Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/02/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]That all makes sense, Sonny. Like you, I only rarely use a filter, although in my case it's a polarizer that I sometimes hold in front of my 35cron. Either way, we're not using a color correction filter. My guess (and your feeling seems to be the same) is that if a film shot would benefit from a color correcting filter, than so would the same shot on a digital camera. And, conversely, if you don't need the filter on a digital camera then you don't need it on your film camera. (Again, this is all assuming photoshop is the destination). It's all digital, one way or another. Best, Aaron Sonny wrote: >Most digital cameras have some preset color balances, as well as Auto white >balance. If you use AWB, it will do pretty good in the daylight ranges of >the kelvin scale, and that includes most fluorescent lights. It does not >work >in tungsten. > >If you were to set the camera to the tungsten mark, and each time you shot >outside, you added an 85 (orange) filter, then you would get pretty good >color. Same thing if you set it to daylight, and used an 80 >cooling filter. > >If you set the thing to awb and used a filter, it would struggle and fail >to >achieve color. By the way, you can speed up most digital cameras by using >preset instead of AWB. > >Most of my work is done on film, and I never filter on the lens except to >use an Neutral Density so I can shoot fast film outdoors. It adds >two surfaces >to bounce light around on, takes away a bunch of light, forcing your >shutter >speed slower and so I just don't see the sense. > >I can do a pretty good job of managing the color so that it is pleasing, >usually on the warm side in Photoshop. Sometimes the mix of light is so >terrible, that I have to take the shot to BW. > >I find the photo filters in PS CS really good for adjusting color balance >in >tiny increments. > >So the short answer to Aaron's question is: use software, whether it is in >the camera or in PS. But always remember, excrement in, excrement >out. Try >to get the best image you can while you are shooting. > >Sonny > > > >-----Original Message----- > >BD, you've reminded me of something I've been wondering: > >Why do folks equate filters on a film camera to in-camera processing in >a >digital camera? > >It seems to me that with digital: >Light enters lens, hits sensor, software in the camera corrects color > >How is that different from: >Light enters lens, hits film, film is scanned, software in computer (eg, > >PS) corrects color > >If a filter would help in the pre-light-hits-film phase, why wouldn't it > >help in the pre-light-hits-sensor phase? > >Inquiring minds want to know. > >-Aaron > > > >There are definitely times when PS offers the best, if not the only > >option for color correction. But keep in mind that making changes in > >Photoshop is rarely 'cost free,' in terms of the digital file. So if > >you can make the adjustments in camera if shooting digital, or with > >filters if shooting film, you're probably better off than routinely > >depending upon Photoshop.