Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,807   Posts: 1,581,458   Online: 1073
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 37 of 37
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Woodend, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    80
    It really depends on atmospheric conditions and on your definition of the word "darken" In summer we have very blue skies in inland Australia and a yellow filter can really darken the sky, closer to the ocean or in winter, when the sky isn't as blue a yellow filter will do very little.

    I rarely use filters (apart from ND) and amen to your comment about heavy handed photographers with the AA sky. I think the reason the older guys really went after sky darkening was a reaction to ortho films that made blue skies white, pan films came along and they wanted all the dark skies they could get, the darker the better.

    Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
    hate to say this but yellow filters don't really darken the sky at all, maybe a tiny bit
    maybe enough to make clouds seem like they are there a bit more, but if your objective
    is to darken the sky, a yellow filter won't really do that ...

    the person i was responding to was talking about how in nearly 50 years of professional photography
    he really found no use for using filters, and i pretty much agree with him .. unless it is for a specialized purpose
    like contrast control with paper negatives, or making ilford SFX film do its thing ...
    i find the use of filters by a lot of "landscape" photographers to be heavy handed in the very least
    and a lot of the time kind of hackneyed and clichéd ... cheezy velvia nudes at slot canyon ...

    but what do i know ...
    It is said that we remember the important things, if true, why photograph? I forget, so I photograph.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    277
    Some of these comments are basically saying anyone who drinks is an alcoholic.

    A lot of good filtration is like a good haircut. No one can tell you've had one. If people are seeing portfolios full of nothing but black skies they are looking at a filter alcoholic. There are plenty of filter users that are not alcoholics. There is a lot of territory between cementing a red filter to your normal lens and being a teetotaler.

    Something else that I find disturbing about filters is there seems to be a large number of people who don't know what they are for. Yes they can darken skies and increase contrast but they can also be used to cut through haze, remove glare, hide or accentuate skin blemishes and also change the relationship between colors/shades of gray. Digital shooters and even some color film shooters (surprisingly) wonder why I shoot black and white. Well there are multiple reasons including dirt cheap easy developing and enlarging. But one big draw for B&W film is the use of filters. It is something that can't be done in other mediums. Polarization is the exception. If I want to take a picture of a landscape and cut through haze I can use an orange filter, red filter, polarizer or combine. The result simply cannot be achieved without the filters. Also if I want to lighten some spring foliage while darkening the sky a bit I use a green filter. Again it really can't be done any other way. There is Photoshoping but the results are usually poorer (noise, posterization, strange digital artifacts) and of course no darkroom print .

    The only thing I can say is people need to read about filters and then use them in various situations. You don't have to use a sledge hammer filter(s) in every situation. As markbau pointed out how dark your sky is also depends on geographic location/atmospheric conditions. I can take a picture of a landscape with an orange filter and have it look like an unfiltered picture taken in markbau's backyard. If my orange filter landscape is terrible then by definition everything marbau is taking in his geographic location is terrible at least in regards to how dark the sky is.

    Seriously I am not a filter guru. As I stated before I will shoot a scene with multiple filters and sometimes no filter just to be on the safe side. If you are shooting roll film I suggest playing around with different subject matter. Filtration to me is just another tool in the workflow. I would not ignore shutter speed, aperture, focus, tripod, cable release, flash, type of film, type of developer, type of paper or paper developer. They are all tools that give you some degree of control. I have found when used appropriately filters can add a lot to a photograph. Heck even when used "inappropriately" you can end up with something nice and unique even if it is not very realistic. And just as I would not have a portfolio full of blurry, expired film, light leak, Holga images I would not have a portfolio full of black skies. Drink responsibly.

  3. #33
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,549
    Images
    300
    I sometimes use filters when I make portraits of people that have poor skin complexion. An orange filter might help someone with lots of skin blemishes, for example.

    I don't know why everybody is so hooked up on using filters only with skies. If you're in the woods photographing foliage, really striking results can be had by using green filters. Any time you photograph flowers and want to increase contrast between two complimentary colors, color filters can come very much in handy.

    Be creative with filters, use them to their strength and to improve your pictures according to how you want your photographs to look. I for one do not like the red filter sky much. Too much of the rest of the color spectrum gets rendered too damned wacky for my tastes.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  4. #34
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,509
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    437
    Going back to the question of film, the Arista.EDU Ultra/Fomapan stuff is really more of an ortho/pan than a true panchromatic. It is very blue sensitive and somewhat deficient in red sensitivity. Don't think you'll be able to pull off that red filter sky look with it, or even get significant cloud/sky separation using a red filter.

  5. #35
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,549
    Images
    300
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera View Post
    Going back to the question of film, the Arista.EDU Ultra/Fomapan stuff is really more of an ortho/pan than a true panchromatic. It is very blue sensitive and somewhat deficient in red sensitivity. Don't think you'll be able to pull off that red filter sky look with it, or even get significant cloud/sky separation using a red filter.
    Thanks for keeping the post on track. I agree that the Arista.EDU Ultra / Fomapan films have a tendency to produce skies that are somewhat featureless, due to their spectral sensitivity. Beautiful film for portraits, though.

    Even though it might be a little surplus information at this point, Kodak TMax 400 has spectral response that acts like a built in filter to yield tones in bright blue skies, more so than other films I've tried. But it isn't hard to capture the sky if you wanted to with Tri-X or HP5+ either.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  6. #36
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Humboldt Co.
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    4,754
    Images
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by Klainmeister View Post
    THAT'S where they keep em? Weird, I've spent a lot of time down in those places and never have come across any nudes. Maybe I need to look into Stone Donkey Canyon or Buckskin...
    One comes across them occasionally under the redwoods.

    Yellow, orange and red filters lighten blue skies relative to the rest of the landscape. Just look at one's negatives -- the skies have less density (lighter!) The brightness of skies in a print will depend on how much exposure one gives the paper. Sorry could not resist.



    My main filter use is a yellow filter in the Fall to darken (increase density) the representation of the yellows on the negative relative to the greens and browns...so that I can easily print them as white in the print.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Prairie Creek, Nude.jpg   Fallen Redwood, Nude_7"x19".jpg  
    At least with LF landscape, a bad day of photography can still be a good day of exercise.

  7. #37
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,031
    The use of a yellow came up with orthochromatic films, where a blue sky had more impact on exposure than with panchromatic film.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin