Black Promist 1/4 or 1/8 video samples?

C

combatentropy

Veteran
Do any of you shoot with a Tiffen Black ProMist filter, either 1/4 or 1/8? If so, can you share some of your footage?

I'm trying to make the choice from my armchair. I've narrowed it down to Black ProMist 1/4 or 1/8. I guess I'm open to regular ProMist, too, but still very mild. I want something to just take the edge off, without looking like something from the 1980s.

So far I've found just short snippets or very controlled tests. I would very much like to see just a ton of footage. I need to see a wide variety, all shot with one of those filters: indoors and out, day and night, with light sources in the shot and not, but usually with people in them, please.

Please note that I'm actually trying to decide between the 1/4 and 1/8, so I'm especially interested in footage of just one or the other. Also telling me which camera and lens used would help, if possible.
 
Last edited:
Greg_E said:
I thought the effect changed with lens focal length which suggests you might need both.
Click to expand...

Yes. That's exactly true. But I don't have any sort of "handy guide" to what the ratio might be.

FWIW, I often shoot with a Black Diffusion 3 (pretty strong) and on a 20mm it's visible to the trained eye, but not the average person.

I wouldn't be surprised if the 1/8 is almost too weak in most situations.

Also, folks have frequently said that the Black Diffusion is less 'glowy' and 'dreamy' than the Black ProMist.

All great filters though.
 
Don't have footage, sorry, but I've used the 1/4 ProMist with the GH3 and Panny 12-35 f/2.8 - and it's definitely noticeable throughout the range... I mean, you don't have to be a pro to notice. Not in love with the effect on people and animals (which I shot a lot of during a festival), but maybe a different use scenario or different photographer/videographer would have used it better. It basically makes everything look fuzzy, but not in a pleasing - dreamy way (which was my hope), almost out of focus. Bleh. I junked all the footage from that outing (hence no footage!), and have not used it since. I have no experience with the 1/8.
 
Tiffen has a demo video available online. You might track it down. From memory they also have a 4K originated version.

As mentioned you might get better results using the 1/8 on wider shots and the 1/4 on tighter shots.

I have been using the Schneider Hollywood Blackmagic filters as of late and am really pleased with the results.
 
I use both constantly, 1/4 on most things, and 1/8 on longer lenses 80mm and above, where I don't want as pronounced an effect. You can see both filters in action across most of my showreel: http://dreamsmiths.com.au/showreel/ (with the exception of the underwater and commercial shots, they're on virtually everything else, the period piece used a 1/2 BPM).

I'd strongly recommend having both densities available.
 
OK, without being an expert on diffusion filters I think there are some basics we have bumped our heads into here in this dark room:

The diffusion filters with the word "Mist" in the name seem to live up to it. They give more of that "dreamy" look that can be more of a problem if that's not what you're after.

Tiffen's Black Diffusion and the Schneider Hollywood Blackmagic filters seem to be really well regarded as a real tool for "taking the edge off".

I have used several of the Tiffen 'Mist" series - the Standard ProMist, as well as the Warm and Cool ProMist.
I think they are wonderful for getting what I would call an affected shot. Dreamy - yes. "Extra Creamy" (my words) - yes.
In what little I have used these - A power of roughly "1" hits my eye as strong as the power "3" of the Black Diffusion series.

Grug linked to the Showreel above and it is a phenomenal collection of very beautiful and artistic work. Watch it.



 
Grug said:
I use both constantly, 1/4 on most things, and 1/8 on longer lenses 80mm and above, where I don't want as pronounced an effect. You can see both filters in action across most of my showreel: http://dreamsmiths.com.au/showreel/ (with the exception of the underwater and commercial shots, they're on virtually everything else, the period piece used a 1/2 BPM).

I'd strongly recommend having both densities available.
Click to expand...

Hey Grug,
Just for clarity - you're using Tiffen's 'Black ProMist' series?

~Thanks
 
DPStewart said:
Hey Grug,
Just for clarity - you're using Tiffen's 'Black ProMist' series?

~Thanks
Click to expand...

Yep, I use primarily the Black ProMists from Tiffen. Sometimes, I'll use a net filter as well for a stronger effect. But on that showreel, it's predominantly Black ProMist.
 
