diffusion filters

MPB

MPB

Well-known member
my new f3 should arrive in a few days and i'm starting a doc project at the beginning of May. it's going to be interview-heavy and many of our subjects will be actors of a certain age. i haven't used diffusion filters much in the past. it's not a look that has interested me, but i'm going to be embracing it now.

i'm shooting with a set of zf mount primes and a nikon 24-70mm. while we're recording to a pix240, it will not be slog. (the producers are not inclined to take on that kind of post load.) what i've seen up close with this camera, shooting rec709 with no real tweaking, is that nikons look very sharp with plenty of contrast. i've also seen a huge, old cooke zoom that introduced a fair amount of diffusion all by itself.

so, i'm thinking i'll need to address the sharpness of both the camera and the lenses, and i want my subjects and their handlers to feel comfortable that we're smoothing out skin and treating them properly. however, i dislike a lot of the halation and loss of contrast i see with some filters. and i'd like to smooth out skin without sacrificing too much sharpness. also, i'd like to build a consistent look, but i want to play it safe and not bake too much into the picture.

from my reading so far, the Schneider Hollywood Black Magic sounds like it could be the ticket. not sure how easy they are to get a hold of. anyway, any thoughts? has anyone used these? other suggestions or ideas about detail and diffusion with the f3?
 
Try out Tiffen SoftFx filters. No halation - very clean and a very pleasing softness on faces. I never use more than the lowest value (1/2) though a 1 is perhaps useful. I've never tried any Schneider diffusion.
The original old Hollywood Mitchell diffusion filters were supposed to be great , but I've never even seen one.
You could also of course just let it be done in post and maybe even invest in the Tiffen post production software.
 
Get your Detail settings to a very low level. Much better than using filters and very consistent. Run some tests on older faces.
 
the Soft FX sound like they could be just the ticket. thanks Lenilenapi.

Thomas, i think i understand where you're coming from, in the past i've never been a proponent of filters. and i do intend to work with the detail settings as well. but i guess what i'm thinking is that at a certain point dialing detail down is sacrificing overall sharpness while the right filter might be better at smoothing skin without softening everything too much.

i also understand the philosophy of - first, do no harm. but... i don't feel that as much as i used to. leaving decisions for post hasn't always been the best decision in the past. as long as i don't get heavy-handed i feel like i should take more responsibility there. and, frankly, for some subjects and situations there's a political consideration as well. sometimes you need to be able to clearly demonstrate, on set, and to a number of people, that you're addressing their concerns and actively creating a pretty picture. but i need to be able to show a look that i actually think is good, too.
 
Once you put something in front of a lens you affect the whole sharpness of the image. I would use a custom PP with detail off and try the settings for skin softness in camera. Don't over do it, leave something for post.
 
i appreciate the admonitions regarding safety first. i have the impression though that the reason for the persistence of the use of diffusion filters is that they offer something other than a direct equivalent to what can be achieved digitally. regardless, once i press the record button, it's in there. i haven't the luxury of leaving everything to post in this instance. so while i intend to use a light touch, touch it i will.

however, if there is some consensus that there is no benefit in filters over what can be done in-camera, i would endeavor to understand that better.
 
MBP,
I'm with you. Filtration is different then turning off detail, which is why there are 30,000 varieties of these dirty windshields. Likewise I agree that leaving it to post takes your eye out of the equation, esp dangerous with clients who don't want a post heavy workflow. In practise that also tends to mean a weak colorist at the controls or none. Finally, especially on interviews, being the guy who makes someone older look good cements your relationship with the client. I have a quarterly CEO interview with a guy that I've been using 1/2 soft FX with for a while now. The client loves it and I'm the guy who's made him look better. Recently they switched to green screen though and we decided it was safer not to diffuse that in camera so instead the detail is off.
 
On the Sony F3 - well my personal preference has always been a 1/2 black promist. In fact its the only one I have anymore. I find 1/4 not enough and a 1, a touch too much.
 
Try to run a test with low detail levels and a light Black Promist or Ultra Contrast. I've been using a lot of filters over the years but lately just use the detail settings. My personal taste varies over the years i've noticed.
If you use filters, bring the whole set because you need to change them for different focal lenghts.
 
yeah... kinda sounds like i need to rent a whole bunch of them. i think i know what i don't want more than what i want exactly. i'd like to take the video edge off the picture, along with improving skin and generally presenting our subjects in a flattering light. but i hope not to give up a whole lot of contrast in the process. that may not be something i can get away with.

do longer focal lengths need more?
 
Soft FX won't affect contrast or halation. That's why I like them
Pro mist is pretty but it affects both.Usually less on longer focal lengths but test test test
 
the Soft FX is sounding very appealing.

thanks for the suggestions. i'll let you know how i get on.
 
in looking for local filter suppliers i was a little disappointed in the fact that the big box stores seem to have very little on the shelf. i did a little digging though and found a local specialty shop;

http://www.filtergallery.com/

it's a one man operation in a small office, but the stock is extensive. Stan is clearly used to catering to much bigger fish than me, but was entirely willing to spend as much time as i required and present various options. very helpful for a filter newb such as myself. when i told him what i was looking for he concurred with Lenilenapi regarding the Tiffen Soft FX, and said the difference between that and Schneider Classic Soft was nearly indistinguishable. he also showed me the warm version of the Tiffen, which looks quite pleasing, but as i can only buy a few right now i don't want to commit to the color change when that's something i can do in camera or with gels.

he offered to let me take a variety to test and then return the ones i don't want. as i won't have the camera for a couple more days i didn't want to take him up on that today. anyway, i'm happy to have met Stan.

thanks again for the suggestions.
 
+1. Detail down first, then pick a filter. Rent a bunch, do a test, and be sure to use a pro-grade monitor on set that you know well.
 
Have you ever shot with both the 1/4 and 1/2 in place? Just wondering what a 3/4 would look like if 1 is too much?

Alan
 
Be carefull with to much extra glass in front of the lens.
More flare en reflections. Might as wel by cheaper lenses.
 
i got a Soft FX 1/2, 1 and 2. i'm going with the 1/2 as a default, up to 1 when a little more is desired. 2 looks like the nuclear option to me, i'd only go that far if my arm was twisted.

so far i haven't had much issue with reflections with just the Soft FX, but i did have a bit when i put a grad nd in there.
 
Noel Evans said:
On the Sony F3 - well my personal preference has always been a 1/2 black promist. In fact its the only one I have anymore. I find 1/4 not enough and a 1, a touch too much.
Click to expand...

Noel,

I feel the exact same way. I also use a Schneider Black Frost 1/2, which is basically the same with some subtle differences. For those saying to reduce the detail setting, it's not the same. The filter isn't used to soften skin, as much as it is to give a more filmic look to the contrast curve.

Here are some frame grabs from a recent music video we just shot where I used the Black Frost 1/2. Shot in S-Log and graded.

559404_10150783989091707_709396706_9671687_631287432_n.jpg


579655_10150783989326707_709396706_9671688_345587196_n.jpg


541353_10150783989751707_709396706_9671690_1477872702_n.jpg


576440_10150783989901707_709396706_9671691_1272229482_n.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top