[stevebrot]

Leave it to me to comment based on a mis-read! Thanks for setting me straight Steve - and the links. Looks like a bunch of folks spending money to have a good time with profits going to charitable causes - and doing it for 46 years. That's impressive.


Ok, to get us back on track...

A while back I finally decided to try b&w again - first roll since 1979. When I mentioned this in an earlier post, Phil suggested I use an orange filter. Of course, I didn't have one. But I did have a red filter from a used collection I bought. So, I shot almost the entire roll with that red filter. I found it a bit challenging to clearly see the subject, so focus suffered, even more so with my tri-focal vision. Anyway, I only had a few near-keepers. Here is one - goats of course.

K-2, M50:1.4, T-Max 100, red filter, Lab processed, home scanned

Love the goats!


Steve

[Vendee]

Pentax MX, Agfa APX 100 film.


Crossing par Kris Lockyear, on ipernity

K.

Nice one Kris

[wuzet]

MZ-S, FA43Ltd., Kodak Pro Image 100, HC-110

[hollywoodfred]

Love the goats!
Steve

Thanks Steve!

And remember that a red filter can cost you 3 stops of light too. That takes your 100 film down to ISO 12. That can sometimes be a challenge getting DOF and handhold shutter speeds if the light starts getting low. Often red filter can also really deepen your shadows too since they cut the blue out of them with average metering. In the case of the sheep that can be an effective thing.

I use the red filter the least in my photography but of course other peoples' mileage may vary. It's good for emphasizing puffy cumulus clouds on blue sky days, when you want to alter the red or green tone in pictures or cut through some haze.

Tuco, I appreciate the tips. I hadn't considered the ISO downgrade, or much of anything for that matter, other than knowing I was going to lose some light. I just slapped on the filter and started shooting. It wasn't until I received the developed work that I started to investigate. Not my best moment, but I wanted to shoot and experiment. I have another roll loaded now - still on frame one. I'm trying to decide - no filter or orange.



cheers,
Fred

[stevebrot]

My most used filters are yellow and orange. I use the yellow the most. It only costs me 1 stop of light and it's a good general purpose filter.

1+ for the yellow filter. I use mine for general shooting and if I want a little darker sky, I have a special minus-blue filter (Wratten #12) that provides much the same purpose as a red, but with only a 1 stop penalty.


Steve

[hinman]

IMG_0001-2

Home scanned. Shot with Ricoh xr-p and likely 28mm with the Tamron adaptall-2 28mm f/2.5, Kodak BW400CN.

Cheers,
Hin

[hollywoodfred]

My most used filters are yellow and orange. I use the yellow the most. It only costs me 1 stop of light and it's a good general purpose filter. In a scene of multi-colors it can make a difference. A lot of common colors reproduce as or near a middle gray. A yellow (and orange) can often help break that up into more contrast by lighting their color and darkening the opposite color with a varying lesser effect of colors in between.

Edit: Here are two examples of a yellow. In the first one, you can see it put some tone in the blue sky even looking into the sun. It's not as deep of an effect as a orange. And the second one is looking into the sun again in the late afternoon with a faint, bleached out blue sky but I still managed to produce a tone other than white.

Tuco, very useful information and fine examples. It seems my approach is all wrong - filter use should be determined more by conditions and desired effect for each frame, rather than just picking a filter and using it for an entire roll. Obvious I suppose. As a learning experience, I'm considering shooting this roll with unfiltered, yellow, orange, and then red filters for each subject so I can see first hand how the images are affected.

[gofour3]

Tuco, very useful information and fine examples. It seems my approach is all wrong - filter use should be determined more by conditions and desired effect for each frame, rather than just picking a filter and using it for an entire roll. Obvious I suppose. As a learning experience, I'm considering shooting this roll with unfiltered, yellow, orange, and then red filters for each subject so I can see first hand how the images are affected.

Yep this is your best bet and I have also done this as well. I use a note book and record ever test shot. Also you will see whcih filter works best with each different b&w film you use.

Phil.

[tuco]

Tuco, very useful information and fine examples. It seems my approach is all wrong - filter use should be determined more by conditions and desired effect for each frame, rather than just picking a filter and using it for an entire roll.

Thanks. Yes that is true for red, orange and green. But in my humble opinion you could just use the yellow for almost all situations if you didn't what to think about it. A scene where I'd use no filter would be where 1) I needed more shutter speed or aperture and 2) there is already good mix of back to white in the scene without altering the tones in it ( like hinman's picture above - that wouldn't need a filter at all ).

[hollywoodfred]

Thanks tuco and Phil for the filter info. Now I need to get out and shoot. I'll post some samples when I finally get through the roll. At my pace, that might be September.

[45 Mike]

for outdoors, I like to use a yellow filter, unless I am shooting people. With people I think the green makes wonderful skin tones.

[filmamigo]

Pentax MZ-S, SMC-A 70-210mm f/4, Fuji Acros 100, Red #25 filter.

[baro-nite]

Pentax MZ-S, SMC-A 70-210mm f/4, Fuji Acros 100, Red #25 filter.

Excellent formal composition and strong mood!

[filmamigo]

Thanks baro-nite!

[gofour3]

Pentax MZ-S, SMC-A 70-210mm f/4, Fuji Acros 100, Red #25 filter.

Yes very nice, like this one as well!

Phil.