Filters

[Tail Ends]

Notwithstanding the IR issues, need for ND filters and other glass needed to properly capture your image in the camera, I would like your thoughts on the use of other filters v. correction in post. Film DP's have their use of filters locked, but I've noticed that most digital people seem to shoot with the concept of fixing in post, not in camera. This may be the result of shoot and scoot, run and gun and other fast types of shooting where a matt box adds weight with a loss of maneuverability. But if you're shooting on sticks and take the time to properly set up your shot, then you probably have time to add a tungsten, coral, magenta or other filter that will adjust your image in camera. I'm from the school of trying to minimize "fix it in post," but when I bring this up to HD people, I'm looked at like I'm nuts.

What do you guys do? Carrying filters adds weight and just one more thing to lose on a shoot. And I find that some simply don't want to incur the cost of filters when they believe it's so simple to fix in post. But my post people always (as in "always") say it's most cost effective to bring them files that need the least correction.

Other than haze and ND's, what do you consider to be the necessary filters to properly represent yourself as a professional to your client and get the best image in camera?

Tail Ends

[jbeale]

I don't know if you include grad filters in with "ND's" but they are certainly helpful in the bright-sky, dark-foreground situations when trying to hold details.

If you are shooting in tungsten light (and have enough of it!) you can get better blue-channel noise performance by using a full or partial CTB filter, either on the lights or the camera.

I know that some people certainly enjoy low-con filters and nets, in some situations at least.

For general color filters, it's my impression that any single filter would do the same as a "one-light" color correction and it seems to me that should not really cost extra in post. Assuming that you aren't talking about a color grad filter, which I have never used, but I'm sure has its place in some styles of shooting.

[Dylan Macleod, CSC]

Notwithstanding the IR issues, need for ND filters and other glass needed to properly capture your image in the camera, I would like your thoughts on the use of other filters v. correction in post. Film DP's have their use of filters locked, but I've noticed that most digital people seem to shoot with the concept of fixing in post, not in camera. This may be the result of shoot and scoot, run and gun and other fast types of shooting where a matt box adds weight with a loss of maneuverability. But if you're shooting on sticks and take the time to properly set up your shot, then you probably have time to add a tungsten, coral, magenta or other filter that will adjust your image in camera. I'm from the school of trying to minimize "fix it in post," but when I bring this up to HD people, I'm looked at like I'm nuts.

What do you guys do? Carrying filters adds weight and just one more thing to lose on a shoot. And I find that some simply don't want to incur the cost of filters when they believe it's so simple to fix in post. But my post people always (as in "always") say it's most cost effective to bring them files that need the least correction.

Other than haze and ND's, what do you consider to be the necessary filters to properly represent yourself as a professional to your client and get the best image in camera?

Tail Ends

It really depends on the time you have on set versus the budget you have in post.

I have decide to go with the Vocas 450 mattebox, because I expect to use a lot of filters.

Grads are a must in some situations to control the dynamic range.

I am getting an "elliptical" grad for "stylistic" effect.

I am going to also get a couple of colored grads when I need to enhance the sky.

Do as much as you can - while being sensitive to time - in camera. Of course make sure you also take advantage of a good colorist and what can be done at that stage. But I really like using filters to help establish the look in camera.

Dylan Macleod
Cinematographer
Toronto, Canada
www.dylanmacleod.com

[Frank Weeks]

You might consider a polarizer, enhancer, and I've enjoyed specialty stuff like a star filter. Your right about being able to do many of them in post but I agree that sometimes old school is better.

[Tail Ends]

This is all helpful. When using ND's, grads and the like, how many variations do you get? As I recall, one vendor, Tiffin or Formatt had 1/8, 1/4, 1/2, .8, 1.0, 2, 4 and several other ND's. Are there industry standards and to what filters rate a "must?"

What are your thoughts about cooling and warming filters v. fix it in post?

Thanks and keep answers coming.

Tail Ends

[James Brundige]

check out this thread
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=10315

It has convinced me to go light on the warming filters, and get a couple cooling filters. It seems CMOS sensors are noisier in the blue end, so its better to shoot more to the blue and warm it in post.

I notice Tiffen marketing "digital enhancing filters" to the DSLR market that seem to be following this logic.

Of course we'll need plenty of ND's to shoot in the fat part of our lenses, and maybe an IR filter when you start using a lot of ND.

[James Brundige]

Additional thoughts - with RAW acquisition, color work in post is essential. Many of the things (like white balance) needed previously are metadata, and not part of the recorded image. Expose to protect the highlights, which can't be fixed. The most creative decision in the field will be DOF.

[Dominic Jones]

The most creative decision in the field will be DOF.
Not composition? ;-)

Just kidding - I know you're talking about filter use, but it just struck me funny...

More usefully as per this conversation, there are "necessary" filters to carry, which pretty much everyone will agree on:
Pola,
ND grads,
NDs,
Maybe low-cons, and for Red specifically IR filtration.

On top of this, there will be differing opinions (both between different DPs and in terms of project to project) on how much filtration should be done in camera vs in post. I will likely carry some lighter grades of coral, full and half CTB correction (80A and 80D), black and white Pro-mists and then perhaps specific filters for a given look an a particular project - but I like to filter as much optically as time and sense allows, and others will prefer more timing in post...

[Tail Ends]

Dominic, good input. I like the corals too. What about cyan and magenta? Any experience with Tiffen's new green screen filters? As you know,there are a huge selection of filters out there, especially when you include the grades from 1/8 to up to 5 in some instances. NOT INCLUDING ND's, solid or graduated, Polas, and IR, what do you people feel to be the 5-10 most used filters in your bag on a day to day basis. Again thanks to all of you for your suggestions.

Tail Ends

[Dominic Jones]

Thanks Tails...

C/M filters I find are not much use without a colour meter, and are pretty easy to time in post, so that's one thing I do tend to leave to the colourist. I hear magenta filters are a good call if you're shooting on the Viper though - no personal experience there though, sorry.

No experience with the Tiffen GS filters either - what are they supposed to do that helps?! I'll have a look at them when I get a chance (got a GS shoot Thurs, but no spare budget to piss around on, unfortunately!).

There are a vast array of filters out there, but frankly I find many far too specialised to carry as standard - for a specific look, though, I'll often test a lot of different filtration/post options before settling on a method of shooting for the style - fwiw, I think the days of DPs needing to carry a huge case of filters are coming to an end (this from a fan of optical filtration!), and rental makes much more sense - at least at my level in the industry. The "big boys" who shoot big-budget stuff day-in-day-out may not agree, of course.

As for most used "non-standard" filters, again, I don't really have any - project by project and scene by scene for those decisions, for me. If you do a lot of DFN work you might want a heavy blue or specific DFN filter. Like anamorphic flares? Maybe you want a Vantage blue streak filter in your set... It's all personal preference, really.

I guess the next thing you might add could be some coloured grads for sexing up skies and creating dawn/dusk effects etc - they come in handy pretty often...

[Tail Ends]

Dominic, as I read the Tiffen lit on their green screen filter, it pumps up the green, and only the green, to make it easier to pull out your image in post. It's fairly new. I'll research at NAB for us.

Tail Ends

[Dominic Jones]

Thanks mate - sounds interesting, I could find any info on their site, but perhaps I just didn't look hard enough - I'm a busy boy today!

Have a good NAB...