# Gary Fong Lightsphere...



## Steve5D

Anyone using one of these?

I've seen the new collapsible one, and I've read some less then stellar reviews about it. I'm thinking about finding one of the older, non-collapsible ones.

I've used a number of diffusers over the years, including some DIY jobs that I actually might revisit.

Anyway, just wondering what the overall opinion of these are.

Muchos grassyass...


----------



## Propsguy

I had one briefly and wasn't impressed with the results.  I had to go with a small (14"X14") softbox on a boom pole to get the results that I had imagined the lightsphere would give me, but unfortunately, the setup with the softbox-on-a-stick (as I call it) requires an assistant.  A bounce card on the flash gives 95% of the results of the lightsphere and costs practically nothing if you make it yourself... white cardstock and some self adhesive velcro is all that is required.


----------



## vipgraphx

Interesting that you post this, I was also looking into buying one of his products....He seems to do great things with them and shows you how to use them.

I wish I had some better info but, I am in the same boat as you....


----------



## sandraadamson

I had one for one wedding and returned it, I use a bracket with my speed light which allows me to move my speed light (instead of your camera to vertical position like most) with the lightsphere on top of my speed light on my bracket it became too heavy and my speed light kept wobbling in bot vertical and horizontal positions over my camera. It drove me nuts so I took it back. I now use a wescott softbox for my speed light at 1/2 the price might I add and no wobble and tipping over.


----------



## Robin Usagani

Friends don't let friends buy a Fong Dong.  

Dont buy it Steve!


When a Fong dong gives u a good result, that's usually when bouncing the light will give you a good result anyway.


----------



## Mach0

I use a stofen cap or a large bounce card. Bouncing flash off of walls or ceilings is the best way to do it. The only time I use the cap or card is when there's no where to bounce flash ( i.e- blue walls, 50 ft ceilings etc.)


----------



## TCampbell

I tried one.  Here's what I learned.

The top is open... more like a cylinder than a sphere.  It comes with a top which I generally did not use (even the instructions only suggest using the top if the ceiling is very low and you want extra scattering of the light.)

There is an advantage to an open top.  More on that in a moment.

A normal "diffuser" (I hate that word... these things do almost nothing to broaden the source of the light) will eat a healthy chunk of light... probably a stop though I've never taken out my light meter to check it.  But what they DO provide is a way to kick light sideways that would otherwise have gone straight up (more or less).    This allows you to feather some light into the eye sockets or other areas that would be in shadow if the light were simply bouncing down from above.  Of course... you can do the same thing with a bounce card.

Since the Gary Fong diffuser is open at the top, it lets you "bounce" without eating the stop of light (again... that's my guess as to how much they eat) that other diffusers eat.  But the shape of the sides of the cylinder catch some light and kick it sideways -- creating a good bounce and feathering tool.  No light is lost going up through the top since that's wide open.

If you really want soft light... a shoot through umbrella or collapsible soft-box (like a Lastolite EZBox) is going to create a MUCH broader source of light -- but even in the portable sizes these things are bulky.  If you shoot with an assistant to carry the gear and hold the sidelight then that'd be my preference.  If you shoot solo then it's going to slow you down.

Today I pretty much slide up the bounce card to kick light forward and don't bother with the Fong.

BTW, It comes in a one-size fits all with grippy silicone fins to hold it on the head of the flash.  I found it fit nicely on my Canon 430EX II.  It was a very tight fit to get it on my Canon 580EX II.  I have not even bothered to TRY to fit it on my 600EX-RT units.


----------



## ShootRaw

Nice review^^Im sure the newer collapsible is better then the old one..That said, I was interested more in the collapsible snoot..Anyone try one of those?


----------



## PeK77

Here's the infamous lithosphere vs tupperweare page

https://improvephotography.com/2545/gary-fong-lightsphere-collapsible-review/


----------



## Derrel

Over the decades that I've shot bounced flash, there is one type of scenario where I think the Gary Fong diffuser's characteristics would actually be very valuable: in really small, confined spaces with low ceilings. I am thinking ofd two places: aboard boats, and in apartments. In boats, the issue is that the ceilings in the wheelhouse or on bigger cruisers, in the salon or gallery areas, wherever, is sooooo low and close to people's faces that with bounce flash, even with the slide-in 14mm panel, that due to the inverse square law, the fall off is around 4 f/stops from the face to the belt buckle. Having the wide-scattering effect in LOW-ceilinged rooms and cabins like that would be like I said, the one area where I think the Fong type system's side-scattering would be of benefit.


----------



## Robin Usagani

Derrel said:


> Over the decades that I've shot bounced flash, there is one type of scenario where I think the Gary Fong diffuser's characteristics would actually be very valuable: in really small, confined spaces with low ceilings. I am thinking ofd two places: aboard boats, and in apartments. In boats, the issue is that the ceilings in the wheelhouse or on bigger cruisers, in the salon or gallery areas, wherever, is sooooo low and close to people's faces that with bounce flash, even with the slide-in 14mm panel, that due to the inverse square law, the fall off is around 4 f/stops from the face to the belt buckle. Having the wide-scattering effect in LOW-ceilinged rooms and cabins like that would be like I said, the one area where I think the Fong type system's side-scattering would be of benefit.



You brought up a good point Derrel.


I agree with with what derrel said.

That is like only one scenario though.  It is not worth it IMO.  Plus other photographers will make fun of you .


----------



## tecboy

Here are Gary Fong's reviews.  I still don't understand his points!


----------



## pgriz

I've used the Lightsphere (mine has a flexible transparent body and opaque white lid), and it is useful in certain situations, as Derrel has already noted.  Since I'm shooting family shots (not exactly snapshots, but certainly not portrait-style) indoors, I need something I can move around with.  In a smallish room, the light spread actually works quite well.  I usually try a bounce flash to see what the quality of the resulting light looks like, and then with the Lightsphere.  The one that gets better results (in that specific situation) is the one I go with.  In larger rooms, or with higher ceilings, it wastes a lot of light.  I have the flash on a bracket, so the flash head is usually 8-12 inches above the lens axis.  With the Lightsphere attached, it becomes a rather tall structure.  However, the results are generally good - no racoon eyes, no red-eye, nice catchlights, decent spread of light, and relatively soft shadows.


----------



## Steve5D

Some years back, I made a flash diffuser out of craft foam and velcro, and it actually worked really well. I may actually make a couple more...


----------



## tecboy

Do something new, try tupperware.


----------



## Steve5D

Robin Usagani said:


> Plus other photographers will make fun of you .



Why?

I saw a guy using one at an event and, honestly, the lightsphere was working well...


----------



## Steve5D

Robin Usagani said:


> Friends don't let friends buy a Fong Dong.
> 
> Dont buy it Steve!
> 
> 
> When a Fong dong gives u a good result, that's usually when bouncing the light will give you a good result anyway.



Care to explain why you have such an aversion to it? I've seen results which pretty much negate your last sentence...


----------



## tecboy

Lightsphere is big and doesn't fit in my camera bag.  I prefer small ones instead.


----------



## Clee33

It did Not knock my socks off as I'd hoped. It just knocked $40 from my wallet. You can get very similar result with a $0.05 index card, which is one of my go-to's during the decade + that I've been shooting.


----------



## tecboy

It is $60 in BHphoto.


----------



## tecboy

What is so good about Gary Fong's products anyway?


----------



## Derrel

Steve5D said:


> Some years back, I made a flash diffuser out of craft foam and velcro, and it actually worked really well. I may actually make a couple more...



I have watched a couple of creativelive.com episodes where highly-skilled profesionalls with decades' worth of experience demo'd, and showed images, they had made using the Rogue brand of "Flashbenders"...and the results are very good. It's basically a product that was I think spun off out of the craft-foam diffuser craze that swept across the Internet six,seven years ago.


