Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
QuickHitRecord

Hot Mirror & IR filters

8 posts in this topic

[size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]I am trying to better understand the difference between of these filters. I have come across several resources:

From Tiffen:

[quote][color=#000000]Unlike many photographic films, the CCD or CMOS of a digital camera is inherently susceptible to infrared contamination, even when the manufacturer attempts to reduce this problem by adding an infrared absorbing filter on top of the image sensor. Because these filters do not have a sharp cutoff at the infrared wavelengths there has to be a compromise in order not to exclude visible red wavelengths. This results in some infrared wavelengths being allowed to pass. While minor infrared contamination does not normally cause much of a problem for visible images, when using conventional neutral density filters especially denser grades, this issue is multiplied by the filter factor[/color][/quote]

From Cavision:

[quote][color=windowtext]The Hot Mirror filter reduces the amount of infra-red light entering the lens while having no affect on the wavelengths of light in the visible spectrum. Digital sensors are especially sensitive to IR light, which can cause aberrations and colour shifting in the image. The hot mirror filter is especially useful when using a neutral density filter because the ND filter will increase the ratio of IR light to visible light. The Hot Mirror ND filter accomplishes both tasks in one combination filter, freeing up an extra filer stage in your matte box.[/color][/quote]

Is there anyone using IR or hot mirror filters that can clarify? How significantly do these filters improve your image?[/font][/size]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote from Roger Deakins cinematograper on James Bond Skyfall from his forum
[url="http://www.rogerdeakins.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1685"]http://www.rogerdeakins.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1685[/url]

"I am using no specialized IR filters. I do use NDs when shooting exteriors. I generally shoot with a 400 ASA setting and a ND6. I have seen no adverse colour shift and almost everything I shoot is coming in where I want it with our chosen LUT.
The IR issue is not something I have experience of at all with this camera."( Arrialexa)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeff Cronenweth uses an 80D with the Red One MX. Schneider has a video from Nab 2011 of their "then" new nd's for matteboxes. They filter IR also,
(basically just for true blacks...) - so the selling point was a set of those would be the only filters you would need. All i saw in the video was a Sony EX3 turn a purple hat back into a black one when they stuck it on.

I have a Gh2, which sure as hell ain't an Alexa.. Lol.. I don't think i ever saw an issue like that or even thought about it being a problem until i started researching these filters.. Lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Andy -- Interesting to read Roger Deakins' take. If he's able to create the images that he does [i]without[/i] these filters, then I probably don't need them either. Thanks for sharing.

Germy -- I'm getting the feeling that these may be in the category of ultra-nitpicky control filters. It's hard to be too nitpicky when you're running a GH2 like we are!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Germy1979' timestamp='1352743516' post='21516']
Jeff Cronenweth uses an 80D with the Red One MX. Schneider has a video from Nab 2011 of their "then" new nd's for matteboxes. They filter IR also,
(basically just for true blacks...) - so the selling point was a set of those would be the only filters you would need. All i saw in the video was a Sony EX3 turn a purple hat back into a black one when they stuck it on.

I have a Gh2, which sure as hell ain't an Alexa.. Lol.. I don't think i ever saw an issue like that or even thought about it being a problem until i started researching these filters.. Lol.
[/quote]

interesting read here on Cronenwerth with the Red One MX with an 80D filter to give more blue so he had more latitude...interesting idea!

[url="http://www.icgmagazine.com/wordpress/2011/12/01/1787/"]http://www.icgmagazi...011/12/01/1787/[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='andy lee' timestamp='1352747613' post='21521']


interesting read here on Cronenwerth with the Red One MX with an 80D filter to give more blue so he had more latitude...interesting idea!

[url="http://www.icgmagazine.com/wordpress/2011/12/01/1787/"]http://www.icgmagazi...011/12/01/1787/[/url]
[/quote]

That's pretty awesome....considering if one had four grand laying around, he could own the camera. Accessories are all over the place in the "red stuff for sale" thread at Reduser for great deals. I think the only reason there are still any available on Red is the fact that Redmags are RIDICULOUSLY expensive.
andy lee likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Arri Alexa has an ISO of 800 so when you shoot outside you do need ND filters
once you go past 2 stops ND4 there is a slight colour shift especially in the blacks due to the NDs
so you do need to use a IR filter to correct this cast.
Had a good talk today with several DOPs on the Arri Stand at BVE North.
So there are a few ways of doing this!
Some use IR filters and some dont....
Its a personal choise thing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Similar Content

    • Tiffen Ultra / Low Contrast filters
      By Inazuma
      Last night I was looking on Vimeo at GX7 videos to see what other people were producing. For the most part it all seemed very casual, not much good stuff in there. But then I came across this:

      First of all you should know that I've been shooting with my GX7 for almost a year now and I've messed around with the camera settings and resultant footage loads. So I pretty much know GX7 footage when I see it. The video above looks completely different to anything I've seen previously.I remember a phrase Andrew used in one of his videos regarding the BMPCC, "The camera has a very filmic response to mid-tones". And I guess this is the only phrase I can use to quantify what makes this footage look different. 
       
      If you look at the tags on the video above you will see a mention of "Tiffen Ultra Contrast 5". So I did a little more research and it seems these things had their hayday a couple years ago around the time when the GH1/2 and Canon rebels were popular. These days some people still use them even for high end cameras like the RED. 
       
