That is a nice set up. In the past, I have had better luck with the incandescent, but it's been 15 years or more since I compared. At the time, I was shooting digital pictures with a Sony Hi8 Video camera, a Vlab box in to a Hot Rod Amiga 2000 with Retina card. The point and shoot $100 cameras do a better job than my $5000 set up then. But they didn't exist in 1994. (That I could afford) I once discovered that a ring I was doing an appraisal on, was a color change stone, but only through the lens, under different light. It was a natural Alexandrite in a ring from the late 1800's (Before the synthetic as available) It was such a subtle change, that I could see it on the monitor, but not to the eye. I may have the pictures somewhere to give you guys an idea of what digital was like in the stone age. Attached is a picture from back then, edited with a program called PhotoImpact that may be still available. I have an old disk, but it didn't like XP, So I haven't used it in years. JC --- John Christensen Saint Charles, IL On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Ray Buck <rbuck@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I bought a pair of lamps with "daylight" fluorescent bulbs from amazon.com > http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001JL1WBK/ref=oss_T15_product > > Here's the info on 'em from the retailer: > > http://www.stillshot2.com/Photo-Lighting/PREMIUM_LIGHTS_For_Photo_Tent_Studio_Video_Lighting_Photography > > I paid $53 shipped on amazon, they want $70 on their own site. > Interesting. > > "Each lamp is rated at 10,000 hours of use 30 watts, 110v, 5400k Cool > Lighting." > > hth, > > RtR > > > > At 07:04 PM 1/6/2010, you wrote: > >> Ray >> You said the lights were photo balanced. >> What bulbs did you use for the box. >> My daughter and I are making one. >> Going to Lowes to get the bulbs sat. >> Thanks >> Mark >> > > >
Attachment:
mb_5.jpg
Description: JPEG image