----------



## Smokeyr67

tecboy said:


> Lightsphere is big and doesn't fit in my camera bag.  I prefer small ones instead.



Said the actress to the Bishop

I have a lightsphere, picked it up second hand and haven't had much luck with it, it's good to see I'm not the only one, it makes me feel less incompetent.


----------



## PeK77

Derrel said:


> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some years back, I made a flash diffuser out of craft foam and velcro, and it actually worked really well. I may actually make a couple more...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have watched a couple of creativelive.com episodes where highly-skilled profesionalls with decades' worth of experience demo'd, and showed images, they had made using the Rogue brand of "Flashbenders"...and the results are very good. It's basically a product that was I think spun off out of the craft-foam diffuser craze that swept across the Internet six,seven years ago.
Click to expand...


I've tried the Rogue flashbender and got ok results where there was absolutely no room to bounce.  A bounce off of a ceiling or even white garage produces a much smoother light (from what I've seen).  I'm guessing the light from the ceiling, walls, and garage is nicer and softer because of the size of the bounce vs. the flashbender.


----------



## pixmedic

Robin Usagani said:


> Friends don't let friends buy a Fong Dong.
> 
> Dont buy it Steve!
> 
> 
> When a Fong dong gives u a good result, that's usually when bouncing the light will give you a good result anyway.



i will second that. 
borrowed one for a bit once. wasnt overly impressed. 
for instances where i wanted more direct light, our small softbox worked better than the fong sphere (by a pretty decent margin)
and for bouncing, it was pretty crappy. our Rogue Flashbender was lightyears better than the fong. 
maybe i just needed more practice with the fong thingy...but i wont be buying one to find out. ill stick with my softboxes and flashbenders.

i have seen people get amazing results with some pretty crazy DIY stuff...
i dont think its a matter of whether or not the fong sphere CAN work good, its just a matter of whether its something you want to work to become proficient with, or if you end up preferring something else.


----------



## Steve5D

Derrel said:


> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some years back, I made a flash diffuser out of craft foam and velcro, and it actually worked really well. I may actually make a couple more...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have watched a couple of creativelive.com episodes where highly-skilled profesionalls with decades' worth of experience demo'd, and showed images, they had made using the Rogue brand of "Flashbenders"...and the results are very good. It's basically a product that was I think spun off out of the craft-foam diffuser craze that swept across the Internet six,seven years ago.
Click to expand...


Yeah, that's about the time period when I made mine. It worked very well. 

I did get an Amazon gift card for Christmas, though, and those Flashbenders _do _look kinda' cool...


----------



## Steve5D

tecboy said:


> What is so good about Gary Fong's products anyway?



That's pretty much the essence of my question...


----------



## Robin Usagani

Because I have seen this product in action like 3X.  All three times were being used by someone who had no idea what they were doing.  I see them shooting bride and groom in the open with fong dong with flash on.


----------



## Derrel

Steve5D said:


> tecboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is so good about Gary Fong's products anyway?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's pretty much the essence of my question...
Click to expand...


Well, I watched the Gary Fong video linked above, the one where he has the model use the remote, and she snaps a photo of herself with each of the modifiers, as Gary runs the camera and swaps the different modifiers in and out...as one can see from the comparison photos, the Fong Diffuser casts the lightest, least-dense shadow behind her. She's placed VERY close to that white wall, and the shooting area has a nice, white ceiling. Just based on the shadows alone, we can see that the Fong Diffuser in that test is throwing out the MOST-diffused, and the LEAST-directional light pattern of any of the tested modifiers. WHich again, goes right back to the exact kind of use I think it's intended for: smaller rooms, low ceilings, cramped situations.

When Gary got started selling these things, I think his MAIN client base were then-new wedding photographers, and these people tend to shoot a lot of before the wedding stuff in low-ceilinged hotel rooms....bride and her attendants getting ready, groom and groomsmen getting dressed...you know, very standard stuff with a single flash, ON the camera...and the Fong Diffuser creates very soft, diffused light, spreads the light all around, and creates a LOT of shadow-filling, softened light by way of reducing the directionality of the light from a speedlight's Fresnel lens...

I watched his on-the-street video comparo of open shade, versus a monolight with an umbrella, versus the Fong Diffuser on an SB-910, photographing a standing model on the sidewalk, with bright, California-type sunlight on the street and opposite sidewalk behind the girl. The umbrella-lighted shots looked like, well, umbrella light. The FOng Diffuser was obviously a smaller source, and created some specularity on her skin. The open shade shot produced a blown-out background, and FLAT, dull lighting on the woman. By bringing LIGHT into the shaded area, both the umbrella shot and the FOng DIffuser shot allowed him to make the sky blue by bringing the delta between shade/sunlight down. So...you know...basic lighting 101 stuff.

It's a modifier. It does what it does. Used in the RIGHT locations, it produces good lighting, when the need is *to create diffused, omni-directional light*. Of course, a lot of people don't seem to understand how to actually light ANYthing, so they ridicule the tool because they really don't get the concept of ambient spill versus directional light. It's only ONE kind of a tool...we don't bash a hammer because it's not a socket wrench, and we don't bash a box-end wrench because it make a crappy hammer and an even worse pry bar...

*Diffused, omni-directional light*: hotel rooms, apartment rooms, inside of boats, motor homes, RV's, camping trailers, cramped rooms of all types, or for when flash with *soft, open shadowing* is desired. Jeebus...that's what it does...


----------



## Steve5D

Robin Usagani said:


> Because I have seen this product in action like 3X.  All three times were being used by someone who had no idea what they were doing.  I see them shooting bride and groom in the open with fong dong with flash on.



Robin, respectfully, you're not making any sense. 

Your criticism isn't of the product, which is what I actually asked about, but of three people you've seen using the product.

You're saying you don't like them because the three times you've seen them being used were instances where the photographers didn't, in your estimation, know what they were doing. That's like saying someone shouldn't buy a Chevy because someone, somewhere, doesn't know how to drive a car. 

I might be wrong, but I sense that there might be other reasons you've such an aversion to them, and you're just choosing not to share them. I can dig that, but at least say so. Saying they're bad because three people didn't know how to properly use it doesn't really help.

How do they perform in the hands of someone who actually _does _know what they're doing?


----------



## Robin Usagani

Steve5D said:


> Robin Usagani said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because I have seen this product in action like 3X.  All three times were being used by someone who had no idea what they were doing.  I see them shooting bride and groom in the open with fong dong with flash on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Robin, respectfully, you're not making any sense.
> 
> Your criticism isn't of the product, which is what I actually asked about, but of three people you've seen using the product.
> 
> You're saying you don't like them because the three times you've seen them being used were instances where the photographers didn't, in your estimation, know what they were doing. That's like saying someone shouldn't buy a Chevy because someone, somewhere, doesn't know how to drive a car.
> 
> I might be wrong, but I sense that there might be other reasons you've such an aversion to them, and you're just choosing not to share them. I can dig that, but at least say so. Saying they're bad because three people didn't know how to properly use it doesn't really help.
> 
> How do they perform in the hands of someone who actually _does _know what they're doing?
Click to expand...


Dude.. you ask why people will make fun of you if you use a fong dong.  Most people that use it think if they put it it on their speedlite, they will have amazing photos without that harsh look without knowing exactly how to bounce the flash.  All they know is that direct flash is bad so they need something to modify their flash.

When someone has no idea how to bounce flash, use a fong dong, set the flash to ETTL, of course they will get good results (except the fact the battery will die sooner) because it will bounce the light everywhere.  But once you really understand how bouncing works, then you realize this device really doesn't help you that much and it will do you more harm than good.

Just based from interacting with other photographers, most of them WILL make fun of you if you use one.


