Do you use filters regularly for B&W?

W

Windscale

Well-known
Local time
7:54 PM
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
387
View My Gallery
Forgive me for being ignorant. I have not done much B&W in the past but I do want to approach it seriously. What I would like to find out is that how many of you use colour correction filters regularly? Do most of you carry a handful of filters with you when you go out? Would any of you think that it is better to take care of things in the D&P stage?
 
I always carry my medium yellow filter with me. I use it for a few different purposes, one being a 1 stop nd filter if i need it.
 
Yes, pretty often. I'm usually using a medium yellow filter outdoors or maybe orange if there are nice clouds, sometimes light yellow just to cut through haze, if I don't want a strong filter effect. Indoors, not so much.
 
Re: the Use of Filters

Re: the Use of Filters

I equip a lens with a skylight filter the moment I take it out of the box. Every lens I own is so equipped. This protects the front element of the lens , also -- on the very rare occasions I shoot color -- eliminates the blue shift of Ektachrome, which though substantially minimized in recent years is still evident on unfiltered images made in what I consider the best photographic light of all (that is, a cloudy day). As to other filters, I use them as necessary: Y2 or R1 to emphasize clouds in BW, etc. However with most traditional rangefinder cameras we have to remember to calculate filter factors into the exposure for the same reason we have to remember to remove lens caps: unlike with SLRs, we're not looking through the lens. As to which filters are used for what purpose, the filter manufactures typically include excellent data tables with each filter, but the best summary of filter applications I have found anywhere (would it had existed when I was teaching) is the one on Wikipedia, linked here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photographic_filter

I hope this helps.
 
I never do. I won't use skylight/uv type filters to protect lenses, they reduce image quality and yes I can see the difference with all but the best (B+W or Heliopan) filters. When I was a student years ago i tried to accumulate a set of the colored filters for BW and got a few but they were all different sizes and i never got a full set for any one filter size I need. Since I didn't have what I really needed and couldn't afford them once I graduated, I just shot without them and I think I have gotten good results.
 
I have a set of B+W red filters for when I am shooting architectural scenes and want to emphasis the sky/clouds. Otherwise I shoot with a UV if I feel I need the extra protection - rainy days, on the coast, sandy environments, etc.
 
Not with the rangefinder; perhaps due to my primary association with it being a more spontaneous kind of camera. I am often tempted to not even change lenses unless I really *have* to for a shot.

Now on the Hasselblad, a yellow, yellow/green and red filter are always in the bag and often on the lens.


-j.
 
As to the alleged loss of quality imposed by filters, perhaps it happens, and perhaps it might be evident at something like 25 diameters enlargement, but on 35mm film at any reasonable print size (up to 11x14 equivalent), not even the most discerning editors can tell the difference. The bottom line is the bottom line: it is a helluva a lot less expensive (and a helluva lot better for your subsequent insurance premiums) to replace a $12-$24 skylight filter than a $400-$2000 lens. If I'm that concerned about image quality, I'll go to a larger format.
 
I only use protective filters if there is an obvious hazard--water, sand, crowds. I do usually use a lens shade (presuming I have one that will work with the lens in question), and use a lens cap to protect the lens.

The bottom line is the bottom line: why spend the money on an expensive lens, if you're going to reduce contrast and light transmission by adding two air-glass surfaces? A multicoated filter will reduce this problem, but still, unnecessary glass is unnecessary glass. A filter shouldn't reduce resolution, unless it's so cheap that it isn't optically flat. The main issues are flare and transmissive light loss.
 
in winter i shoot in snow and wind. in summer, there is wind and sand from the road and i mostly shoot on the street...so i do use uv filters - expensive ones (but i try to buy used) for protection.

i don't use any other filters though preferring to boost contrast in photoshop.
 
Decades ago I succumbed to the "more complex must mean better" thinking and tried to use either yellow, orange, red, or green filters plus sometimes a polarizer for most b&w shots.

Nowadays, I very very infrequently use an orange filter when shooting MF b&w. But most of the time, and always shooting 35mm, I use nothing but my brain to expose correctly.
 
My personal preference is to use a UV filter on my lens at all times to protect it. I have one on most of my lenses. Those who do not wish to do so are welcome to their opinion as well.

As to the question of filter use from the OP, I had gotten away from photographing as much as I used to. When I used to take more photos, I didn't hesitate to use a filter in color or b/w film use. If I didn't think I needed one, that was just as well too.

I am fortunate to have an extensive set of filters in various colors for b/w, as well as in various sizes. Also color correcting filters for color films. I don't think I just have to have a filter to take a photo. But if a filter I have will help the photo in my estimation, on it will go. My 35mm Fujica kit bag has about 12 or 15 filters in it. Other kits have their share too.

But that is just me. Not everyone believes in it. In days past, I experimented with filter use and found when I thought it helped. That is when I will try to use one.
 
occasionally used to use yellow and green filters, but mainly because I was outside with film rated at 800 in cameras with top shutter speeds of 1/200-1/500th.

Regarding protective filters... a buddy and I went back and forth with that argument for a long time... until some weird flare destroyed all the important images from a commercial shoot that could not be repeated... ouch! Cost him a lot of money and stress for nothing.

>>The main issues are flare and transmissive light loss.
 
Windscale said:
Forgive me for being ignorant. I have not done much B&W in the past but I do want to approach it seriously. What I would like to find out is that how many of you use colour correction filters regularly? Do most of you carry a handful of filters with you when you go out? Would any of you think that it is better to take care of things in the D&P stage?
Click to expand...

Windscale a basic rule should be not to use a filter unless there is a specific reason to do so.

having said that however filters and B/W photog go hand in hand. i suspect that many responces here on RFF where a number of people dont use them is inherent to the type or style of photography that is often associated with rangefinder cameras that make up the bulk of phtographers here obviously(spontanious, candid, streetshooting ect).

UV filters on modern muticoated lenses are usefull beyond their intented purpose to protect the lens and rarely if ever are the cause for an adverse effect on the final image (i.e flare), the same image taken without the UV filter on would likely had shown some effect anyway--the best solution is to use a lens hood. but nobody likes to use a hood do they 😉 even though its the single best thing to put in front of your lens.

the old pinkish Uv filters are also usefull for a slight seperation between blue sky and white clouds as well.

a yellow filter generaly has little effect on most images if left on (does increase exposure time tho) but is most useful for seperating the blues (sky and cloud)and does increase contrast of the shadows which are made up with blue light.it can also bring out the foliage in a picture as well. I use yellow often

greens i find are a waste of time (probably the photography hoax of the last century) and only do what yellow does but increase exposure time more (OK if thats what you need-kinda like puting an ND filter on-i use ND often by the way-because i use modern fast films and vintage slow shutters)

blue filters same thing--but they do look pretty in the collection tho

orange and reds are usefull for increasing the effect in the picture-the darker red to black (72 i think it is) is more so with infared film.
 
Filters are really only useful if you do your own processing. And if you apply the stated factors, nothing will come out like it should.

That said, you can't entirely replicate the look of contrast filters using darkroom tools only.

I use one contrast filter only.

Dante

Windscale said:
Forgive me for being ignorant. I have not done much B&W in the past but I do want to approach it seriously. What I would like to find out is that how many of you use colour correction filters regularly? Do most of you carry a handful of filters with you when you go out? Would any of you think that it is better to take care of things in the D&P stage?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom