F55: What filters do you use in your mattebox

captainjman

captainjman

Well-known member
Can you post what filters you use in your mattebox (or threaded onto lens) -

What brand do you like, why?

Do you use any specialty filters?

Do we need IR/UV filters? Is there a basic one installed on the camera? If so, should/could it benefit from a better UV/IR filter?

I was going to get just a UV filter to protect the lens - and then ran into the 750 filter listed below -


DO YOU HAVE ANY EXPERIENCE WITH EITHER OF THESE FILTERS I AM THINKING OF PICKING UP?
1. Schneider 4x5.65 Digicon 2 Glass Filter Tiffen Filters Panavision
2. Schneider 5.65x5.65" True-Cut 750 IR Glass Filter Tiffen


 
This is kind of like asking which focal length lens should I use. It depends!

I have a set of ND filters, ND Grads, Polarizer, Diopters, and then various diffusion filters like black pro mist and Hollywood Black Magic. It really depends on what you are doing.
 
I own Tiffen 4x5.65 ND's, grad, and a clear 4x5.65 filter which is smashed. I have a 2-stage mattebox with 1 rotatable, but I hardly ever use it for most shoots. (Although I did use it yesterday on a shoot to cut down some lens flares of light coming directly into lens from reverse key)

99% of the time however I use round filters (Tiffen) screwed directly onto the lens. Probably because I am shooting with a small crew or solo, and don't really need the matt box on my rig anyways. I'm also mostly shooting with lenses that can fit 82mm or smaller filters. For CP.2's with a larger from element then I would have to use the mattebox.

I was shopping for a well priced used .3 ND grad in 4x5.65 but with 14 stops on the F55 not sure it really matters anymore except in fixing contrast situations so it looks nicer on a monitor. Once you pan or tilt with a grad filter in place it's a chore to remove in post, so I'd rather just do it in post if I need to. I know it's not exactly the same but...

I also started buying Tiffen Series 9 filters because for $20 you can buy a soft fx or fog filter versus a couple hundred for 4x4 or 4x5.65.. but again they are limited in size so it will depend on what lenses you are using, or want to use.

I have polarizers as well.


All other filters or effects I do in post. ie. color, cooling, warming, tilt shift, etc.. I guess it depends.
 
For neutral density I use Tiffen water-white 4x5.65 NDs in 1-4 stop densities. Used in combination with the internal NDs on my F3 and F5 (and arrange to have the least dense ND possible in the mattebox) I've never encountered any issues with IR contamination.

I also pull out the 0.6/2-stop grad NDs (both horizontal and vertical) all the time for balancing skies or overly hot windows.

Polariser for rich blue skies, deep green grass, or to see through windows.

And then the rest is diffusion diffusion diffusion :)
 
Good primer from Starcentral to get you oriented on diffusion. You will also want to look into Schneider filters. If you google David Mullen there is an epic thread on his approach to cinematography. He is also a huge diffusion filter officianado and gives excellent direction on where to go for looks and the asethetic reasons to do so.

Agreed with Starcentral on screw on filters for many applications although mattebox style filters if you have a swing away mattebox and are changing lenses frequently but be careful with diffusion when you change filters, the effect can and often will change dramatically when a new sized lens is put on especially with halation based filters.

Good idea (read essential) to have a large monitor with HD-SDI inputs if you are going to be applying diffusion filters. Flanders Scientific, Marshall, TVLogic and Panasonic are good places to start for these.

Get out your cheque book as you go down the rabbit hole.
 
This is excellent info, thanks guys.

Dennis - You cant'tell me your "secret recipe?" - LOL - you, coke and Colonel Sanders - Is it usually a personal/secret sauce thing for video guys regarding filters used? Or are you just being funny?

I knda like the "black pro mist 1" - I keep swaying from ""thats to much diffusion" to "oh yeah baby, lets go for flu strength" -

I ask like smoque, dig icon, and I can't tell if I should even bother with those dynamic range filters
 
I'm just being funny guy (mooo haaa haaa)

In all honesty however I think it boils down to personal preference and style. Diffusion filters can be used to impact the image in a variety of ways. (soften image, provide halation, alter scene contrast) So the real question is why do YOU want to use diffusion on your images in the first place?

When it comes to diffusion what I don't like are using filters or strengths that alter the contrast of the overall image. This is apparent in Hulberts side by side comparison on wide shots. Whites and skin (mid) tones can get muddy with some lighting setups, and personally I don't like that. Typically this happens because some filters are designed to give some halation from light sources and spill it into darker areas. It was like the Tiffen ultra con set I use to use way back when my camera didn't have a lot of dynamic range and I could use them to even out my scene contrast ratio. But now with a camera like the F5/F55 with 14 stops of dynamic range I just don't see the need of using a filter to cheat and lower my contrast. If I lit it for contrast, I want it there in post where other subtle adjustments can be made.

