Black and white filters - Hitech quality?

[Heroique]

Now, Lee filters are costly and considering that I am now looking at [b/w] filters, I’m thinking that Hitech may be OK? Does anyone have first hand experience of using Hitech/Lee filters on black and white and can offer comments?

The Lee b/w polyester set, including the gel snap holder, is only $65.

I've used this durable set from the beginning, with great results.

You would, of course, need the Lee regular holder (2nd image) for the 4"x6" GND filter. This regular holder (which snaps onto an adapter ring, and rotates around it) will also hold the 4"x4" b/w polyester filters.

[Brian Ellis]

[QUOTE=Meekyman;1002026] . . . I know this is like asking what's better, tea or coffee but are yellow-green and orange good first choices? I've seen the effects of red filters, sometimes I like sometimes looks too much.[QUOTE]

I'd forget yellow-green at first unless you have some particular need for it. If you're primarily going to be doing landscapes, and if you're only going to buy two at first, I'd suggest orange and green. Darkening blue skies is, as you know, a common use for a filter. And for that purpose I found orange to be a nice compromise between yellow, which for me often didn't darken the skies enough except at higher altitudes, and red, which may be good for skies but also tends to turn green foliage black.

I suggest green on the assumption that you'll be including green foliage in a lot of your photographs and a green filter will tend to lighten the foliage and therefore separate it from whatever other colors are around it. But it really depends a lot on exactly what you photograph and under what conditions. I'm a believer in the theory that the use of filters should be kept to a minimum and used only when you know exactly what you're trying to accomplish with them.

[sanking]

I have never had an occasion to disagree with Lenny but I think he missed the boat on this one. Why not make the image you want in the camera? Why waste time in Photoshop?

I don't agree with Lenny on this either.

Test yourself. Shoot the same scene with color negative and B&W film. To highlight the difference choose a scene that has strong color contrast. Scan the color negative and the B&W film. Convert the color negative film to B&W in PS using Convert to Black and White, using the color filters to control tonal contrasts. Now see what you can do to change contrast with the B&W scan. Unless you are a magician with PS you will find that tonal controls with the B&W scan are much more limited than with the scan of the color negative film.

Now consider this. If you are photographing a given scene with panchromatic B&W film, and understand how to use color filters, the tonal control is almost as if you were standing there making an image on color negative film.

Can you make good prints in B&W without using filters? Of course, but why would you deny yourself this tonal control when you have already made a considerable effort to put a view camera on the tripod and carefully composed the scene?

Sandy

[Meekyman]

Thanks everyone.

Brian...sure, I am into landscapes so your suggestions sound good. I also agree on only using a filter when you want it's effects and not just because you have it!

Heroique...thanks for the heads up about the polyester set. I already have the Lee holder/adapter system (as well as Lee ND grads, polariser etc.). Do you find the polyester filters durable? Easy to scratch? I look after my kit well, but just in general use?

Thanks

Graham

[Heroique]

Heroique, thanks for the heads up about the polyester set. I already have the Lee holder/adapter system (as well as Lee ND grads, polarizer etc.). Do you find the polyester filters durable? Easy to scratch? I look after my kit well, but just in general use?

I take care of them – always in their case if not in use. I certainly don’t toss them around like frisbees when setting up or taking down. Plus I pack/store them so they won’t get bent or punctured. So, after years and years, my impression is that they’re durable. No scratches that matter, no cleaning ever done. My only issue is that the black frame on one filter occasionally tries to loosen, but that’s easy to fix in an instant. Overall, a useful set for a good price. Lee also offers ND (not GND) polyester filter sets, but it looks like you already have ND filters.

[vinny]

I have a lee polyester set I'd be willing to sell if you're interested. I won't be home til the end of the month though.

[Kevin J. Kolosky]

I don't know what kind of lenses you have for your large format camera. But you probably paid a lot of money for them, and you keep them clean, etc.

So if you are going to use filters use good ones that are clean, scratch free, and flat. I use B & W, Zeiss, or Hasselblad filters. They all work very well.

[Lenny Eiger]

I have never had an occasion to disagree with Lenny but I think he missed the boat on this one. Why not make the image you want in the camera? Why waste time in Photoshop?

You have to take my bias into account. First off, I don't like very contrasty images and I don't like dark/black skies. That eliminates some of the filters. When I tried a yellow filter a year or two ago I found the effect to be quite subtle, something I could easily have changed in the post processing. Certainly a polarizer can be useful.