----------



## Derrel

Now...HERE'S a light modifier that retails for around $700 or so with the mounting ring. it is the Profoto "globe"....

Profoto globe - Google Search

You know, the "globe" modifier...aka *the Front Porch Light*...aka the Hallway Light's Globe...aka The Cheap Hotel Clothing Storage and Suitcase Stand Area Light...

Whaddaya' suppose this kind of a light modifier is supposed to do???? Cough,cough, cough....omni-directional diffusion...

And here is a link to the "Profoto globe + DIY", whereby you can buy a globe at Home Depot for $6.99, and spend a five dollar bill on mounting hardware, and make this damned thing for under $20...

Profoto globe + DIY - Google Search


----------



## CCericola

It's not a horrible tool to have. It does wonders in a small space. But the design does really make the flash work hard. I actually use the removable dome like an expodisc for white balance. It is a very mis-used tool. Mostly because there are those who think the Lightsphere will magically light you subject perfect in any and all situations and that's just not true. 

Really, it's not a bad thing to have in your bag even if it's just for the dome to custom white balance. If it didn't work at all Gary wouldn't be a frikin millionaire. 

I used to use it almost everyday when I photographed preschools and daycares. The group photo would be in their classrooms which are often small with low ceilings.


----------



## tecboy

I met one photographer in the cosplay convention.  He told me the Gary Fong lightsphere is so far the best light modifier he ever bought.  Inside the convention?  Every room is so large.  The walls are far away and the ceilings are extremely high.  He shot the cosplayers about 50ft in front of him.  I don't think he gets any good pictures.

  If you look some of his videos, he uses lightsphere outdoor.

You should see one of his videos that he uses lightsphere as light saber.  It is pretty funny.


----------



## Robin Usagani

**Tips requested for Gary Fong Lightsphere - FM Forums


----------



## Derrel

Robin Usagani said:


> **Tips requested for Gary Fong Lightsphere - FM Forums



If one reads through that old thread from 2009 all the way, which I did, he can see that about one in maybe ten people actually understand how and when to use this device. Those would be the people who actually KNOW HOW to light.

When used with the top open, what the Fong diffuser gives is bounce flash + omni-directional, diffused fill. Which is a ***perfect solution*** in ***some*** situations.

But then again, there are a lot of people who don't really,truly understand that a tool needs a skilled operator behind it, and rag on how ineffective the tool is when used in the wrong situation.

A Phillips screwdriver is the perfect tool to install or remove Phillips-head screws. But many people just reach for a butterknife. SAME, exact tools, right?


----------



## Robin Usagani

Derrel.. I just wanted to proof how many people make fun of it LOL.  I havent started shooting in 2009.


----------



## Derrel

I understand what you wanted to do. My point is that the majority of people have very little idea of what the device can do. It gets made fun of alllll the time by newbs who have no idea about the scope of lighting tools that exist in the world. The REAL "pros" in that thread understand how and when to use it. it is one of many potential tools; the dimwits look at it as a universal tool...*the butterknife of screwdrivers*...

As Christina pointed out above, "I used to use it almost everyday when I photographed preschools and daycares. The group photo would be in their classrooms which are often small with low ceilings."

It's a light modifier. One can watch the videos where Gary pops a whole bunch of different tools on a fixed-position camera and a model, and literally SEE HOW the various modifiers perform in that scenario.

As I've been pointing out all along, in rooms with LOW ceilings, and in CONFINED spaces, the Fong diffuser creates soft, almost shadowless lighting. People in that FM thread bag on the way it "eats up batteries". A typical amateur dig; if you're shooting a lot of flash, have a lot of batteries OR do what I did in 1985--buy a Quantum Battery so you don't have to make excuses.

The fact is that the "tool" can be used either in the right situations, by a skilled shooter, or it can be used by an unskilled shooter in all the wrong situations. When what is needed is omni-directional light, plus the ability to bounce, the device is CLEARLY better than a whole host of other products.

Again...look at the results the device can create when used by a person who actually understands how and when the conditions are appropriate to use that,specific tool.

It's a poor craftsman who blames his failures on tools that he *does not really understand how to use *effectively.


----------



## runnah

Real pros use screwdrivers as butterknives.


----------



## pgriz

I'm showing two images from the New Year's Eve get-together.  The subject is a two-year-old daughter of a friend - very active and very curious.  The environment was an apartment with relatively low white ceilings, but lots of non-white stuff on the walls.  I got down to the little lady's level to shoot, and the ceiling was quite "high" in relation to the subject.  The first image is show with bounce flash, no flash card.  The second is with the Fong (clear sides, opaque top).  During the evening, I tried various methods of bouncing light (ceiling, back wall, forward-tilt bounce, and the Fong.  In that situation, the Fong gave better results most of the time.  As Derrel said, it's not as effective in larger rooms.

So:  Left shot is bounce only, right shot is with the Fong.



As you can see in the left shot, there was lots of "background" which I overlaid in the right shot to get a cleaner image.  I'm not putting this out as great photography - just an example of a use of the Fong that worked for me (in this specific circumstance).


----------



## Robin Usagani

Maybe we should have a speedlite death match.  One person use a fong dong, one person just use pure bounce.  We can argue all day that a fong dong can give a better result than pure bounce.  Yes, there will be a scenario where it will give a way better result but not that often.  Plus it will take up space in your bag, plus gazzilion non photographers will ask you what that is, plus a lot of photographers will make fun of you (in their head), plus it will bounce your light everywhere even to dark wall and it will eat up your battery.  It is almost as silly as the stoffen diffuser but at least the stoffen generic one is only $5.


Your example pgriz, the bounce was too close to the top of the subject.  You need to either bounce it more behind you OR use the bounce card.


----------



## Derrel

pgriz said:
			
		

> 1) Bounced flash shotView attachment 63799
> 
> 2)Fong Diffuser ShotView attachment 63798



Pgriz, pardon me, but let me rate these:

1) Bounced flash shot; "Ehhhhh...."

2) "*Excellent* lighting result!"

Once again, proving what experienced shooters know: there is a time and a place for every tool, every technique, and every approach.


----------



## pgriz

Robin, you're right on the bounce, but as I noted, that was a very active little girl, and I had enough trouble keeping her in focus and far enough so that she'd fit the frame.  As for people making fun of me...  I'm ok with that.


----------



## Steve5D

Robin Usagani said:


> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Robin Usagani said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because I have seen this product in action like 3X.  All three times were being used by someone who had no idea what they were doing.  I see them shooting bride and groom in the open with fong dong with flash on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Robin, respectfully, you're not making any sense.
> 
> Your criticism isn't of the product, which is what I actually asked about, but of three people you've seen using the product.
> 
> You're saying you don't like them because the three times you've seen them being used were instances where the photographers didn't, in your estimation, know what they were doing. That's like saying someone shouldn't buy a Chevy because someone, somewhere, doesn't know how to drive a car.
> 
> I might be wrong, but I sense that there might be other reasons you've such an aversion to them, and you're just choosing not to share them. I can dig that, but at least say so. Saying they're bad because three people didn't know how to properly use it doesn't really help.
> 
> How do they perform in the hands of someone who actually _does _know what they're doing?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dude.. you ask why people will make fun of you if you use a fong dong.  Most people that use it think if they put it it on their speedlite, they will have amazing photos without that harsh look without knowing exactly how to bounce the flash.  All they know is that direct flash is bad so they need something to modify their flash.
> 
> When someone has no idea how to bounce flash, use a fong dong, set the flash to ETTL, of course they will get good results (except the fact the battery will die sooner) because it will bounce the light everywhere.  But once you really understand how bouncing works, then you realize this device really doesn't help you that much and it will do you more harm than good.
> 
> Just based from interacting with other photographers, most of them WILL make fun of you if you use one.
Click to expand...


