Tiffen filter wratten equivilents

Discussion in 'Miscellaneous Equipment' started by Radioiron, Apr 6, 2009.

  1. Radioiron

    Radioiron Member

    Messages:
    43
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Does anyone know what a tiffen green 1 filter is eqivelent to in wratten numbers? I've searched everywhere and can't even come up with spectral transmission to match to regular filters.
     
  2. ic-racer

    ic-racer Member

    Messages:
    7,470
    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Location:
    Midwest USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I happen to be doing a search on Wratten filters with the 'special dyes' tonight. The Kodak site is useless. The "Help" section gave zero hits for Wratten. The technical search informed me that the 'special dyes' were "Used to alter the color wavelength of light." (Duhh..)

    Anyway, I came across this stuff that may answer your question.

    Select Tiffen spectra:
    [​IMG]

    Select Kodak Wratten spectra:

    [​IMG]
     
  3. Lee L

    Lee L Member

    Messages:
    3,247
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2004
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    An older Wratten filter designation used letters and numbers. Newer Wratten nomenclature uses numbers, sometimes followed by a letter. Hoya uses letter+number, but often shortens the designation to letter only. B+W uses a three digit number code, and Schott uses two letters + a three digit number.

    Tiffen Green 1 is a Wratten #11, and their green 2 is a Wratten #13. Tiffen also makes a Green 56 and Green 58, which are the same as Wratten #56 and #58. The current Tiffen numbers 1 and 2 are probably shortened forms of Wratten letter+number designations. The Wratten #11 was also an X1, and is equivalent to the G11 or 060 filters in other systems. The Wratten #13 is also an X2, and called the 061 in other systems. Both the #11 and #13 are yellow-green.

    Astrophotography books refer to the Wratten #13 as a "more efficient" version of the #11. The #11 and #13 pass the 480-580 nm spectrum, and the #11 has a filter factor of 4 and the #13 a factor of 5. I suspect that the "more efficient" comment means that the #13 has a sharper cutoff, i.e. is better at blocking unwanted wavelengths outside the passband.

    The Wratten #56 passband is listed as 490-580, and the #58 as 505-560.

    B&H tends to list multiple filter designations on their web site, so you might find that helpful.

    Lee
     
  4. Mike Wilde

    Mike Wilde Member

    Messages:
    2,936
    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2006
    Location:
    Misissauaga
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    While not necessarily of perfect optical grade, theatre lighting gels can work very well for many photo situations - get an old wratten filter holder for the front of you lens to hold them, or improvise.

    I would suggest that about $50 spent on a designers swatchbook from Roscoe or Lee - makers of theatrical lighting filter gel would be money very well spent.
    They are about 2"x5", and include the spectral transmission curve.
    There are smaller swatch books that are 1" x 2.5" that have the same infomation, but clipping gels from these only gives filters big enoygh for most point and shoot lenses.
     
  5. Q.G.

    Q.G. Inactive

    Messages:
    5,682
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    That's not it.
    The 13 absorbs more red than the 11. The behaviour of both at wavelengths shorter than about 590 nm is virtually identical.
     
  6. Lee L

    Lee L Member

    Messages:
    3,247
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2004
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    In what way is that not "better at blocking unwanted wavelengths outside the passband", e.g. blocking more red and/or blue?

    Lee
     
  7. Q.G.

    Q.G. Inactive

    Messages:
    5,682
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Both block unwanted wavelengths outside the passband. Their passbands are slightly different.

    The one does not have a sharper cutoff than the other.
    The behaviour of both at wavelengths shorter than about 590 nm is virtually identical. The 11 is more transparent for red and near infra red than the 13.
     
  8. Lee L

    Lee L Member

    Messages:
    3,247
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2004
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    OK, so you're saying the efficieny refers to a deeper rather than steeper red cutoff. I don't have, and can't find a Tiffen curve for the #13, only B+W 060 and 061, and they often differ significantly on "equivalent" filters from Tiffen.

    The OP might appreciate your posting the Tiffen curves you're using.

    Lee
     
  9. Q.G.

    Q.G. Inactive

    Messages:
    5,682
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I'm not using Tiffen curves. I was - like you - writing about Kodak Wratten filters.

    I have those curves on paper (Kodak booklet). Alas no digital version.