Matte Boxes: worth it OR waste of $$$

Steve Kahn

Steve Kahn

Well-known member
I would guess historically the reason matte boxes were used in film cameras was to facilitate the use of filters. But as the AF100 is blessed with an ND filter wheel there goes that arguement.

The second reason was to be able to attach huge French flags or barn doors to eliminate stray sunlight or set lights. But, on a set one can erect flags as needed. One can use a lens hood.

Sure, they look good. People will think you're cool. Actors will think you're important and be more likely ignore your thin 50 page script which still lacks a whole second act because you haven't even written it yet.

But they slow you down when you need to change lenses. They may not interface well with your lenses. They may vignette. They may attract too much attention when you're trying to be a guerrilla.

So, then I ask: Matte Box:

worth it OR waste of $$$
 
Last edited:
Historically filters were used much, much more than they typically are today. Today, about the only filters people seem to use on a regular basis are polarizers and graduated NDs. But for the longest time, when color correction was done optically on the film with printer lights, filters were essential because you had to get the look as close as possible in-camera.

Matte boxes are not designed to slow you down. In cinema, they can greatly accelerate the pace of work. What slows you down is screwing in individual filters and dropping them and cursing and cleaning the filter off and re-screwing it in and cross-threading it and ... ugh. And, you say erecting flags on set to control spill and flares, yes -- but how much easier and faster is it to NOT have to custom-set a flag every time you move the camera? The mattebox is a moving light shade that's always there with you.

And slowing down changing lenses? Only if you're using a rails-mounted mattebox that doesn't swing away. If you're using one of those on a cinema shoot, you're using the wrong product for the job. Those things are appropriate for fixed-lens video cameras, but in cinema you want/need a swingaway (which is one reason why the Redrock mattebox was so exciting, it was the first decent swingaway mattebox at a cheap price).

Matteboxes exist for many reasons, and none of them are "to impress the actors" or to have people "think you're cool". For a no-budget shooter, who's shooting on stills lenses, no they're not necessary; just get appropriate lens hoods for your glass and you're probably set. For a cinema shooter working in a conventional cinema-style workflow, they're as desirable now as they've always been -- except that we don't use as many filters anymore.
 
you might want to use another filter besides ND, Polarizer for instance (needs a circular moving mattbox frame) or maybe something to soften the HD image, such as a pro-mist or soft FX.
And your enemy is always light falling in the lens in a wrong way, not a nice diagonal circle pattern but a nasty lift in blacks.
Maybe you want to keep the rain out, sounds crazy but I'm very happy my mattbox does that as well.
And last but not least, protection against bumping your front lens into things.
Money well spent.
 
There are more filters then ND that someone might want to use, like polarizers, gradient nds, ect. One matte box saves you time because you dont have to screw filters on the front of a lens, and you can change lenses and have the same filters, also attatching french flags to a matte box saves a lot of time over setting up flags on the set/location if all you are trying to do is reduce lens flare why bother setting up a flag...

They are very expensive though, and if you aren't willing or able to invest in a set of filters then they aren't doing much more then making the camera look better. And if you don't have much of a kit there are things more worth the money then a matte box in my opinion.
 
In your opinion, does it have a sort of flimsy fit/feel to it? I've long been waiting for something to come along and best Chrosziel at half the price and I've been considering the Redrock for a while now. But then again, I love how durable the Chrosziel's are...
 
I use my matte box mainly for my polariser and for lens protection, also by shading the front element of the lens it can help boost the contrast a little.
The downside, my camera is heavier on my shoulder so my back starts to complain amd you start getting funny looks from members of the public.. Dont get a mattebox if you wish to remain incognito lol...
 
I think that's my feeling as well.

Rasons:

1. There are many times in public one needs to remain incognito when you don't have a permit to shoot a location.

2. Still photographers seem to do well with lens hoods.

3. Cinema style shooting as opposed to ENG allows time to flag out extraneous lights. A gaffer needs to set up lights when they set the scene. To clamp an extra flag or two has never been that inconvenient.

4. I really would like an Arri follow focus. :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)
 
Rails, Mattebox, and Follow Focus are at the heart of virtually every cinema camera setup. They are all there for good reason. If you are shooting cinema, then it is not a waste of money.

And a number of working DPs do use matte boxes for holding anything from effects filters to color filters and hard mattes - even when shooting digital.

And an FYI: O'Connor are now selling what is being touted as a pretty great FF.
 
Here I have to strongly disagree - high end DPs, shooting features, commercials, high budget music videos and adverts use diffusion flirtation almost all of the time. It's only the local restaurant ads and the no-budget Vimeo stuff that doesn't, with some very, very rare exceptions. Magic Bullet Looks cheap-n-tacky as a diffusion replacement, and if one cannot see the difference, one does not have a very refined eye. (That said, Magic Bullet is useful for lots of other stuff, just not that.)

A mattebox with large flags has the other practical purpose, which is flagging flares.
 
Unless you are using cinema style lenses, I think you will find matte boxes a pain. Photo style zoom lenses can change length significantly while zooming and matteboxes aren't really designed to accomodate those dimension changes. If you get a PL to M4/3 adapter and use cine style lenses, a matte box will be useful.
 
Robert Ruffo said:
high end DPs, shooting features, commercials, high budget music videos and adverts use diffusion flirtation almost all of the time. .
Click to expand...
Understood. But one can buy a diffusion screw on filter as well. One could also shoot either fully stopped down or wide open to get softening effects as well. One could even buy cheap lenses known to be soft for just this very effect.

Finally, I'm not sure I agree I couldn't get a similar effect in AE with a mild Gaussian blur. It's been my experience that it is best to save such effects for post. YMMV.
 
Last edited:
Steve Kahn said:
Understood. But one can buy a diffusion screw on filter as well. One could also shoot either fully stopped down or wide open to get softening effects as well. One could even buy cheap lenses known to be soft for just this very effect.

Finally, I'm not sure I agree I couldn't get a similar effect in AE with a mild Gaussian blur. It's been my experience that it is best to save such effects for post. YMMV.
Click to expand...
main reason i use a mattebox is because to my knowledge when you're outdoors in a very bright sunny day you should almost always have at least a Polarizer AND a ND and sometimes you want 3 a polraizer ND AND a GRAD ND, or sometimes just polarizer and Grad ND for the sky, etc. but for DSLR's or any low end digital you almost always want at the least a polarizer for outdoors to help blowouts with their poor dynamic range
 
Matte boxes provide another, seldom mentioned, function (I have 4 of them in different sizes and weights)... Being on rails they are not secured to the lens, so if something hits the front of the camera (like a fist - don't laugh, this has happened to me) the matte box takes the impact instead of the front lens element. I've had three incidents in the past 20 year where this has saved an expensive lens and kept my insurance rates from going up.

Also, perhaps more "professionally", I really like diffusion filters with HD, and square filters tend to be of better overall quality than screw-ins.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top