I hate to say it, but that was a pretty dismal attempt at answering my question.

First you say you don't like it because three people you saw using it didn't know how to use it. While they may, in fact, not have known what they were doing, that's not an indictment of the product.

Now you're saying that you don't like it because other photographers will laugh at you. Well, I would be hard pressed to give a rat's ass about that. I care about the end result, not about how cool I will or won't look while taking the photo. If that's you're primary concern, you're in the wrong line of work.

Are you of the opinion that the Lightsphere simply has not a single redeeming quality? I ask that in all seriousness because, frankly, you haven't address the actual product at all, only those who choose to use it...


----------



## Steve5D

pgriz said:


> I'm showing two images from the New Year's Eve get-together.  The subject is a two-year-old daughter of a friend - very active and very curious.  The environment was an apartment with relatively low white ceilings, but lots of non-white stuff on the walls.  I got down to the little lady's level to shoot, and the ceiling was quite "high" in relation to the subject.  The first image is show with bounce flash, no flash card.  The second is with the Fong (clear sides, opaque top).  During the evening, I tried various methods of bouncing light (ceiling, back wall, forward-tilt bounce, and the Fong.  In that situation, the Fong gave better results most of the time.  As Derrel said, it's not as effective in larger rooms.
> 
> So:  Left shot is bounce only, right shot is with the Fong.
> View attachment 63799View attachment 63798
> 
> As you can see in the left shot, there was lots of "background" which I overlaid in the right shot to get a cleaner image.  I'm not putting this out as great photography - just an example of a use of the Fong that worked for me (in this specific circumstance).



How many people laughed at you?

Because, you know, according to Robin, that's what really matters...


----------



## Steve5D

Robin Usagani said:


> Maybe we should have a speedlite death match.  One person use a fong dong, one person just use pure bounce.  We can argue all day that a fong dong can give a better result than pure bounce.  Yes, there will be a scenario where it will give a way better result but not that often.  Plus it will take up space in your bag, plus gazzilion non photographers will ask you what that is, plus a lot of photographers will make fun of you (in their head), plus it will bounce your light everywhere even to dark wall and it will eat up your battery.  It is almost as silly as the stoffen diffuser but at least the stoffen generic one is only $5.



Wow, your panties are really twisted over this.

I asked a simple question. Your responses to that question were all about the people using the product, and not the product itself. I've seen folks using them, and I've never thought to laugh at them. I've seen the results people have gotten from them, and many have been pretty impressive. I was asking for feedback here.

Since you're more concerned with someone laughing at you than anything else, I will give your input every consideration it is due...


----------



## pgriz

Well, I was the only one with the camera, and if they laughed, they wouldn't have gotten any pictures.  Of course, there were lots of laughs...  fortunately not at the expense of the Fong.  Or me.


----------



## tecboy

Gary Fong is misleading his lightsphere and trying to knockoff other competitors.  Beside, it is not really a sphere.  Just a dome on top.  Take the dome off, and it looks like a cereal bowl.


----------



## pgriz

The thing is, any time we add some piece of equipment, it takes a while to explore when/where/how to use it effectively.  That's true if you're using a flash, or a bounce card, or another tool.  Think of music - a reed flute may be a very simple instrument, but no-one figures out how to play it really well without a lot of practice.  I see our camera equipment the same way - we need to understand its strengths and weaknesses, and see where it can be best used.  It also takes practice until the desired results start to come together.  I was turned to the Fong by a professional photographer in our club who had some very good images using it, and she gave a workshop where we explored how to use it effectively.  Therefore, it is part of my kit, and I take it out when appropriate.  The same approach is used for my UWA lens, or my flash brackets, or my focusing rails.  They have a place where they are very useful.  Using them outside their "core" area, however, is much less effective.  As long as you know the limits of the gear, and shoot within those limits, you should be fine.


----------



## Robin Usagani

Sigh.. I gave you many reasons... I was trying to be funny but it is kinda true.  I gave you many reasons other than people will make fun of you.


----------



## Robin Usagani

I gave you a link from 2009 where i wasnt part of. A lot of haters on the product by respectable photogs.


----------



## pixmedic

honestly, I want to buy one now just so i can say i have a "fong dong". 
thanks Robin... hilarity ensues and now i have to go spend $40 so I have a running gag every time i reach into my camera bag...


----------



## tecboy

I'm planning to shoot crowded people, art pieces like sculptures, charcoal drawings, and paintings.  Should I get lightsphere?


----------



## pgriz

tecboy said:


> I'm planning to shoot crowded people, art pieces like sculptures, charcoal drawings, and paintings.  Should I get lightsphere?



Probably not, unless the "environment" is right for that piece of equipment.  When I shoot my wife's stuff (art and paintings), I use two umbrellas at 45 degrees on either side to give even light.  If I shoot sculpture (or pottery, as I have a potter friend), then the light needs to be more sculptural, and depending on the surface finish, either very close or further away (depending on the sharpness of the shadow I want), and I may have two or more flashes at various power levels to get the effect I need.  For crowds in large rooms, I usually set up two or more flashes in umbrellas.  The only place where I would use the Fong is in relatively small areas with low white ceilings, and hopefully white walls, and again, only if I had to use a one-flash setup.  Really, it's a specialized piece of equipment.


----------



## Steve5D

Robin Usagani said:


> Sigh.. I gave you many reasons... I was trying to be funny but it is kinda true.  I gave you many reasons other than people will make fun of you.



Where?

All I read were comments about how the people you had seen using them didn't know what they were doing. Again, that's not a comment about the product but, rather, the user.

I didn't see "funny". What I saw was a fantastic failing at answering a pretty simple and straightforward question.

Re-reading this thread, the comments about the actual product are basically that, when someone knows how and when to use it, the results are pretty favorable.

Can you comment about actual results about the product, or are you going to continue to refer to it by some childish name while bemoaning the people you've seen using them?


----------



## Steve5D

Robin Usagani said:


> **Tips requested for Gary Fong Lightsphere - FM Forums



That, in no way, shape or form, even approaches being an answer to the question.

You don't like them. I get that. A lot of people don't like them. I get that. You're afraid of people making fun of you. I get that.

From an operational perspective; the "can it work?" perspective, what are your thoughts on the product?


----------



## PeK77

Robin Usagani said:


> Because I have seen this product in action like 3X.  All three times were being used by someone who had no idea what they were doing.  I see them shooting bride and groom in the open with fong dong with flash on.



Curious.  If you didn't have a bounce on location wouldn't the fong be able to be used?  Or by in the open do you mean far away from the flash etc...


----------



## pgriz

PeK77 said:


> Robin Usagani said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because I have seen this product in action like 3X.  All three times were being used by someone who had no idea what they were doing.  I see them shooting bride and groom in the open with fong dong with flash on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Curious.  If you didn't have a bounce on location wouldn't the fong be able to be used?  Or by in the open do you mean far away from the flash etc...
Click to expand...


The Fong spreads the light around a lot.  In a small room, that can work for you.  In a large area, it's wasted.  I consider its range to be about 10-15 feet max (T1i, ISO 400, 580EX-II flash), and that includes the distance to the reflecting surface.


----------



## runnah

At this point I might just send Steve a light dome to end this thread.


----------



## Robin Usagani

Robin Usagani said:


> Yes, there will be a scenario where it will give a way better result but not that often.  Plus it will take up space in your bag, plus gazzilion non photographers will ask you what that is, plus a lot of photographers will make fun of you (in their head), plus it will bounce your light everywhere even to dark wall and it will eat up your battery.  It is almost as silly as the stoffen diffuser but at least the stoffen generic one is only



i gave 3 other reasons?


----------



## tecboy

I like Sto-fen.  It is very good in small room and closed subject.