Second, I've been doing this for a very long time, my Dad was a photographer - I grew up with the spectral response curve of b&w film. When I look out there and previsualize, that's what I see. This is not a small factor. I remember when I made the change from darkroom to platinum printing, many years ago. I took some time, the better part of a year, but I noticed that I was actually seeing differently. The print medium was teaching me how to see. If you do enough shoot, develop and print, you get to have this happen to you. If you add filters (or other variables - maybe changing developers all the time) to the mix, your previsualization may suffer. (Or, let's just say maybe mine might, it's quite possible that others are better than me at this.)

In Photoshop these days the most I do is control a sky a little here and there and build an expressive print. That's easy enough to do.

I have seen some interesting examples where certain objects were brought out of the scene using a filter. I'm not denying it exists. It's just not the way I think about things.

It's very much the same if you use one lens for a long time. It teaches you what fits inside of its dimensions. I wouldn't consider going outside of the 4:5 form factor, it would mess up the tuning of my eyes. Most of the photographers in the history of photography, used one lens and one camera for many years at a stretch (with some notable exceptions). If you mess around with 9 different lenses you can miss out on clearly identifying images/frames in your view.

I have always been after the subtlety of the seeing. Consistency helps a great deal.

As to making the "image we want in the camera" I think its a great goal. However, I think that part of the magic of photography is that most of us are still surprised when it works.

By all means, if anyone is interested in filters, go right ahead. However, as with a battery of 9 lenses, I don't consider them "essential" in a landscape photographer's backpack. This is opinion, of course. I am not attempting to set a rule. I could also be wrong. If someone wants to point out an example of where they might be really useful, and explain how I might be missing something, I'm all ears. I'm here to learn as well.


Lenny

[sanking]

I use the Lee B&W polyester filter set described earlier with a Lee wide angle bellows lens hood. The filters drop straight into a slot on the bellows hood. If you handle the set carefully in use and store it well the filters will last a long time. I am now in my second replacement set in about 15 years of using this system.

Since my practice is to always use a lens hood to prevent flare it is a simple proposition to use a filter or not. If the scene is one where I can obtain some needed separation of tonal values I use a filter. If you really understand how filters work with B&W panchromatic film it is a kind of no-brainer to look at the scene and quickly figure out if it is worth the trouble to use a filter. In many cases the tonal relationships can be transformed in PS, but in other cases there are some effects that can not be fully achieved unless you use the correct filter when you make the negative.

I spend too much time with PS as is. Any practice in the field that takes only a few seconds and can save time later in editing is worth the trouble to me.

Sandy

[Bernice Loui]

This got me thinking about color B&W filters...

There are three sets of B&W color filters in the gear collection. One set of Sinar/Hi-tech 100mm square polymer, One set of Sinar 105mm glass, One set of Tiffen Series nine. They are set up with more than one Sinar filter swiveling holder and/or 100mm three slot holder. These are also used on other lensed by threaded step rings.

Of the three, the 105mm Sinar glass appears best due. thinner glass and anti-reflection coating. The 100mm square polymer color filters work fine except the polarizer which died years ago by separation resulting in the polarizing element turning clear-yellow. The neutral density filters have some degree of color cast to them which is OK for B&W, not for color back when I was making images in color.

With all this, I got to thinking about how often these color filters are used for the B&W images made.. It turns out, very few and when they are used these days and before I stopped making B&W images years ago. If a color filter is used the yellow is it. Many years ago when I got serious about B&W images, there was much experimentation with color filters and in time their use began to pass. These color filters do and can indeed increase/alter/change the overall contrast ratio/balance of a B&W image from subtle to hitting one in the eye with drama with the altered contrast ratio.

For me, it has become trying to render more of what the tonal range many have been rather than trying to alter them in ways that very significantly deviate from what they were. Or, reaching the place where lower contrast images are preferred in rendered in a way that does not draw the viewer into the image for only a moment, but inviting the viewer to examine and discover what the image has to offer if they are attentive, aware, interested and greater involvement with the image.

There is no correct or wrong to this, it is a matter of individual artistic expression, no more , no less.


Bernice

You have to take my bias into account. First off, I don't like very contrasty images and I don't like dark/black skies. That eliminates some of the filters. When I tried a yellow filter a year or two ago I found the effect to be quite subtle, something I could easily have changed in the post processing. Certainly a polarizer can be useful.


Lenny