If this helps at all, I used a black Promist 1/2 on this sketch, which has burning hot backlights. A 1/8 or 1/4 would have course produced less glow.

https://vimeo.com/channels/keypeele/123479988

For diffusion without a lot of highlight glow, I am currently using the Glimmerglass range, generally around 1/2 and up. I used it throughout the current season of "Playing House"

.
 
Wow, I love your work, and Key & Peele are my favorite sketches. Doesn't get better than that lol! So you prefer the glimmerglass over promists?
 
It's not so much a matter of preference as it is tailoring the look to the project at hand. For me the Glimmerglass series is great to take the edge off the modern lens/digital sensor combo, reduces contrast a little and smooths out fine details. It does add a subtle glow to highlights. The Promists are more noticeable, especially when it comes to highlight glow. I'll use them when we are going for a specific look. In the pre-HD era, a 1/4 black promist was the go-to to give video more of a film-like quality, but it wasn't quite as suited as a "set and forget" filter for the modern HD cameras. I also carry the HD Classic Softs and will sometimes combine them with the Glimmerglass if we are really "going for it".

I also tested the Black Satin and Pearlessence filters a few months ago and found that the pattern in the Satin glass created lines in out of focus highlights which I didn't care for. The Pearlessence were quite nice.
 
REALLY helpful here.
This is a great demonstration of the 2 different styles of diffusion we're talking about here.
Wow, thanks Charles!

I think this example of the Glimmerglass is probably exactly what the O.P. was wanting.
Taking the edge off without the glow.

And then a great example of the glow for those who may not be clear as to what we're taking about.

I think I need to get some of that Glimmerglass right away!


CharlesPapert said:
If this helps at all, I used a black Promist 1/2 on this sketch, which has burning hot backlights. A 1/8 or 1/4 would have course produced less glow.

https://vimeo.com/channels/keypeele/123479988

For diffusion without a lot of highlight glow, I am currently using the Glimmerglass range, generally around 1/2 and up. I used it throughout the current season of "Playing House"

.
Click to expand...
 
Thank you. Pro-Mist is stuck in my mind because over 15 years camera operators would mention often using 1/4 or 1/8. But that goes back to SD and 2/3" sensors, where it's subtle. I really think sensor size affects filter strength. For example, the Digital Bolex with Pro-Mist 1/4 looks fine, but even Black Pro-Mist 1/8 looks kind of strong on an Epic.

A year or so ago I tediously looked through encyclopedic analyses of all of the filters out today, like Tiffen's half-hour demo and Shane Hurlbut's tests (which I can't find again right now, although here is a still). For some reason I settled on Pro-Mist, despite the newer ones like Glimmerglass and Digital Diffusion. I can't remember why, except that maybe I'm conservative and prefer the tried and true. Anyway, I had said I just wanted to take the edge off, but I like a little interpretive glow around lights. The Glimmerglass gives me that, I can see. So I guess I'll have to watch everything all over again. ;)
 
I think you need to concede that there is no one filter family to rule them all. The Digital Diffusion certainly has applications that just take the edge off, then get into the different mists (regular and black) to add a little whispyness, etc.

I'm not sure sensor size has much to do with it, I think that goes back into angle of view. But I bet resolution has something to do with it, betting a 1/4 diffusion looks a lot different at 1280 than it does at 6k given the same sensor size. I'm sure we could come up with an equation to help predict the outcome based on photosite size and angle of view... But I bet most working pros would just say to buy the entire series and be done with it.

Since I'm always used adapted lenses, I'm thinking of making a drop in slot for smaller round filters between lens and sensor. Assuming it works acceptably this would get the effect down to a somewhat constant predictable amount. The light rays are always about the same angle in the adapter tube, so the amount of effect should be pretty constant. That's the theory anyway, may not work in practice. One of these days one of my cheap adapters will get a slot cut into it for trial. I did try this on one adapter, the filter just happened to be a little smaller than the lens mount, so I dropped it in and taped it in place... The result was a lot less than putting it in front of the lens. Another project to continue testing down the road to see what happens. Just wish there were multicoated filters out there in case I decide this is a cool way to handle things. Reflections could be the killer to this line of thinking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top