polarized sunglasses for Landscape Photographer

[Deepak Kumar]

This might seems very strange to ask such question but I believe
that this must be having effect on landscape photographer vision
in visualising the final photo.:cool:

Should photographer (specially Landscape) wear polarized lens sunglasses
OR without it :confused:

secondly should they wear any shade at all ?

[Lachlan 717]

As necessary as wearing shoes for me. Just protection from the elements. Nothing to do with photography; I just don't want the UV damage.

[msk2193]

I only take mine off to dry focus and the lens polarizer!

[Bruce Watson]

As necessary as wearing shoes for me. Just protection from the elements. Nothing to do with photography; I just don't want the UV damage.

+1.

Mine are UV coated, polarized on front, and AR coated on back. Which makes it a whole lot more comfortable to wander about outside with a camera on my back!

I only take them off when I go under the dark cloth.

Hasn't changed my photographs a bit -- just made it possible to make more of them.

[Lachlan 717]

Bruce,

Are you ever seen tilting your head, checking Pol effect via your sunglasses?

I must look like a real nutter to the non-photographer...

[Ken Lee]

The eye accommodates a limited range of brightness. Within that range, is a smaller range where we can see colors in full fidelity. We wear sunglasses in part, to see within that "sweet spot".

I wear sunglasses outdoors, and use a Zone VI viewing filter too, when judging b&w.

[Brian Ellis]

I wear polarized sunglasses that have a slightly warmish tint. They have a huge effect on evaluating a scene. Often something that looks good with the glasses on looks much worse with them off. So the first thing I do after seeing something that looks promising with the glasses on is to remove them and look again. I never go to the trouble of setting up my camera without first removing the glasses. I'd say that about half the time things look sufficiently different with and without them that I end up not making the photograph after I remove the glasses.

Ken's statements are news to me. I'm no optical expert but I've always understood that the human eye can accommodate quite a wide range of brightness, much greater for example than the range of film. I've also never heard about a limited range within which the eye sees "colors in full fidelity" or that wearing sunglasses helps us see within that "sweet spot." But on the very likely assumption that he knows more than I do about the human eye, I won't argue.

[Bruce Watson]

Bruce,

Are you ever seen tilting your head, checking Pol effect via your sunglasses?


Nope.

[Heroique]

…So the first thing I do after seeing something that looks promising with the glasses on is to remove them and look again. …about half the time things look sufficiently different … that I end up not making the photograph…

I think this is uncommon wisdom.

And let’s not forget to turn this wisdom around, and ask a question that should come naturally:

When not wearing polarizing sunglasses, should the photographer who comes upon a promising scene put the glasses on and re-evaluate the scene in advance of set-up? >> :cool:

Would this also eliminate promising shots “half the time”?

[Steve Gledhill]

I wear polarized sunglasses that have a slightly warmish tint. They have a huge effect on evaluating a scene. Often something that looks good with the glasses on looks much worse with them off. So the first thing I do after seeing something that looks promising with the glasses on is to remove them and look again. I never go to the trouble of setting up my camera without first removing the glasses. I'd say that about half the time things look sufficiently different with and without them that I end up not making the photograph after I remove the glasses.

Ken's statements are news to me. I'm no optical expert but I've always understood that the human eye can accommodate quite a wide range of brightness, much greater for example than the range of film. I've also never heard about a limited range within which the eye sees "colors in full fidelity" or that wearing sunglasses helps us see within that "sweet spot." But on the very likely assumption that he knows more than I do about the human eye, I won't argue.

I'm with you on both your points here Brian. Polarizing glasses certainly change a scene very significantly. I do wear them some of the time but certainly make my judgements without them on and if I suspect a polarizing filter is needed then I'll evaluate the scene through that filter. And, I don't really know what Ken means with his comments. Ken, can you help me here ...?

[Steve Gledhill]

I think this is uncommon wisdom.

And let’s not forget to turn this wisdom around, and ask a question that should come naturally:

When not wearing polarizing sunglasses, should the photographer who comes upon a promising scene put the glasses on and re-evaluate the scene in advance of set-up? >> :cool:

Would this also eliminate promising shots “half the time”?

