UV Filters - Do They Enhance Haze and Fog??

[Godfrey]

UV filters used to be very important with B&W film, particularly at high altitudes, because B&W film up until the late 1960s was overly sensitive to the blue-ultraviolet end of the spectrum. UV scatter, particularly at high altitudes, creates a "haze" in the image, the UV filter took out most of that UV.

More modern B&W emulsions, since about 1968, are much less sensitive to UV so the UV filter is really little different from a clear glass filter now. The film just can't record the UV very much anymore, so the UV haze isn't real ... It's mostly in our minds. 😉

Most digital camera sensors aren't sensitive to UV at all, so a UV filter really does next to nothing on them. There are a couple where UV can leak in, but it's rare.

Of course there are other kinds of haze ... mostly caused by particulates in the air (like smoke and other exhaust residues) ... but a UV filter can't do anything to suppress them. 😀

G

 

[raydm6]

I remember in the 70’s, Skylight filters were the craze then UVs took over.

 

[Retro-Grouch]

I do think there is still an issue at higher altitudes, particularly with color transparency films. I find it necessary to use corrective filtration, at least a Skylight IA or more often an 81B, to get the blue cast out of my shadows. I'm not sure whether this is from UV or just excessive blue light, but it's noticeable in particular with Ektachrome. Fuji reversal films seem to have much less of a problem in that regard.
As far as a protective filter of some sort? Always, and always one of the best quality. And clean!

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Just checking spectral response of modern B&W film- several modern films on the market are sensitive well into the UV. Some are not- but the TMAX films are.

SO- rather than state "All modern films and camera lenses do not require UV filters", best to check your own setup.

A quick search-

Spectral Sensitivity of B&W Film - A Deep Dive into Orthochromatic, Panchromatic and All the Rest

The term spectral sensitivity might sound boring and/or scary – the kind of jargon which photography veterans use to bamboozle and discourage newbies.

www.35mmc.com

As we still have many members using the Leica M9, M Monochrom, and M-E: they are very sensitive to UV, and you need to use a Filter to prevent "Purple Haze". The Red color dye in this region has an up-tick, and matches Blue. SO- Purple-Haze.

 

[boojum]

Field expedient solution? When in doubt, filter. If you want protection for your lens, filter. We always practice safe photography. ;o)

 

[Godfrey]

Just checking spectral response of modern B&W film- several modern films on the market are sensitive well into the UV. Some are not- but the TMAX films are.

SO- rather than state "All modern films and camera lenses do not require UV filters", best to check your own setup.

A quick search-

Spectral Sensitivity of B&W Film - A Deep Dive into Orthochromatic, Panchromatic and All the Rest

The term spectral sensitivity might sound boring and/or scary – the kind of jargon which photography veterans use to bamboozle and discourage newbies.

www.35mmc.com

As we still have many members using the Leica M9, M Monochrom, and M-E: they are very sensitive to UV, and you need to use a Filter to prevent "Purple Haze". The Red color dye in this region has an up-tick, and matches Blue. SO- Purple-Haze.

Absolutely ... It is always best to test the specific equipment you have and use to see how it responds. I don't use TMAX very often, I use Ilford emulsions most of the time which seem relatively insensitive to UV. Of course, nearly all B&W films today are less sensitive to UV than all B&W films prior to the late 1960s, which is the general thrust of what I was saying.

Color ... Using filters like the Skylight 1a, 1b, etc instead of a UV is perfectly reasonable with most color emulsions back then and today. Proper filtration for color is always much more complex than B&W since you are trying to image the colors and they are pushed around by far more factors than B&W films are.

G

 

[Richard G]

Thanks Brian. A bit to think about.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Yes, the music seems like only yesterday. Biased as I am I see it as a wonderful period in popular music. It was an outburst of new pop musical thought. As Dylan said, "Tin Pan Alley is dead. I killed it." The names like Strawberry Alarm Clock, Ten Wheel Drive and Lothar and the Hand People will not be equalled for a long while. And as biased as I am I do not think the music will be bested for a long while.

I might have the album still- had it as a kid.

 

[boojum]

I might have the album still- had it as a kid.

