Contrast Filters

[S.Rolf]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

With post-production software now, are contrast filters for B&W necessary?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[spydrxx]

It really depends on what you want your NEGATIVES to look like. PP software for B&W can do a lot, but it can't capture things which aren't on the negative. For instance, if you want dramatic cloud rendering on B&W film, you really need to use a red filter...pp software just won't do it if you haven't been able to initially differentiate it.

[S.Rolf]

You mentioned “Red” filter as an example.

Would your assessment still hold true for instances when I would normally use a “Yellow” filter?

[Jean-Michel]

If you still use b&w film, then yes. The rendition is set in your film;

If you use a Monochrom camera, then yes. The b&w rendition is set in the file.

If you use a regular M camera, then there is no need for contrast filters as you are offered a myriad of tools to convert your colour file into b&w. The only useable filter would be a polarizing filter.

Edited January 4, 2018 by Jean-Michel

[S.Rolf]

I'm speaking of specifically an MP Film Camera so yes, B&W film only in this case.

For color I primarily use my M10.

I guess I'm still one of those guys that believes digital B&W cannot replicate what B&W film can do.

Edited January 4, 2018 by S.Rolf

[Exodies]

And then you scan it. Doh!

[klytz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I must admit that there's always a yellow filter in front of my M246. I regularly use orange and red filters too not to forget the polarizing filter. I've never really found out to use the green and blue ones, but I guess it is just a matter of perseverance.

 

You may call me odd but I never use my M240P for BW. I don't even take a look at the conversion. When I want BWs I use the 246. 

[pippy]

I've never really found out to use the green and blue ones, but I guess it is just a matter of perseverance.

 

Historically in portraiture a green filter was used to render skin tones more 'natural' when using B'n'W film as it heightened the subtleties of variation in the red part of the spectrum. The areas which benefited most were, of course, the lips and 'rosy' cheeks - if present!...

 

In landscape photography a green filter can also be used, obviously, to lighten foliage.

 

Blue filters weren't / aren't used much except, again in B'n'W photography, to differentiate different colours which might share similar tonal values in a particular scene; i.e. if there is a strong orange object and a strong blue object they may have a similar tone so using a blue filter will darken the first whilst lightening the second.

 

Pip.

Edited January 4, 2018 by pippy

[Ko.Fe.]

I'll try

 

1. Filter->contrast->lens->modified light->film->exposure->developing->scan->PP.

or

2. Lens->film->exposure->developing->scan->PP(contrast of electronic image).

or

3. Lens>film->exposure->developing->filter->contrast->modified light->print.

 

All three are different, with different results in terms of the contrast.

1. You are modifying the light to get specific contrast on the negative.

2. You are modifying digital image.

3. You are modifying the light which goes on the darkroom paper.

 

Personally,  I suck at #1 (filters not working well enough for me) and don't like 2 because (technically) it is digital image degrading process (editing).

So, I do it by #3.

I could use contrast filters for VC papers. But I prefer single contrast papers and variations of developers (including film), prints exposure times, dodge and burning etc.

 

And what I'm trying to say here...

if you are trying to play digital vs film BW card, it is only fair if no digital processing is involved.  Because digital editing can't do how analog do it, contrast including.

Not just how it is done, but how it looks on final image.

 

I have to switch paper developers for same paper to get contrast like this:

 

[Mark II]

I find a light blue filter handy for dealing with high contrast lighting in some cases, where the shadows are bluer than the parts of the scene in direct sun.

 

Whatever colour filter you use, you need to pay attention to the colours in your subject. I have some shots of a scene with banners that were written in white on a red background. The red “contrast” filter that I was using lightened the background so much that the text was illegible on the negatives!

 

I also suspect that some films give grainier results with a red filter than without - this seems to be the case with sky areas and Delta 400. I am not sure if this is just because it is easier to see the grain in a darker sky, or because of something in the film formulation (some films use two layers with different sensitivities, for example).

[Jean-Michel]

There is no good reason to use a filter, other than skylight or UV, or a IR cut-off for an M8, on a colour digital camera. The sensor already has RGB filters in front of the photosites. Te RAW file allows you to correct for any colour cast, or you can set the white balance manually and later adjust to taste,and so on.

 

For film work, here is a pdf with good information on Schneider filters:

https://www.schneideroptics.com/pdfs/filters/BWHandbook.pdf

[S.Rolf]

To put a finer point on my OP, I'm using Kodak 100TMAX with Yellow and Orange filters on my MP through 28, 35, 50 Summicron lenses and shoot primarily old architectural structures.

Edited January 4, 2018 by S.Rolf

[Mark II]

There is no good reason to use a filter, other than skylight or UV, or a IR cut-off for an M8, on a colour digital camera. The sensor already has RGB filters in front of the photosites. Te RAW file allows you to correct for any colour cast, or you can set the white balance manually and later adjust to taste,and so on.

 

Colour filters are occasionally useful on colour-sensor cameras when there is a strong colour cast in an image that needs to be corrected.

 

For example, when “scanning” colour film via a macro lens I use a blue filter to help counter the orange mask. The filter that I use is not exactly matched, but it avoids huge differences in the colour channels on the “scanned” image that at best result in unnecessary noise and at worst a clipped red channel.

 

Emulating strong colour filters in digital PP can also result in image artefacts. I suspect - though I have never tried thIs - that using a mild colour filter at capture could yield better results than relying entirely on PP in some cases. A polarising filter is also often a good idea if the intent is to simulate a strong red filter in PP for sky/cloud separation.