Is continuous light (HID) really softer than strobe?

I have seen a few threads in this forum pretending that continuous light is softer than strobe.

Am I wrong to believe that the only difference between the 2 is the color temperature, and if they have the same diffuser, the result will be the same... once the color balance is done?

I have search the web for a true proof of that… and found none.

Softer? What do you think that means? I think what people here mean is that your photos will be softer because continuous lighting is MUCH less powerful than a strobe. In the 1/60th of a second that a strobe goes off, you can get 200 watt-seconds into a photo using a decent strobe. Using 20w lights, you'd get 20/60 or 1/3 of a watt-second into the photo.

See what I mean?

Regards,

James

Softer? What do you think that means? I think what people here mean is that your photos will be softer because continuous lighting is MUCH less powerful than a strobe. In the 1/60th of a second that a strobe goes off, you can get 200 watt-seconds into a photo using a decent strobe. Using 20w lights, you'd get 20/60 or 1/3 of a watt-second into the photo.

 

See what I mean?

 

Regards,

James

Softer because of the longer exposition... i get it.

I'll have to do my own test to see if i can get a 1/60 sec. good exposition for a close up of course.

Generally softness has to do with the size of the light source and the degree to which it's power is concentrated (which of course is related to size). As James says, in this case the problem of softness probably has more to with the actual amount of light delivered during the exposure. If you increased your exposure in camera to the extent necessary that the exact same amount of light reached the sensor from the HID lights as you get in a fraction of a second from the strobe, the image should be the similar, everything else being equal