----------



## Steve5D

Robin Usagani said:


> Robin Usagani said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, there will be a scenario where it will give a way better result but not that often.  Plus it will take up space in your bag, plus gazzilion non photographers will ask you what that is, plus a lot of photographers will make fun of you (in their head), plus it will bounce your light everywhere even to dark wall and it will eat up your battery.  It is almost as silly as the stoffen diffuser but at least the stoffen generic one is only
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i gave 3 other reasons?
Click to expand...


So your opinion of them consists of the following:

1. *Plus it will take up space in your bag* - Everything takes up room. Everything. If the right environment for this piece of equipment is to be encountered, why would you treat it differently than any other piece of equipment you have? My flashes take up room in my bag. I bring them if I think I'll need them. According to you, though, I shouldn't have bought them because they take up room.

2. *plus gazzilion non photographers will ask you what that is* - _Seriously_? This is a reason to not buy a piece of equipment? I would imagine that only someone who's socially inept would be afraid of such a thing. Do you get upset if people ask if your camera takes nice pictures?

3. *it will bounce your light everywhere even to dark wall and it will eat up your battery* - This is the only thing you've said which begins to border on an actual response. 

I thought it was pretty obvious that I was asking for input from people who've actually had experience using the product. I think you and I can both agree that you're just not that guy. Considering that, I do think it's interesting that the loudest, whiniest voice of opposition to the Gary Fong Lightsphere is coming from someone who's never actually even used a Gary Fong Lightsphere....


----------



## PeK77

pgriz said:


> PeK77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Robin Usagani said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because I have seen this product in action like 3X.  All three times were being used by someone who had no idea what they were doing.  I see them shooting bride and groom in the open with fong dong with flash on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Curious.  If you didn't have a bounce on location wouldn't the fong be able to be used?  Or by in the open do you mean far away from the flash etc...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Fong spreads the light around a lot.  In a small room, that can work for you.  In a large area, it's wasted.  I consider its range to be about 10-15 feet max (T1i, ISO 400, 580EX-II flash), and that includes the distance to the reflecting surface.
Click to expand...


That totally makes sense.  So in a situation where you're in a field, if you're close enough to your subject it may not be a total waste.


----------



## Robin Usagani

Robin Usagani said:


> Friends don't let friends buy a Fong Dong


I guess you are not my friend.


----------



## pixmedic

I have only used the fong a few times, (borrowed) so i have no _*real*_ experience with it on which to base an opinion that would be considered valid here....
however...i was not impressed enough to run out and buy one. I have a few small softboxes and a few rogue flashbenders that seem to do everything we need. sometimes i will even bounce with the softbox on. 
to be honest, i did not use the fong in any confined spaces, so if that is where it shines, i totally missed that trial. 

there are sooooo many different flash diffusers on the market, but its really just about someone finding one that works for you and how you shoot. 
i have had people tell me i was crazy spending $40 on the rogue flashbenders when i could get much cheaper bounce cards, but i have really loved the rogues, so thats what i have stayed with. i am sure there are plenty of people that felt the same way about the fongs.


----------



## Steve5D

Robin Usagani said:


> Robin Usagani said:
> 
> 
> 
> Friends don't let friends buy a Fong Dong
> 
> 
> 
> I guess you are not my friend.
Click to expand...


Oh... the horror...


----------



## Steve5D

pixmedic said:


> I have only used the fong a few times, (borrowed) so i have no _*real*_ experience with it on which to base an opinion that would be considered valid here...



It would be far more valid than some of the nonsense that's been posted.

I think the most important question, though, is this: Did people laugh at you?


----------



## pixmedic

Steve5D said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have only used the fong a few times, (borrowed) so i have no _*real*_ experience with it on which to base an opinion that would be considered valid here...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It would be far more valid than some of the nonsense that's been posted.
> 
> I think the most important question, though, is this: Did people laugh at you?
Click to expand...


Nah.. Noone at the wedding reception seemed to notice. Or care.  It was just another part of the camera.  Softbox, bounce card, fong dong... 

It was a large open room with high ceilings, so i preferred the softbox. The fong sphere, dome, whatever wasn't "bad"  per se, but with the dome on, i had little directional control over the light, and with the dome off, it was more like a snoot, and my rogue flashbender folds into a snoot. 
The dome did diffuse the light, so i got some ok shots with it, but in that scenario, i did better with the softbox concentrating more light where i actually wanted it. I can see how it would do better in a smaller area. 
The room was very dark. The only real light was from the aquarium tanks. 

So.. There it is.  My gary fong experience.  If i saw one at a garage sale or flea market for $10 i would probably grab it, but im not going to order one new when i already have several flash diffusers for different situations.


----------



## Derrel

pixmedic said:
			
		

> SNIP> i already have *several flash diffusers* for *different situations*.



You mean you use different tools for different situations? Madness!!!!


----------



## Steve5D

So, I buckled down and made a diffuser, much the same as I made several years ago. I think the grand total was about three bucks.

Here are five images I took this morning. They've had zero editing done, other than resizing. Other than that, they are absolutely unmolested. The flash used was an EX 580EX II:


1. Flash head pointed straight ahead:








2. Flash head pointed directly upwards towards a white ceiling, about three feet from the flash head:







3. Flash with a Stofen, pointed directly ahead:







4. With the Stofen aimed towards a white ceiling, about three feet from the flash head:







5. With the $3.00 foam flash diffuser, flash head pointing straight up into the diffuser:







This is the basic design of the one I made: DIY Reflector-Diffuser

And I have no idea why this annoying "thumbnail" is down here...


----------



## tecboy

If you set your flash at 45 degree angle with Sto-fen attached, you should get better lighting this way.


----------



## JerryVenz

Derrel was right-on with his explaination of how PROFESSIONALS use light modifiers. My wife and I have been doing weddings for over 25 years--international award winning CERTIFIED, MASTER photographer, etc.,etc. I bought Gary Fong's Photo-journalist LIght Sphere when it first came out--had been using Stofens on all my flashes up to that point because you MUST use SOMETHING with on-camera flash--a professional does not use DIRECT on-camera flash on people!!

So, I was amazed at how well it worked with most interiors.  If I have a cieling I angle the flash head at 45 degrees--which is where I usually have it--without the cap installed--and the results are always great--IF I ADJUST FOR THE RELECTIVITY OF THE ROOM AND CEILING HEIGHT WITH MY SHUTTER SPEED. That means I DRAG THE SHUTTER--slow the shutter-speed--until I get the look I want. Sometimes I use 1/60, 1/30, or 1/15th--it depends on the room.

BTW, these are NOT portraits! These are for candids--getting ready at her home or hotel, fun stuff, walking interiors, elevator shots, limo interiors, and of course the reception coverage.

MY portraits are usually done by WINDOW LIGHT, NATURAL LIGHT OUTSIDE, or If I have to studio style lighting inside.

Another area the Fong LIght Sphere really shines is in close-up photography.  At the cake table ( WHEN I DON'T HAVE WINDOW LIGHT ) I always do images of the cake with their invitation, rings, toasting glasses, flowers and special decorations that my wife puts together very artistically--we've actually won several international awards ( both PPA and WPPI ) for this usually very cliche type of wedding photography!!

The trick with close-ups with the Light Sphere is to point it STRAIGHT-UP WITH NO CAP ON TOP.  Again, I'm also dragging the shutter and on a tripod.

I'm not as happy with the newer collapsing Light Sphere because it's heavier than my old style and the weight can over come the flash head's detents allowing the unit to drop-down from the 45 degree to the 90 degree--pointing straight at my subject--the worst possible position!!

Anyway they're great tools--would not do a wedding without them!!


----------



## pixmedic

while not a diffuser, i like _*this*_ system. 
i assume they will have diffusers as an add on at some point. 
i would hope so anyway.


