Must have filters for B&W?

[Roman]

Roger,

have you tried comparing a yellow and yellow-green filter side by side for the same scene (esp. lanscapes, or anything with foliage in it)?
I used yellow filters for years, since they were what is recommended as 'standard' everywhere, until I got some Russian MF lenses that come packaged with yellow-green, and that was the eye-opener: in direct comparison, the y-g does everything the yellow does (like giving better cloud separation in skies), but with the added bonus of making trees, bushes, etc. look much more plastic, 3D like, and slightly lighter than with a yellow, kind of airy, fluffy 😉

Roman

 

[TPPhotog]

Sounds daft but I think the quality has quite a big impact, after all your putting another layer of glass between the glass and the subject.

When my freelancing was going downhill I worked P/T in a camera store for a while. Some of the old filters that came in on trade-ins had beautiful deep colours compared with many filters today. Getting to try them out the older filters to me gave a much nicer contrasty result.

I only use a yellow-green these days as used 48mm are few and far between and like the effect. Although I have now a step ring to fit 49mm filters I haven't used my other coloured filters for ages.

 

[TPPhotog]

When I'm using my Sekonic hand-held meter I usually set the ISO setting on the meter to allow for the filter factor. That way I can take readings all day without having to remember to mentally apply the factor.

 

[Doug]

Filter factors are weird, and not fixed in concrete... It depends on the color of the light. If, for an extreme instance, the light is the very same color as the filter, then there's nothing for the filter to filter out... and there's no filter factor to apply. Conversely, a yellow filter in blue light will have a filter factor higher than spec. And the color of the subject matters too; if the whole subject is about the same color as the filter, then it all gets lightened by about the same amount, so there's not much point.

One could say, well if the filter factor varies with the circumstances, then the smart thing is to just meter through the filter and see! Too bad that doesn't always work either, since the meter's spectral response is not the same as the film's. I became aware of this after wondering why I kept getting underexposure in yellow-red incandescent lighting. Had the meter checked ok at low light... But I found out that the Silicon Blue Cell meter is more sensitive to red than Tri-X is, so was reporting more light than the film could see.

I guess the published filter factors are a resonable compromise for most common situations, but it doesn't hurt to be conscious of how they're likely to vary!

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Roman,

I've never tried them side-by-side as you suggest, but I have tried them and I find the lightened foliage less attractive than you get with a plain yellow. Personal taste? Different films? Different developers? Who knows?

A few years ago (OK, about 15) I bought full sets of 40.5 and 58mm filters for a few kopeks each in Moscow, including even pale blue...

Cheers,

Roger

 

[Roger Hicks]

Sounds daft but I think the quality has quite a big impact, after all your putting another layer of glass between the glass and the subject.

It actually has astonishingly little impact. I used to believe in the 'good filter/bad filter' myth but then I decided to try it. The only 'filter' that detectably reduced sharpness was a bit of 3mm window-glass. Otherwise, there was no difference between Leitz/B+W (the best) ond Russian, or plastic, or anything else.

Ctein (who is a better experimentalist than I) tried the same thing and came up with exactly the same results.

Depth of colour is something else again, and yes, the deep yellows do deliver a lot more contrast than weak yellows. Then again, one of my favourite filters is a weak (2,8x) Soviet-era orange which is permanently mounted on my 200/3 Vivitar Series One, which in turn lives on a Nikon F.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[TPPhotog]

Hi Roger,

Thank you kindly for clearing those points up for me. The quality of them has always been one of those niggling thoughts at the back of my mind when using them. I suspect that the opulence of the earlier filters has seduced me in the past.

Best wishes Tony

 

[sleepyhead]

Anyone try GREEN filter for b&w PORTRAITS?

Anyone try GREEN filter for b&w PORTRAITS?

Hi Everyone. I met a guy recently who said that Mary Ellen Mark used to use a green filter for people shots because it had a nice effect on skin tones? Has anyone out there any experience with this?

I would have thought that any blemishes or red marks would be accentuated with a green filter. Of course, for those of us who find freckles attractive, perhaps a green filter would enhance them as well...

 

[TPPhotog]

I've not tried a green for portraiture, as my logic is the same as yours. Usually to improve the skin a yellow filter is the order of the day, or even an orange for those of us that don't like freckles 😉

 

[Roman]

Hmm, wouldn't have thought that Mary Ellen Mark would have used a green - but it is recommended for nudes and for portraits often - though only with people with either perfect skin or good make-up. Also, it does make lips look darker (usually a problem with orange filters, where lips look too light...

Roman

 

[marlinspike]

I wonder why I stopped getting new message notices after about 4 posts, but whatever. Anyways, thanks to all who have replied. To those who said get em all and experiment...I'm a college student = no money = can't get em all. I'll read these again when I'm not at work and pick up the ones that the general consensus agrees upon. If anyone wants to make my work easier, the things I'll be shooting with this camera with black and white film is city/street scenes and maybe a bit of landscape stuff.
Richard