      Here is the description from Tiffen itself:
       
      I quite like the look that diffuser filters give and it sounds like the Low Contrast filter will give some of that look along with the softened contrast. Does anyone here have any experience with these and can make recommendations?
    • A $40 variable ND filter that surprisingly doesn't suck
      By Sangye Ince-Johannsen
      I broke my L.C.W Fader Variable ND II a while back, and finally got around to replacing it. I decided to give the Bower variable ND a try, at $40. Bower makes decent lenses, so I thought I might luck out.
      And luck out, I did. It's definitely better than the L.C.W, with less bokeh striation / "texture", no noticeable color shift up to the strongest setting, and the characteristic 'X' pattern only shows up at the very strongest settings (7/8+), as opposed to on the L.C.W where it dominates the image at every strength above 2/3 or so. I haven't tried many higher end variable ND filters, but I'd like to see how this one stacks up against them. So far I'm very impressed.
      The only issue I have noticed is that the first 1/5 of the adjustment throw seems to go from a strong polarizing effect to a more transparent effect, without any ND loss or gain. After that the polarizing effect stays minimal, and the neutral density increases as expected. On the plus side, this quirk might mean that the filter could double as both a variable ND filter, and as a linear polarizer.
       
      The bokeh texture / "striation" is my biggest complaint, but it's still not as coarse as the L.C.W Fader mk. II that I used to own.
       
      The 'X' pattern also doesn't show up until a strength that I find myself unlikely ever to want to use anyway (e.g. T1.3, 1/50s, bright sunlight, ISO 1600).
       
      Color shift is negligible. Sometimes green things seem to get an ever so slightly brownish cast, but it's so, so subtle.
       
      Softening is also quite mild. In my testing it's not an issue, and if anything seems to be a subjective change rather than an objective softening. I have not used it on a lens longer than 85mm, though, so maybe it's worse on teles.
       
      My verdict is that, for $40, this is should be an obvious choice for a budget VND. If I had more money of course I'd buy a Schneider, Singh-Ray, or Heliopan, but this performs like what I'd expect from a VND in the $150-$250 range.

      I've attached one sample. For more, look here:
      https://www.dropbox.com/sh/gbf684pt21g64zg/AAA-Mk1MYCRdxuQwN98UkC22a?dl=0

    • GH4 - crop factors - filters - Nikon and Voigtlander
      By Nini
      Hiya Guys!
       
      I'm new to this forum and will try to be as clear as possible. :)
       
      I'm about to buy new gear for videography pretty soon and have already chosen to go for the GH4,
      that i will use with these lenses : Voigtlander Nokton MF 35mm f/1.4 (77mm with crop factor), Nikkor 35mm DX (56mm with speedbooster), Nikkor 50mm FX (80mm with sb) and a Nikkor 18-55mm DX (28,8-88mm with sb).    I applied a 2,2 crop factor for Voigtlander lenses and 1,6 for the Nikon ones (DX and FX). Is this correct? I keep seeing different crop factors all over the internet.    The main use will be documentary and travel videography, so I'm trying to get good and sharp gear easy to travel with as I'll be shooting alone or with only one person.  I've read several threads on the eoshd forum, reviews... and still have a few questions concerning ND filters.    It seems like I should get a variable ND filter with a 77 or 82mm diameter. The max budget for the filters (one VND or filter system) would be 300/400 US dollars tops.    - would you recommend a VND filter rather than a filter-system + ND filters for my use? - my Nokton diameter is 43mm, do you know if a step up ring 43-82 mm or 43-77mm exists? I couldn't find one over the internet.  - if you faced this problem, did you find a solution?  - would I get vignetting on corners with wide lenses even with the crop factor?  - Reviews seem to highlight the Heliopan and Tiffen VND, are there massive pros for one rather than the other?    I'm sorry for this long post! One question always seems to lead to another one...  Thank you very much to those who will read and answer me :)  And a huge thank you to all other posts and people in the forum for the previous topics that helped me.  Woooo!
    • IR and ND filters for Black Magic Pocket Cinema Camera
      By Damphousse
      I got in on the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera (bmpcc) fire sale and in preperation for receiving my new camera I have been researching neutral density filters.  What I would like to know is what are people's preferences between single ND filters and variable ND filters.  And also your thoughts on IR filtration for the bmpcc.
       
      I already know if you go the "straight" variable ND route Tiffen seems to be a good trade off as far as quality and price.  Dave Dugdale did an incredible review of "straight" variable ND filters.  Honestly it is amazing it took an amateur like Dave to do such a test.  I see so many posts on the internet from people who could have either saved themselves money or used a higher quality product had someone simply done what Dave did and test them out.  These people are pros mind you!
       

       
      So the choice was simply, right?  Wrong!  I then came across another video showing IR (near infrared) issues with the BMCC... and other cameras including Alexa products.
       

       
      So there are numerous solutions.  One could say the near IR pollution thing is nonsense and just get a "straight" Tiffen variable ND.  Or you could go with a set of individual ND filters and skip the variable.  You could also get an IR cut filter and use either single NDs or variable ND.  Or you could get the Tiffen combined IRND variable filter.  Or you could get the single IR ND filter sets.  B&H has a strong three filter set for $164.50.  Okay, that is a lot of options.  The reason I posted is I want to know which one will give you the best results.  I know the variable NDs have the polarization "issue."  Sometimes I like using a polarizer on video so it isn't always an issue for me.  Also there is a hack where by you turn the whole filter assembly en bloc to reduce or get rid of the polarization effect.  I don't know how effective that is.
       
      This guy shows the "hack" to optimize the use of a variable ND filter...
       

       
      Here is a video showcasing the Tiffen IRND variable filter.
       

       
      So what should I do?