----------



## tecboy

Steve5D said:


> So, I buckled down and made a diffuser, much the same as I made several years ago. I think the grand total was about three bucks.
> 
> Here are five images I took this morning. They've had zero editing done, other than resizing. Other than that, they are absolutely unmolested. The flash used was an EX 580EX II:
> 
> 
> 1. Flash head pointed straight ahead:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. Flash head pointed directly upwards towards a white ceiling, about three feet from the flash head:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3. Flash with a Stofen, pointed directly ahead:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4. With the Stofen aimed towards a white ceiling, about three feet from the flash head:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5. With the $3.00 foam flash diffuser, flash head pointing straight up into the diffuser:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is the basic design of the one I made: DIY Reflector-Diffuser
> 
> And I have no idea why this annoying "thumbnail" is down here...



Oh yeah, I forgot to mention.  Shoot inside a closet.  You will get awesome photos!


----------



## Steve5D

tecboy said:


> Oh yeah, I forgot to mention.  Shoot inside a closet.  You will get awesome photos!



I wasn't going for "awesome photos". All I intended to do was illustrate the differences resulting from different approaches...


----------



## Robin Usagani

Steve5D said:


> So, I buckled down and made a diffuser, much the same as I made several years ago. I think the grand total was about three bucks.
> 
> Here are five images I took this morning. They've had zero editing done, other than resizing. Other than that, they are absolutely unmolested. The flash used was an EX 580EX II:
> 
> 
> 1. Flash head pointed straight ahead:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. Flash head pointed directly upwards towards a white ceiling, about three feet from the flash head:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3. Flash with a Stofen, pointed directly ahead:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4. With the Stofen aimed towards a white ceiling, about three feet from the flash head:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5. With the $3.00 foam flash diffuser, flash head pointing straight up into the diffuser:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is the basic design of the one I made: DIY Reflector-Diffuser
> 
> And I have no idea why this annoying "thumbnail" is down here...



i dont understand what you are trying to proof? Some of your samples are underexposed. You cant compare bare flash and diffused or bounced with the same flash power. If you diffuse it or bounce it, you need higher power.


----------



## Steve5D

Robin Usagani said:


> i dont understand what you are trying to proof? Some of your samples are underexposed. You cant compare bare flash and diffused or bounced with the same flash power. If you diffuse it or bounce it, you need higher power.



Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were still here.

I wasn't trying to proof [sic] anything. All I set out to do was illustrate the effects of various approaches with all else, including flash power, being equal.  

All I wanted to do was show how the results of direct flash, bounced flash and diffused flash differ when all other factors were pretty much constant. Period. That's it. 

To my eye, the $3.00 DIY job wins. Your mileage may vary, and that's perfectly fine.

There's no reason to over-analyze what I was doing although, frankly, I suspect you're going to try...


----------



## Robin Usagani

Sigh...  Noob will look at this thread and think bouncing the flash upward will give you a complete black photograph.  I dont know why you think I am arguing with you.


----------



## runnah

Your house looks creepy Steve.


----------



## tecboy

Oh no, Steve is our next Gary Fong!


----------



## Steve5D

Robin Usagani said:


> Sigh...  Noob will look at this thread and think bouncing the flash upward will give you a complete black photograph.  I dont know why you think I am arguing with you.



I don't think you're arguing with me. I just think you haven't offered a reasonable, intelligent opinion regarding the Lightsphere. You have, however, made it quite clear that you're afraid of people laughing at you...


----------



## Steve5D

runnah said:


> Your house looks creepy Steve.



It's a long story but, yeah, I agree...


----------



## Steve5D

tecboy said:


> Oh no, Steve is our next Gary Fong!



Do you have anything intelligent to add?

I asked a simple question, and it seems that spare few people were able to actually answer it intelligently.

You weren't one of those people...


----------



## tecboy

Steve5D said:


> tecboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh no, Steve is our next Gary Fong!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have anything intelligent to add?
> 
> I asked a simple question, and it seems that spare few people were able to actually answer it intelligently.
> 
> You weren't one of those people...
Click to expand...


What is so intelligence about this thread?  It is all based on opinions.   Just like every other threads, you keep lashing out other members.   Nail them with questions to make you superior and intelligence.  You remember the time we got an argument.  It didn't end well.


----------



## kathyt

pixmedic said:


> honestly, I want to buy one now just so i can say i have a "fong dong".
> thanks Robin... hilarity ensues and now i have to go spend $40 so I have a running gag every time i reach into my camera bag...


Me too. I want to have a "fong dong," just to get to say it all the time. I am going to make a necklace to hang mine on.


----------



## Steve5D

tecboy said:


> What is so intelligence about this thread?



Certainly not much of the spelling, grammar and uneducated opinions. The person who was most vocal has never even used one...



> It is all based on opinions.   Just like every other threads, you keep lashing out other members.   Nail them with questions to make you superior and intelligence.  You remember the time we got an argument.  It didn't end well.



No, I don't recall that. I guess you failed to make an impression. Shocking.

Tell ya' what, Chief, if you don't have anything intelligent to add, why not just bow out and let people who actually _can _answer the question do so. Statements like "Take pictures in closets" are stupid, and don't speak too highly of the brain-trusts making them.

But, hey, don't fret. Your input can still be valuable. Rest assured, when I need to know how to shoot motorcycle racing through a chain link fence, you'll be my go-to guy...


----------



## tecboy

tecboy said:


> Do something new, try tupperware.





Steve5D said:


> tecboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is so intelligence about this thread?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Certainly not much of the spelling, grammar and uneducated opinions. The person who was most vocal has never even used one...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is all based on opinions.   Just like every other threads, you keep lashing out other members.   Nail them with questions to make you superior and intelligence.  You remember the time we got an argument.  It didn't end well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, I don't recall that. I guess you failed to make an impression. Shocking.
> 
> Tell ya' what, Chief, if you don't have anything intelligent to add, why not just bow out and let people who actually _can _answer the question do so. Statements like "Take pictures in closets" are stupid, and don't speak too highly of the brain-trusts making them.
> 
> But, hey, don't fret. Your input can still be valuable. Rest assured, when I need to know how to shoot motorcycle racing through a chain link fence, you'll be my go-to guy...
Click to expand...


You love to attack members.  You love to insult them.  What are you? You are right?


----------



## Robin Usagani

Gee Steve.  You seem to talk down to me. Maybe you need to spend time with your flash a bit more.  I am positive if you are better at it, you wouldn't have started this thread about the fong dong.  Seriously.. this is your version of bouncing the flash?  Increase your ISO and or turn up the power.  Or just leave it to ETTL while you bounce.

I never talked down to you.  I basically made fun of the product.  Show some respect.
View attachment 63905


----------



## Steve5D

tecboy said:


> tecboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do something new, try tupperware.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> 
> Certainly not much of the spelling, grammar and uneducated opinions. The person who was most vocal has never even used one...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is all based on opinions.   Just like every other threads, you keep lashing out other members.   Nail them with questions to make you superior and intelligence.  You remember the time we got an argument.  It didn't end well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, I don't recall that. I guess you failed to make an impression. Shocking.
> 
> Tell ya' what, Chief, if you don't have anything intelligent to add, why not just bow out and let people who actually _can _answer the question do so. Statements like "Take pictures in closets" are stupid, and don't speak too highly of the brain-trusts making them.
> 
> But, hey, don't fret. Your input can still be valuable. Rest assured, when I need to know how to shoot motorcycle racing through a chain link fence, you'll be my go-to guy...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You love to attack members.  You love to insult them.  What are you? You are right?
Click to expand...


If someone's going to belch up idiocy in response to a simple question, why would I be polite?

