Flat vs Square Gel Frames

Barry Cheong · December 30, 2005

Was just glancing through some grip catalogues and out of curiosity was wondering why they make both flat and square gel frames? It seems to me that for gel application flat seems to make more sense. Are their any benefits to square? More rigid maybe?

David Mullen ASC · December 30, 2005

Was just glancing through some grip catalogues and out of curiosity was wondering why they make both flat and square gel frames? It seems to me that for gel application flat seems to make more sense. Are their any benefits to square? More rigid maybe?

I don't understand the difference between "flat" and "square" -- aren't all frames by definition flat, even if square? Do you mean round versus square gel frames for fitting inside a light fixture? Or do you mean the larger rectangular versus square frames that go on c-stands in front of a light? Or do you mean the thin frames that slip behind the barndoors of a light fixture versus the thicker square frame structure for gel frames that go onto c-stands?

Edited December 30, 2005 by David Mullen

Barry Cheong · December 31, 2005

Sorry for the confusion I was meaning gel frames (like the common 3x3 and 4x4) put into c-stands in front of lights. They seem to come in either a square tube design or a flat thin design. They both seem to be used for the same application.

http://www.msegrip.com/mse.php?show=produc...oducts_ID=26062

vs

http://www.msegrip.com/mse.php?show=produc...oducts_ID=26067

Edited December 31, 2005 by Barry Cheong

David Mullen ASC · December 31, 2005

Yes, they are both used for the same things, more or less. I'm not a grip, but I think it basically comes down to weight versus stability (rigidity). It's easier for the thin frames to get bent.