $1500. With a choke ballast they're indestructible.

And there are Compact 575, Apollo 575, Strands, Desistis if you want a fresnel.

 

That said, I don't understand why you have to own everything. It's not the cheapest way to make movies. 


  • 0

#18 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11387 posts
  • Other

Posted 27 November 2016 - 08:14 AM

Comparing new for old isn't very fair, but yes, that's what I'd do, depending on my access to the used market.

 

Bear in mind iron ballasts can cause complicated problems for rolling-shutter cameras, and it's increasingly common for cameras to shoot high frame rate, so they're really not ideal. More or less all LEDs are flicker free at any speed you like.

 

As to the owning everything - there are complexities here. What people overlook is that the costs of adding a 575 HMI PAR to an existing package where there's already trucks and crew and insurance are certainly very reasonable. The problems of just renting one alone, involving setting up an account, arranging insurance, picking it up and taking it back, are much more significant and that's why people prefer to own things, especially if they live in Spotweld, Nebrahoma, population 37, which is 2500 miles from Los Angeles.

 

Or London, which is even more remote and backward.

 

P


  • 0

#19 JD Hartman

JD Hartman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1540 posts
  • Gaffer
  • Edison, N.J. U.S.A.

Posted 27 November 2016 - 12:32 PM

Do rental houses in London or the vicinity not subrent gear from individuals?  I don't mean ARRI and certainly ARRI can't be the only rental house in the area.  Buy an ARRI M18 and subrent it through a smaller rental house where they put it to work, insure and maintain it when you don't need it.  Lighting gear eventually pays for itself.


  • 0

#20 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11387 posts
  • Other

Posted 27 November 2016 - 04:36 PM

I've no idea, I suspect they might do, but you'd need a relationship with them to begin with.

 

P


  • 0


Visual Products

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

Aerial Filmworks

Quantum Music Works

CineTape

Pro 8mm

Paralinx LLC

Glidecam

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Ritter Battery

Metropolis Post

Abel Cine

Tai Audio

Technodolly

Rig Wheels Passport

CineLab

Zylight

Willys Widgets

FJS International, LLC

Technodolly

Aerial Filmworks

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

Abel Cine

Ritter Battery

Metropolis Post

Visual Products

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Zylight

FJS International, LLC

The Slider

Glidecam

CineTape

Tai Audio

CineLab

Quantum Music Works

Pro 8mm

Paralinx LLC