Look back at some of the little nuggets you posted. "Go shoot in a closet"?? Sorry, but that's stupid. If you don't want people talling you that you say stupid things, stop doing it...


----------



## tecboy

Steve5D said:


> tecboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tecboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do something new, try tupperware.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> 
> Certainly not much of the spelling, grammar and uneducated opinions. The person who was most vocal has never even used one...
> 
> 
> 
> No, I don't recall that. I guess you failed to make an impression. Shocking.
> 
> Tell ya' what, Chief, if you don't have anything intelligent to add, why not just bow out and let people who actually _can _answer the question do so. Statements like "Take pictures in closets" are stupid, and don't speak too highly of the brain-trusts making them.
> 
> But, hey, don't fret. Your input can still be valuable. Rest assured, when I need to know how to shoot motorcycle racing through a chain link fence, you'll be my go-to guy...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You love to attack members.  You love to insult them.  What are you? You are right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If someone's going to belch up idiocy in response to a simple question, why would I be polite?
> 
> Look back at some of the little nuggets you posted. "Go shoot in a closet"?? Sorry, but that's stupid. If you don't want people talling you that you say stupid things, stop doing it...
Click to expand...



All light modifiers including Fong Ding Dong work better in very confined space and closed subject.  Sorry, you feel that way.  It was a joke.


----------



## Steve5D

Robin Usagani said:


> Gee Steve.  You seem to talk down to me. Maybe you need to spend time with your flash a bit more.  I am positive if you are better at it, you wouldn't have started this thread about the fong dong.  Seriously.. this is your version of bouncing the flash?  Increase your ISO and or turn up the power.  Or just leave it to ETTL while you bounce.
> 
> I never talked down to you.  I basically made fun of the product.  Show some respect.
> View attachment 63905



"Show some respect"?

Why?

The image you copied was one of five. Why not include those, as well? The five photos were posted to illustrate something. No, the one image you decided to post is not my "version" of bouncing the flash. Again, it was one of five images. Calling it my "version" is dishonest and, therefore, you are unworthy of respect. I don't know much about the Lightsphere, so I asked a question about it. Calling it a "Fong dong" is stupid and immature. Why would I show any degree of respect for that?

If you think I'm talking down to you, that's too bad. I can't control how you perceive things. Maybe stop carrying on like you do and things will go differently for you.

The bottom line is that you've been the most vocal in speaking out against the Lightsphere, _*and you've never even used one*_. Your points of contention had nothing to do with the product. You seem to have some obsession with the word "dong".

Why do you think such nonsense is deserving of respect?


----------



## tecboy

F.Y.I.      I don't like Gary Fong, either.  Robin just speaks his mind, and that is nothing wrong.


----------



## Steve5D

tecboy said:


> F.Y.I    I don't like Gary Fong, either.  Robin just speaks his mind, and there is nothing wrong.



Speaking his mind is fine. 

But giving reasons like "I saw three people who didn't know how to use it" and "People will ask me what it is" is hardly constructive. It adds nothing to the discussion and it doesn't answer the question. He's got *zero* experience using the product, so he's not really able to speak intelligently on the subject of the Lightsphere. He might be able to discuss bouncing the flash versus diffusers in general, but not versus the Fong _specifically_, which is what I asked about. 

This is often the problem on this forum. People (like some in this thread) who've foolishly convinced themselves that they know what a person is "really" asking, and they fly off on some tangent which doesn't even come close to addressing the original question being asked.

That's what Robin did. Defend him all you want, but both of you were spectacular failures at answering a pretty simple question...


----------



## Robin Usagani

Oh.. the word fong dong has been used since it came out.    I didn't invent it.  I am proud I have never used or owned one.  

This arguing back and forward is tiring.  I am going to bed.  Night night.


----------



## tecboy

I don't know why you are upset over Gary Fong thing.  

How is my grammar?  Better than your?


----------



## pgriz

I really don't understand the amount of naysaying going on in this thread.  It takes time and practice to learn how to effectively use any equipment.  Consider someone trying to improve on the pop-up flash.  They may get a 600EX-RT flash "because it takes such great flash pictures", mount it on their hotshoe, and find out (Gasp!) that their flash pictures are not much better than the pop-up flash pictures.  Then they learn about bounce technique, off-camera use, what various modifiers can do, and guess what - the pictures are SO much better.  If the equipment in the hands of a good photographer still gives crappy results, despite that photographer having tried various ways of getting the equipment to work, then probably the equipment is crap.  But until someone goes through the learning curve, and thoroughly explores what the "new" equipment can do, the best we can say is that we haven't yet learned to use that equipment effectively.

Another aspect to consider is that there is rarely only one way to get something done.  If there are (say) four different ways of achieving the same end-result, then arguing whether approach A is better than B, C or D is kinda sterile.  We SHOULD know that there are several different ways to get our objectives accomplished, and then pick the method that is cheapest/fastest/easiest/(your favorite criteria) for deciding which of the four methods is most useful for your specific situation.

In my own case, as I progress down the learning curve, I often find some aspect that I haven't considered before, or some change in technique that would give me much better results.  As I noted in an earlier post, I was turned to the Fong Lightsphere by seeing the results of a very good photographer.  In her hands, the images were excellent, and when she explained to us the mechanics of how and where she uses it, it made a lot of sense.  I have also seen the product mis-used and when you do have some knowledge of how the thing is supposed to work, then you can recognize that the usage observed is not optimal.  Is that the fault of the equipment, or of the user?  I would say user.

How many threads have we read about people having focusing/sharpness issues when they are trying to use their f/1.8 or f/1.4 lenses wide open?  Again, there's a learning curve in understanding when and how to use that aspect of the lens, and in the hands of a skilled (as in knows what they are doing) photographer, the results are usually excellent.  In the hands of someone who bought the lens but hasn't learned its use, the results are... well, you know.

It is my hope that when people make suggestions about which equipment is better (or not), they reveal their own position on the learning curve of that equipment.  That's probably idealistic, but I'd like to know if someone has taken three shots or has taken 3,000 with the equipment in question, whether they have found the "sweet spot", or are still searching for it.  Then it is more useful to the rest of us to know how the good photographers were able to adapt the equipment in question to their purpose.  We're here to learn, right?


----------



## Steve5D

Robin Usagani said:


> Oh.. the word fong dong has been used since it came out.    I didn't invent it.



Such a thing might require original thought and, well, never mind...



> I am proud I have never used or owned one.



Wow, not owning a product is something to be proud of? That's sad...

But, more to the point: Given your vast experience with the actual product, why would anyone care about your opinion of it?

Let me help you: No one would...


----------



## Steve5D

tecboy said:


> I don't know why you are upset over Gary Fong thing.



The reason I'm "upset over Gary Fong thing" is that certain people want to inject themselves into a conversation regarding something they've never used...



> How is my grammar?  *Better than your*?



Goddamn, you just can't make this stuff up...


----------



## Steve5D

pgriz said:


> I really don't understand the amount of naysaying going on in this thread.



Those who've used it and like it say so. Those who don't use it because they tried it and don't like it say so.

And then there are those folks who belch up nonsense which is not, based on their own admission, a result of their actual experience using the product. Such people need others to pay attention to them, so they throw out things they think are funny like "Fong dong" and dishonestly try to make their points. 

I appreciate the input from the _intelligent _folks in this thread who've chosen to answer the actual question I asked.

If the mods want to lock this one down, that's fine with me. I don't know how much more ignorant input I can take from the TPF brain trust...


----------



## kathyt

I have a large Rogue FlashBender. You should look into this Steve. It is easier to throw into your bag and I can manipulate it into doing a few different things. It is nice when you have nothing to bounce light from. Check them out.


