Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/02/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>>but comparing a video studio situation to a photo situation (studio or not) is a completely different set of circumstances<< >> I can see where it would happen in a video studio though, if care were not taken in the lighting<< Why are they different?. I would think they are comparable.Could you elaborate? [Austin] That's a good question. I thought a bit about it, and the video sets I have worked on, all have a LOT more lights than we ever use in the photo studio, also, the video cameras move around a lot more, plus there are more of them. The most we ever move in the studio is probably a 10'D circle...if that, and the lighting is VERY structured. Most video sets I have seen, have so many lights, and they are so far away...I could readily imagine it being a much more complicated problem with flare than in the photo studio. >>I have been shooting in the studio (and out) for 25 years, always using filters and have NEVER seen any image problems at all<< What filters are you using in the studio? Most of my shooting is in the studio, and unless I need CC filters there is no need for a filter(for protection). Just curious. [Austin] Since I never noticed any difference, filter on or off, I just prefer to keep them on. I've heard the pros and cons of using/not using filters for 25 years, so just to prove it to our selves, about 10 years ago, we ran a test, to see if anyone could identify 6 out of 6 sets of 'identical' prints 6 shot with a UV(0) and six without. We used a number of different lenses, half were studio shots, half outdoor shots. The prints were all 20"x24". All were B&W, cold light printed, Schneider 80mm Componon-S f4 enlarging lense, Tri-X or Plus-X, D-76/1:1 +30% development. I don't remember what paper they were printed on... At least a dozen professional photographers tried, and numerous 'other' people. Results...no one could tell the difference. It averaged out to three (max was 4, and it was not repeatable...), so statistically, they were indistinguishable. I mean damn, think about it. If a lense has 6 elements, meant to bend the image all around and have it come out with no/incredibly minimal distortion on the other side, and they can get that right, they can't get a damn flat piece of glass right? I personally use a UV(0) Hasselblad filter on all my Hasselblad lenses, plus I ALWAYS use a shade...even in the studio...