Using Filters in B&W Photography

[Double Negative]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just thought I'd share a new article posted over the weekend...

 

"Using Filters in B&W Photography"

 

Discusses using a variety of filters with B&W film, including the usual contrast filters, neutral density and UV, etc. As usual, we'll be adding more details, sample images, etc. in the near future.

 

This article is the second in a series so far. The first was:

 

"Choosing a B&W Film Developer"

 

More will be on the way!

[Richardgb]

Good article on a sadly neglected topic since the advent of digital.

 

A couple of comments and a lesson learnt from the days I used to shoot film.

 

I was a great believer in an orange filter. It darkened blue skies just a bit more than yellow, and gave a bit more contrast in hazy landscapes. The resulting prints stood out that bit more to catch the picture-editor's eye. I was using a fast-ish film (Tri-X), so could still hand-hold despite the 2-stop exposure compensation.

 

I came unstuck once, though, at an industrial location. Picture blue, cloudless skies, and towering, red-painted cranes. An impressive scene, especially as the cranes were some of the biggest around, with a 500-tone lifting capacity and being used on a bridge-replacement exercise. Anyway, the sky darkened nicely in the shots, as expected, but the cranes were lightened to almost exactly the same tone. Luckily, the side-lighting still meant you could pick out some of the cranes' structural members, but it took quite a bit of darkroom work to get a publishable print. The lesson? When using stong filters, take a shot without just in case... To anyone new to filters it's also worth pointing out that the degree of lightening / darkening depends on the combination of filter and film, owing to differences in spectral sensitivity between film types.

 

Concerning the article's comparison of an overcast sky to a giant overhead lightbox making it suitable for portraits, yes but... the overhead lighting puts shadows in the eye-sockets and under the cheeks, unless the photographer is above the model and he / she is looking up. This is not very flattering. The answer is to use a reflector or a bit of fill-in flash. The reflector gives a softer fill in the shadows, but can be unwieldy; fill-in flash adds a bit of sparkle in the eyes (invariably welcome), but you have to watch not to over-fill (i.e. so the flash dominates, unless that's the effect you want), and there's aways the risk of shadows and reflections of the flash appearing where unwanted.

 

I've just started using the filter effects in SilverEfexPro, bit as this is a digital topic it may not be deemed a topic of the Film Forum...

[Stealth3kpl]

I've just started using the filter effects in SilverEfexPro, bit as this is a digital topic it may not be deemed a topic of the Film Forum...

 

I occasionally use ColorEfexPro. I'd be interested to see a few screen shots of Silver Efex Pro, and an overview of the program if you'd like to do a thread somewhere. I might find it useful for conversion of a colour scan.

Pete

[Double Negative]

Thanks, Richard - fully agreed.

 

Using filters blindly can get you into trouble if you don't consider exactly what it is that it does. Both the colors it darkens - as well as lightens. I think people have enough trouble "seeing" in B&W, let alone figuring out the filters. It does take a little reading, experimenting and practice. I hope to add a series of photos of a well-colored scene with all the various filters as a comparison...

 

True also - an overcast sky doesn't mean perfect lighting. A reflector or other method is required with strong backlighting, diffuse or not.