----------



## pixmedic

kathythorson said:


> I have a large Rogue FlashBender. You should look into this Steve. It is easier to throw into your bag and I can manipulate it into doing a few different things. It is nice when you have nothing to bounce light from. Check them out.



I have a few of them in different sizes.  I love that they hold their shape and i can roll them into a snoot. They are probably our most used flash accessory.


----------



## Steve5D

kathythorson said:


> I have a large Rogue FlashBender. You should look into this Steve. It is easier to throw into your bag and I can manipulate it into doing a few different things. It is nice when you have nothing to bounce light from. Check them out.



Yeah, I was looking at those on Amazon. I've got a $50.00 Amazon gift card, and no idea what to buy with it. I'm probably one of the few people left on the planet who's never shopped on Amazon. This looks like as good a time as any to start...


----------



## tecboy

Steve5D said:


> tecboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know why you are upset over Gary Fong thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The reason I'm "upset over Gary Fong thing" is that certain people want to inject themselves into a conversation regarding something they've never used...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How is my grammar?  *Better than your*?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Goddamn, you just can't make this stuff up...
Click to expand...


You are too sensitive.  You need to get yourself a therapy and drink some decaf.

I have Rogue Flashbender, and it is really good.


----------



## Robin Usagani

You can buy this with your $50. Coffee Bean Direct CO2 Decaf Espresso Coffee, 5-Pound Bag,Net 2265 g.:Amazon:Grocery & Gourmet Food


----------



## play18now

tecboy said:


> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tecboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know why you are upset over Gary Fong thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The reason I'm "upset over Gary Fong thing" is that certain people want to inject themselves into a conversation regarding something they've never used...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How is my grammar?  *Better than your*?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Goddamn, you just can't make this stuff up...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are too sensitive.  You need to get yourself a therapy and drink some decaf.
> 
> I have Rogue Flashbender, and it is really good.
Click to expand...


Number 1: This thread is ridiculous.  I can't believe grown men and woman are arguing so passionately about something that matters so little.  

2:  I've used but never owned a Gary Fong.  Didn't work for me.  I prefer bouncing and a mini soft box for my on-camera flash modifiers.  Your milage may vary from mine, but that's what worked with my techniques.  Just my 2 cents

3:  DON'T LET DECAF HAPPEN TO YOU

Cheers- 
Nathan


----------



## JerryVenz

pgriz said:


> I really don't understand the amount of naysaying going on in this thread.  It takes time and practice to learn how to effectively use any equipment.  Consider someone trying to improve on the pop-up flash.  They may get a 600EX-RT flash "because it takes such great flash pictures", mount it on their hotshoe, and find out (Gasp!) that their flash pictures are not much better than the pop-up flash pictures.  Then they learn about bounce technique, off-camera use, what various modifiers can do, and guess what - the pictures are SO much better.  If the equipment in the hands of a good photographer still gives crappy results, despite that photographer having tried various ways of getting the equipment to work, then probably the equipment is crap.  But until someone goes through the learning curve, and thoroughly explores what the "new" equipment can do, the best we can say is that we haven't yet learned to use that equipment effectively.
> 
> Another aspect to consider is that there is rarely only one way to get something done.  If there are (say) four different ways of achieving the same end-result, then arguing whether approach A is better than B, C or D is kinda sterile.  We SHOULD know that there are several different ways to get our objectives accomplished, and then pick the method that is cheapest/fastest/easiest/(your favorite criteria) for deciding which of the four methods is most useful for your specific situation.
> 
> In my own case, as I progress down the learning curve, I often find some aspect that I haven't considered before, or some change in technique that would give me much better results.  As I noted in an earlier post, I was turned to the Fong Lightsphere by seeing the results of a very good photographer.  In her hands, the images were excellent, and when she explained to us the mechanics of how and where she uses it, it made a lot of sense.  I have also seen the product mis-used and when you do have some knowledge of how the thing is supposed to work, then you can recognize that the usage observed is not optimal.  Is that the fault of the equipment, or of the user?  I would say user.
> 
> How many threads have we read about people having focusing/sharpness issues when they are trying to use their f/1.8 or f/1.4 lenses wide open?  Again, there's a learning curve in understanding when and how to use that aspect of the lens, and in the hands of a skilled (as in knows what they are doing) photographer, the results are usually excellent.  In the hands of someone who bought the lens but hasn't learned its use, the results are... well, you know.
> 
> It is my hope that when people make suggestions about which equipment is better (or not), they reveal their own position on the learning curve of that equipment.  That's probably idealistic, but I'd like to know if someone has taken three shots or has taken 3,000 with the equipment in question, whether they have found the "sweet spot", or are still searching for it.  Then it is more useful to the rest of us to know how the good photographers were able to adapt the equipment in question to their purpose.  We're here to learn, right?



Derrel was right-on with his explaination of how PROFESSIONALS use light modifiers. My wife and I have been doing weddings for over 25 years--international award winning CERTIFIED, MASTER photographer, etc.,etc. I bought Gary Fong's Photo-journalist LIght Sphere when it first came out--had been using Stofens on all my flashes up to that point because you MUST use SOMETHING with on-camera flash--a professional does not use DIRECT on-camera flash on people!!

So, I was amazed at how well it worked with most interiors. If I have a cieling I angle the flash head at 45 degrees--which is where I usually have it--without the cap installed--and the results are always great--IF I ADJUST FOR THE RELECTIVITY OF THE ROOM AND CEILING HEIGHT WITH MY SHUTTER SPEED. That means I DRAG THE SHUTTER--slow the shutter-speed--until I get the look I want. Sometimes I use 1/60, 1/30, or 1/15th--it depends on the room.

BTW, these are NOT portraits! These are for candids--getting ready at her home or hotel, fun stuff, walking interiors, elevator shots, limo interiors, and of course the reception coverage.

MY portraits are usually done by WINDOW LIGHT, NATURAL LIGHT OUTSIDE, or If I have to studio style lighting inside.

Another area the Fong LIght Sphere really shines is in close-up photography. At the cake table ( WHEN I DON'T HAVE WINDOW LIGHT ) I always do images of the cake with their invitation, rings, toasting glasses, flowers and special decorations that my wife puts together very artistically--we've actually won several international awards ( both PPA and WPPI ) for this usually very cliche type of wedding photography!!

The trick with close-ups with the Light Sphere is to point it STRAIGHT-UP WITH NO CAP ON TOP. Again, I'm also dragging the shutter and on a tripod.

I'm not as happy with the newer collapsing Light Sphere because it's heavier than my old style and the weight can over come the flash head's detents allowing the unit to drop-down from the 45 degree to the 90 degree--pointing straight at my subject--the worst possible position!!

Anyway they're great tools--would not do a wedding without them!!​


----------



## tecboy

Uh oh, this thread is going hay-wired.


----------



## manaheim

I see a thread that's 8 pages long and I go... hmmm... I wonder.

Yup, sure enough. People are being nasty to each other.

Everyone put your sharp objects away and be nice or I'll lock the thread.


----------



## tecboy

Okay, I'll be nice.:mrgreen:


----------



## Steve5D

manaheim said:


> I see a thread that's 8 pages long and I go... hmmm... I wonder.
> 
> Yup, sure enough. People are being nasty to each other.
> 
> Everyone put your sharp objects away and be nice or I'll lock the thread.



Man, go ahead.

The children ruined this thread by the end of the first page...


----------



## manaheim

Steve5D said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> 
> I see a thread that's 8 pages long and I go... hmmm... I wonder.
> 
> Yup, sure enough. People are being nasty to each other.
> 
> Everyone put your sharp objects away and be nice or I'll lock the thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Man, go ahead.
> 
> The children ruined this thread by the end of the first page...
Click to expand...


And that comment is helping... how? 

It takes two to fight,  Steve. I think you should know that by now.

Thread closed.


----------