Brian, this is a de facto admission of a misspent youth. That kind of music will cause curvature of the spine and lose the war for the Allies. And your hair will fall out. ;o)

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Brian, this is a de facto admission of a misspent youth. That kind of music will cause curvature of the spine and lose the war for the Allies. And your hair will fall out. ;o)

Got all my Hair Baby, and get it cut once a year whether it needs it or Not! I gave the girl a $50 tip, floor looked like tribbles running across it when she was done.

 

[wlewisiii]

In my experience, a hood and a filter are far more often your friend than not. So I use them, especially on my 50's.

As for misspent youth, you're all old farts 🤣

 

[boojum]

Got all my Hair Baby, and get it cut once a year whether it needs it or Not! I gave the girl a $50 tip, floor looked like tribbles running across it when she was done.

Yes, but you realize this is but a step away from The Rocky Horror Picture Show and Pink Flamingos? ROTFLMAO Do Tribbles reproduce faster than Shmoos? "Tune in next week, same time, same station, for the answer to this and other interesting questions."

 

[Retro-Grouch]

Brian, this is a de facto admission of a misspent youth. That kind of music will cause curvature of the spine and lose the war for the Allies. And your hair will fall out. ;o)

If you didn't mis-spend your youth, you weren't spending it well. And my hair has fallen out; bald, shiny, and proud!

 

[boojum]

If you didn't mis-spend your youth, you weren't spending it well. And my hair has fallen out; bald, shiny, and proud!

"If you remember the 70's you weren't there." All this has me revved up to rewatch the rock festival trilogy: Monterey Pop, Woodstock and Gimme Shelter. The beginning, high point and the end.

I passed on Woodstock and followed it on WBAI where it was pretty much covered as a total mess. Luckily the cinematic coverage made it out to be great and I suppose if you snip four hours out of the total week it was great. But the returnees had different stories. We embroider our past. Nevertheless the movie is wonderful and the central and high point of those three festival concert films. Now it is Taylor Swift at US$1000+ a ticket for a single show. Show me the money, baby. The music and the vibe was great back then. I am glad I passed through it because I doubt it will ever be repeated. That of it which I remember.

 

[Archiver]

Over time, I noticed that the lenses I used most of the time, all filter clad, were not as sharp as they once had been. I took the filters off and found the lenses had a thin fog on the front element. I cleaned the lenses and filters, put them back to use. A few months later, the same thing. "Hmm," I said to myself, "I guess I have to take the filters off every couple of weeks to clean inside." The lenses I had no filters on didn't seem to get dirty, the one I had filters on did. "Hmm again: If I have to clean the lenses with filters more frequently, well, that's about as good an opportunity to damage a front element as if I only used a filter when I needed one, since I don't often have to clean those lenses." So I took off all the filters and went shooting with my lenses. And I noticed that I got less flare, slightly better sharpness, most of the time.

That was in about 1980. Since then, I put filters on only when I feel I need one to protect a lens in a specific circumstance (like going to the beach, or photographing in a dust or sand storm) and when I need to filter light. I've still never damaged a lens's front element .. I use a hood *all* the time to protect the lenses and to improve flare control. I feel I'm getting the most my lenses can offer.

A UV filter is mostly necessary for my lenses as I'm often in situations where the front element gets dirty. It's going to be sweat or flying saliva from an athlete or even blood during competition. Even under more sedate circumstances, little specks of whatever fluid gets on the front element, so a good UV filter is welcome protection. I don't use filters on a few of my lenses, but generally, they are on most, and I don't notice any difference in IQ. I use B+W, Hoya Pro and Urth UV Filter Plus.

The filters are cleaned once every few weeks if necessary, using a blower, then cleaning fluid and a microfiber cloth, inside as well as outside. I once killed a filter by slipping on a rock and sitting down hard, the camera was in my bag and impacted the rock and the filter was destroyed. The lens, however, was fine. I've also inadvertently scuffed the edges of a lens against a wall, which a filter would have protected against. A lens hood would also have worked, but a lens hood prevents quick adjustment of variable ND, a must for video shooting in bright light.

On the other hand, variable ND filters can sometimes give an unwanted colour cast, softness or bloom to an image, which can be really annoying. A UV filter usually doesn't produce this effect, so maybe @boojum should give his an extra careful clean.