What I do like about using diffusion filters are for getting halations around light sources, so long as it doesn't spill too much into the rest of the image. The halation for me at least seems to take some edge or signature off the digital format. This look can also be done with most NLE softwares using a type of "glow" filter that only affects brighter tones. Magic Bullet also has some filters for this.

You can't beat David Mullen's advice and breakdown of the various use of filters, check it out:
http://www.scarletuser.com/showthread.php?t=5941
 
Glow and light wrap is precisely why you want to use diffusion in certain instances. A lot of the skin softening effect you can get in NLEs (or better in Resolve) as you mentioned but if you know what you are after and can nail it with say a Classic Soft or a Hollywood Black Magic then why not do it, if you are in control of the production pipeline (in other words "one man banding" it).

The epic thread I was referring to with David Mullen is this one:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?2714-Ask-David-Mullen-ANYTHING

There is lots of talk about the use of diffusion. It will take a little bit of time though to weed through the thread.
 
Andrew that is indeed a nice epic thread!

If you don't want to weed through the thread, just half way down the post from the link I posted is a nice summary quote on David Mullen and what all the varieties of diffusion do, can do, are used for, and what effects they have - including some screen shots from the film War of the World.

As for why not do it in camera, I guess really its up to the individual. If you don't have the experience using them, and don't have a large HD monitor on-set that you can meticulously inspect as you play with various strengths, brands, or types all while trying to get on with an actual shoot, then I would suggest not doing it in camera if you know what I mean. :cool:
 
Some talk of rear lens netting should also happen here. Some fine, sheer nylon/hose can work wonders and saves you from reflection slip-ups that have happened to me with front glass.
 
VinceinLA - What "reflection slip ups?"

Dannis - I am so thankful for your links (and everyone else's) so that I can make good decisions on filter purchases.

I was ready to pull the trigger on two filters, I had them picked on based on textual information that sounded good, saw a video that simply gave me an example of what it could do and just prior to pressing the "BUY IT NOW" button a little voice in my head (no I am not schizophrenic, you know what i mean LOL) told me, WAIT, STOP, GO TO DVXUSER.COM AND ASK AROUND FOR SOME GUIDANCE

I am really glad I did. If you can believe it, I even had a quick email exchange with Ira Tiffen regarding the apparent similarities between Tiffen and Schneider filters, asking him "are these made in the same facilities?'. As it turns out Schneider was sold out to corporate interests and Ira came to Schneider to head the filter department. It was Ira who started experimenting with filters that lead to the Tiffen product line, and now he is at Schneider. For Starters- I asked him about the 750 UV and IR true cut filter - some are just IR and some are UV AND IR. One of the listing for the IR and UV showed a picture of the box and it only said IR so I asked if it was a typo on the listing or if the product actually exists. It isn't even in their catalogue - and it does exist.

I want to have a protective filter in front of the lens - and since that will cost over 100 bucks for a really good optically clear glass - I thought "might as well get IR and UV protection out of it anyway (even if it costs extra. Turns out that even if cameras have UV protection they can benefit from an extra filter. One question I have was about the text in the catalogue about UV filters for digital cameras. Theire is cut off at 750, 715 and 680 "depending on which camera you are using. Well, I don't have the money to buy all three - So I want to know which one the F55 needs. DO ANY OF YOU GUYS KNOW?

but I haven't heard back yet - I am sure they will answer but so far still haven't heard

I have a lot of research to do - I think a lot of the magic comes from these filters! I do like the smoque and black pro mist so far - but in some of those videos I saw examples of other great effects. So much to learn!

Again, thanks everyone :)

Jason
 
starcentral said:
If you don't want to weed through the thread, just half way down the post from the link I posted is a nice summary quote on David Mullen and what all the varieties of diffusion do, can do, are used for, and what effects they have - including some screen shots from the film War of the World.
Click to expand...

Yes I am quite familiar with that summary of David's and it is good, particularly for people who need to get their initial orientation on the REAL purpose of diffusion in storytelling or image making.

As you suggested either earlier on or in a different thread Dennis, it is a good idea for people to focus on the screw on filters. Way, way cheaper and allow you to make mistakes or at the very least get a filter that may not see a lot of action at first and won't kill your bank account. Screw ons are also apt for people that use Nikon still lenses (77mm filters if you are using their pro lenses) and those who operate Steadicam and need to keep weight down. Nothing worse than coming up against a weight limit and have to lose a mattebox and a baseplate.

Mullen does give a desert island list of 5 filters somewhere in one of his threads which I recall was good as a starting point if you are into his general aesthetic.

As a starting point I would recommend a circular polarizer and a COUPLE of diffusion filters. Don't blow your brains out at first and get the circular screw on filters. If something blows you away and you KNOW you are going to use it regularly in a mattebox then buy the 4"x5.65 versions or whatever size you need for your mattebox... or maybe you will figure out a way to do almost all of what that filter does in Resolve.

Unfortunately, you will not find a lot of great telling examples of diffusion on the internetz. DPs are pretty guarded about that information. David Mullen's forum threads are by far the most telling source for cinematic filter use.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top