I'd suggest reviewing the scene through a polarizing filter might be a good idea. I often do just that - even when I'm not wearing my polarizing glasses.

[Preston]

I have polarizing glasses and really like them. My old eyes have a really hard time with glare, and the UV protection is a must. Maybe it's psychological, but I feel cooler on a hot-bright day when I'm wearing my shades.

I always remove my glasses to evaluate a promising scene, and when under the cloth.

If you check a scene with your polarizing filter, be sure to remove your polarizing glasses. If you don't, your preview may be inaccurate due the cross-polarization effect.

--P

[Ken Lee]

I don't really know what Ken means with his comments. Ken, can you help me here ...?

When it's too dark, we can't see any colors at all. When it's too bright, we can't easily distinguish colors either. We can most easily distinguish colors and tones within a particular range. That's one reason we like sunglasses: they adjust the brightness range back down, to where we can appreciate colors best.

The ear is the same way: it operates best within a particular range of volume. Outside of that range, sound is distorted.

[Steve Gledhill]

When it's too dark, we can't see any colors at all. When it's too bright, we can't easily distinguish colors either. We can most easily distinguish colors and tones within a particular range. That's one reason we like sunglasses: they adjust the brightness range back down, to where we can appreciate colors best.

The ear is the same way: it operates best within a particular range of volume. Outside of that range, sound is distorted.

Ok - I wouldn't dispute what happens at the extremes though if you have polarizers that are tinted then besides having the distorting polarizing effect you'll also be getting the distorting tint overlayed as well.

Now what would be useful are high resolution negative sunglasses (shadowglasses?) to be worn in the near dark to aid vision. But they mustn't be more costly than polarizing sunglasses. Just speculating ...

[Heroique]

…If you check a scene with your polarizing filter, be sure to remove your polarizing glasses. If you don't, your preview may be inaccurate due the cross-polarization effect.

An oversight that can also produce weird visual effects – I once made this mistake, and thought my polarizing filter was defective.

But mainly, I wear polarizing glasses to reduce eye-strain in my rocky-volcanic region – lots of hellish glare to suffer. I try to keep the real eyes rested & happy for as long as possible, since they’re the window to the inner, pre-visualizing eye…

[lenser]

I just wish I could find two pairs. One a combined polarizer and yellow and the other, a polarizer with red. That way I could preview my scenes in binocular vision with my two favorite combinations for black and white.

[Preston]

"I just wish I could find two pairs. One a combined polarizer and yellow and the other, a polarizer with red. That way I could preview my scenes in binocular vision with my two favorite combinations for black and white."

You could get a pair of polarizing glasses, 40mm Red filter, a 40mm yellow filter, tape one filter over the left lens and the other over the right-hand lens, put them on, and then close either eye...voila! :D

--P

[Brian Ellis]

When it's too dark, we can't see any colors at all. When it's too bright, we can't easily distinguish colors either. We can most easily distinguish colors and tones within a particular range. That's one reason we like sunglasses: they adjust the brightness range back down, to where we can appreciate colors best.

The ear is the same way: it operates best within a particular range of volume. Outside of that range, sound is distorted.

Sorry but this doesn't make sense to me. As you say, if it's too dark we can't see any colors at all. As you also say, sunglasses adjust the brightness range "back down." Which is good for areas that were excessively bright without sunglasses but isn't good for darker areas that were visible without sunglasses but that become too dark with sunglasses to see any colors at all. Are there sunglasses that operate only within a certain brightness range such that the excessively bright areas would be brought back down while leaving darker areas unaffected?

[Ivan J. Eberle]

Earlier this year I found a pair of Serengetis for about $60 new with the Strata lenses that are both photosensitive glass and polarized. They really open my eyes to scenes that have a lot of glare when viewed directly, many of which I've often previously passed up. I'm especially thinking of mid-morning glare on vegetation and especially shiny leaves that are quite workable with a polarizer.