question about stacking filters

[zeppelin390]

Like a kid on the ride home from the grocery store, not able to wait until he got home to get the toy out of the cereal box, i was the same with my first two filters i bought. i got home, slapped them on, went out and shot a roll. hurridly i took them to the one hour photo shop, waited what felt like an eternity, only to get my prints and find disappointment. I could not see any of the effects that i was hoping the filters would give me. I bought a diffusion and uv filter. Now i know the uv filter should not have much of an effect, but i was certainly expecting more from the diffusion filter. I had the diffusion filter on first, and the uv on top of that. Is there a certain way these need to be stacked to get a desired effect? is there an "ON" button that i overlooked? grrrrrrr
i was using 400iso with B&W film.

 

[dEARlEADER]

Did you take A, B comparision shots of the same subject with the filter off and on?

What subject were you shooting?

 

[Big Mike]

I don't know much about diffusion filters and you are right that you won't notice much difference with or without the UV filter.

I don't recommend stacking filters...it is likely to cause problems with flare etc.

 

[zeppelin390]

Did you take A, B comparision shots of the same subject with the filter off and on?

What subject were you shooting?

i did not take comparsion shots, i will try that.
subject was outdoors, trees and such.
will an effect from a diffusion filter only come from properly messing with the exposure, or should it just happen?

 

[dEARlEADER]

i did not take comparsion shots, i will try that.
subject was outdoors, trees and such.
will an effect from a diffusion filter only come from properly messing with the exposure, or should it just happen?

dunno.... this is a little outta my league... i've never shot a diffusion filter and i don't shoot film...

I'd rather add softness to an image selectively in post than commit a filter to diffuse the entire image. If ur shooting trees outdoors you should slap on a polarizering filter. I wouldnt stack the filters IMO especially since that UV filter will only contribute to vignetting. UV filters are good for snorting cocaine off of.... if you don't snort cocaine than I would return the UV filter.

more seriously if you are commited to these filters I would definatly try an A, B scenario with various subjects and lighting condition in order to maximize their potential.

 

[AlexColeman]

Never used either.

 

[dEARlEADER]

quote]


i reserve my coke snorting for off of stripper's breasts, but when those aren't available, i'll give the UV filter a shot

That's the spirit!

 

[zeppelin390]

dunno.... this is a little outta my league... i've never shot a diffusion filter and i don't shoot film...

I'd rather add softness to an image selectively in post than commit a filter to diffuse the entire image. If ur shooting trees outdoors you should slap on a polarizering filter. I wouldnt stack the filters IMO especially since that UV filter will only contribute to vignetting. UV filters are good for snorting cocaine off of.... if you don't snort cocaine than I would return the UV filter.

more seriously if you are commited to these filters I would definatly try an A, B scenario with various subjects and lighting condition in order to maximize their potential.

i reserve my coke snorting for off of stripper's breasts, but when those aren't available, i'll give the UV filter a shot

 

[Battou]

Well, the diffusion filter...um well all it's going to do is soffen your images a touch, With out on/off direct comparison pictures you will not see it.

Take another roll and a triopd and take the same shot twice, one with the filter and one without and then compare.

I have a difussion filter that I never use, to be brutally honest I kinda find them rather pointless.

Then the UV filter, it to in minimal and near impossible to see, again take another roll and a triopd and take the same shot twice, this time early in the morning when UV light is at it's at is at highest concentration, one with the filter and one without and then compare.

*EDIT*
I need to post faster...what the heck just happened here lol

 

[Battou]

If I'm thinking of the right thing, a diffusion filter is basically a soft-focus filter that diffuses light in different ways depending on how it's made (the ones I've seen either have a very fine mesh of wire inside the glass that bends the light, or fine concentric circles etched into the glass).

Negitive, it's star filters that are wired or meshed, diffusers have a textured glass kinda like the texture vinal on a car dash board only smaller.

*EDIT*
this gives me an idea for my next super macro, thanks, Ironically a couple weeks ago I ended up with a super macro of my star filter.

 

[Battou]

Yeah, but I could swear I've seen diffusers that have a mesh in them too, probably even finer than a star filter. I was probably wrong about it being wire though. This is the kind I've seen: Tiffen | 3 x 3" SoftNet White Effect 2 Diffusi | 33SNW2

It's probably something not as reflective.

Haha glad I could help. Hope to see the result!

I'll have to take a look at mine...it's been a wile since it's been out of its case I can't remember what it is :blushing:

Being a holiday today I am not sure if I can, but if they are open I'll pick them up and get them scanned after work, they are prolly nothing spactacular as I was merely playing with my macro equipment when I discovered I had gone a little too far beyond 1:1 and was literally photographing the filter on the lens I was using at just short of minimum focusing distance