Filter or no filter?

#1 by Vidar Olavesen , Thu Aug 06, 2015 5:17 pm

Do any of you use filters?

I sometimes feel it's a big improvement, but not always.

In this 16mm of A Man Called Horse, I think it does a lot of good to the sky tones, even if it's slightly darker

Attached pictures:
Blue filter.jpg   No filter.jpg  

Vidar Olavesen
Posts: 5.707
Points: 12.975
Date registered 08.02.2015
home: Sarpsborg, Norway
ThankYou 350

Last edited 08.06.2015 | Top

RE: Filter or no filter?

#2 by Robert Crewdson ( deleted ) , Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:39 pm

Hugh sent me a 16mm feature with a set of filters; some of the scenes looked normal, others that had turned red were more brown; I think it gave the appearance of normality because the sky was blue. I had the filters taped loosely over the lens, and frequently lifted them up to see the difference. Not sure if I would have found the film so enjoyable without the filters. They didn't seem to make too much difference to the light reaching the screen.

Robert Crewdson

RE: Filter or no filter?

#3 by David Hardy ( deleted ) , Sat Aug 08, 2015 1:34 pm

I am still considering using filters for some of my prints.

David Hardy

RE: Filter or no filter?

#4 by Steve Bales , Tue Aug 11, 2015 12:48 am

I try not to project anything that has gone red. I dont care watching a red film. That being said, most westerns look fine with the sepia tone look.

Steve Bales
Posts: 16
Points: 43
Date registered 08.03.2015
home: Butte. MT
ThankYou 3


Sidney Powell responds after Trump campaign says she is not part of legal team:
Posting stuff you actually own.

disconnected Reel-Chat Members online 0
Xobor Create your own Forum with Xobor