In article
>In article <01bbf757$7ec9f240$633889cd@fuzzie.jersey.net>, "travglen"
>
>> Ilkka Nissil{
>> <5a3vv7$aec@ritsa.cs.hut.fi>...
>> > In article <59kd55$duc@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>,
>> > Bob Neuman
>> > >In article <59701d$eg2@cnn.Princeton.EDU>, zpzhang@nutmeg.Princeton.EDU
>> says...
>> > >Hmmm, I think you can do ALL of your photography without filters
>> > >(if you think of them as being like condiments, you may see what I
>> > >mean). Well-chosen subject matter, placed in good light, and
>> > >photographed well is like a gourmet meal, to which one would hesitate
>> > >to add salt, pepper, Catchup, relish, mustard, or any other additive
>> > >that would change and detract from the experience of something that
>> > >is already fine... ;-) Really, though, I think filters ARE overused,
>> > >and generally unnecessary (and are best saved for emergencies when
>> > >you MUST produce a photo under poor conditions).
>> > Personally I think that one can not do outdoor photography
>> > with slides without a few color compensating filters.
>> > (Of course, two or three bodies with different films can
>> > do almost as well.)
>> > The light source varies, and no film produces the best
>> > results without slight corrections. I feel that this type
>> > of filtration is much too often forgotten in nature photography.
>> I would hardly call filters condiments! More like the ingredients needed
>> for that gourmet meal. And just like a gourmet meal, using too much of one
>> ingredient can overshadow the others. The trick to using filters is make it
>> look as if none were used. But I never use a filter to protect my lenses. I
>> never keep a filter on my lenses. I either shoot without a filter or use
>> one, or two, or maybe even three, for a very intended purpose-but that's
>> another story.
>The problem is that we view a scene with our eyes which have one spectral
>response but record the scene on film whose response to colors is very
>different from the eye's.
>
>For this reason filters are used to:
>
>A: balance the visual scene so it appears the same on film as it does
>to the eye
>B: modify the scene to be different from the eye's view of the scene
>C: eliminate or change distractions in the scene (reflections for example)
>D: with B&W to manage the grey scale reproduction of individual colors
>within the scene
>E: to create a specific mood or feeling ie, fog, soft focus, etc
>F: for emphasis such as cross stars or lenticular filters to emphasize
>spectrals.
>g: balance a specific emulsion of film to be neutral in its ability to
>record the colors of the scene. Or to balance the spectral response of
>different films to record the same scene the same.
>
>Anyone who states:
>
> >Hmmm, I think you can do ALL of your photography without filters
>> > >(if you think of them as being like condiments, you may see what I
>> > >mean). Well-chosen subject matter, placed in good light, and
>> > >photographed well is like a gourmet meal, to which one would hesitate
>> > >to add salt, pepper, Catchup, relish, mustard, or any other additive
>> > >that would change and detract from the experience of something that
>> > >is already fine... ;-)
>
>is very inexperienced with the proper use of filters or doesn't care that
>a scene is recorded on film as it appears to the eye.
>
>--
>HP Marketing Corp. Gepe, Giottos, Heliopan, HP Combi-Plan-T, Kaiser, Linhof, R
>imowa, Rodenstock, Rollei, Sirostar 2000
Hmmm, this from a seller of filters....;-)
I trust the responders DID note the ";-)" in my original post....;-)
And I do stand by my assertion; "Really, though, I think filters ARE
overused, and generally unnecessary (and are best saved for emergencies
when you MUST produce a photo under poor conditions)."
The mark of an amateur (in the worst sense...;-) is the use of filters
when they are not needed (which is most of the time). VERY few photographs
are actually improved by the use of polarizers, star filters, fake-fog
filters, softening filters, rainbow filters, graduated "tobacco" filters,
etc. These gimmicks just draw attention to themselves, and are often used
in an attempt to cover weaknesses in the image. Maybe about .05% of the
time a polarizer may be useful for adjusting a troublesome reflection,
maybe 10% of the time a dark yellow or orange filter may help a B & W landscape, maybe 10% of the time a moderate graduated grey filter can
help a color landscape, and color correction filters are generally
useful when photographing artificially illuminated interiors with daylight-balanced slide film. I find UV filters useful for lens protection;
my partial-tungsten, partial-flourescent, and full-flourescent color
correction filters are essential for interior slide shooting; and my
several pounds of other filters sit unused in a box, since I find it
generally unnecessary to disturb the tones and colors of what I find
to photograph (though my filters have all been tried and tested so that
I know what they do [and do not do], and when/where/why I should [or
should not] use them ;-)
And, BTW, you CANNOT record ANYTHING on film as it appears to the eye..;-)
Hope This Helps