 |
  |
 |
Thanks useful information: 6
phil....thanks for the explanation. What I also meant.....the back glass needs to line up correctly with the front glass to work properly...correct. If so if I turn the front glass so that the top in landscape style is turned to the top in portrait style...then both glass elements are in a different position to each other...unlike in landscape position. Do I make sense? I guess I don`t really know how the glass at the rear works......hmmm. Maybe someone can explain.
Graeme
"May the good Lord look down and smile upon your face"......Norman Gunston___________________________________________________
Nikon: D7000, D80, 12-24 f4, 17-55 f2.8, 18-135, 70-300VR, 35f2, SB 400, SB 600, TC-201 2x converter. Tamron: 90 macro 2.8 Kenko ext. tubes. Photoshop CS2.
Threadstarter
I don't think it's a seam. I think it's our "DOT as it were. Just noticed it on mine yesterday.Originally Posted by old dog
So, you discovered that it needs to be angled to the axis of the suns direction? That'd make sense too.
Nice!!
I think I will have to experiment a bit to find things out in portrait position.
Threadstarter
What makes portrait different to landscape orientation?
I just assumed that the rear glass must be in a certain position for the front glass to correspond in it`s certain position (optimal polarisation) so I guess that when you turn the camera into portrait position all you have to do is take the shot....if it`s already optimised in the landscape position. Does that make sense?
Threadstarter
I'd would have thought you'd just rotate the filter 90deg's opposite to the angle the camera rotated when going from Landscape to Portrait. ie. putting it back where you had it set to in the first place for optimum effect.
Or does it also depend on the censor with DSLR as to which is the best angle of rotation?
(EDIT: Still waiting for an chance to try mine out. damn you daytime work hours!!!)
haaaa......I`m going to experiment tomorrow. I`ll report my findings in this thread asap. Got to work this out as I`m off to Turkey for a holiday next wednesday and I`ve got to get my pics right...
G'day Dave & Dan + others
Gosh - the things I find from this forum...
Dave - I also was MCSE certified back in w-3x & w-95 days tho I let it all lapse as I moved on
Dan - you're quite right in the presumption that IF the camera is rotated 90deg from landscape to portrait mode, the filter has to be counter-rotated back 90deg to where it started from to realign it to the sunlight for its best results
As to the alignment of each filter when using two filters - I can't help here ... I was mucking around to try for a ND4 + ND4 effect, so I was just twirling them to get maximum 'blackness' so that I could then get swirling waves over the rocks
As an aside here ...
There is a photo doing the rounds of the advertisers/magazines, showing a blue car, probably a '60s US convertable with aeroplane-like fins at the rear, where the text claims to have removed all reflections from the paintwork via a pola filter.
The picture is - in my opinion - a total fraud
From the days when I was doing my photography stuff at RMIT in Melb, we studied optics & pola filters in some depth - and unless the laws of physics & light have changed with the introduction of digital cameras, there is no way known to mankind where those reflections could just magically disappear. I can think of how 'someone else' could do it, but not via a pola filter on-the-camera
Regards, Phil
Of all the stuff in a busy photographers kitbag, the ability to see photographically is the most important
google me at Travelling School of Photography
images.: flickr.com/photos/ozzie_traveller/sets/
It totally depends on the shade of blue Phil!!
Darker shades with brighter background reflections can be almost totally eliminated by the Pol.
If it weren't for the polariser, these images would be self portraits!
yes, you can see some reflection, but I can assure you without the polariser it'd be all reflection. A bright sunny day(on the odd occasion) where the reflected subject matter was well lit, and so was all to prevalent in the paintwork.
I also got a few shots of a black Ford Thunderbird('55-ish, I think). I'm crouching fairly low down and close to the front of the vehicle, and my ugly mug was very prominent in the reflection in the paint work. Pol removed me completely without the need to install PS/CS!!
I didn't process or upload that image, but I can if you wannna have a peek.
The efficiency of reflection minimisation is dependent on many factors, but it can be 100% effective in some instances.
Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
{Nikon}; -> 50/1.2 : 500/8 : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8 ais : 105mm f/1.8 ais : 24mm/2 ais
{Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
{Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC
{Yongnuo}; -> YN35/2N : YN50/1.8N
Arthurking83 - Gee, do like those effects! Particularly the "deeply-depth" in the second one.
How was that done - if it isn't a "trade-secret"? Special lens - or something in PP...?
And yes - do let us see the '55 T-Bird - they're Icons of their Era - please....
Dave.
Thankyou Arthur
Your images "reflect" mine too
However, the offending advert claimed that a pola filter would remove reflections, and in the advert's image, not a single reflection of any sort was visible
Regards, Phil
It should remove close to 90% of a very bright reflection, where subsequent and very basic pp in the form of brightness reduction should(could) completely remove the remaining 10%.
In my non uploaded T-bird shot.. not uploaded due to pretty ordinary image quality!!.. the reflection of myself in the front guard was totally eliminated without any PP at all, simply in using the polariser. I was hunched down low and in some shadow, and there is no reflection at all in the black paintwork(where there would have been without using the polariser)
Harves' (old)polariser thread clearly demonstrates how effective a polariser can be against reflection, I've seen in other instances 100%(or close enough to it) removal of reflections in other instances too. Adverts and their grandiose claims of miraculous magic will be worded such that they maximise their marketing advantage!!
Totally eliminate reflections by using a/our/their polariser filter, but only under specific conditions .... which doesn't sound as amazing when compared to totally eliminate reflections using our polariser filter!.
I'll try to upload that T-bird image to display how effective they can be tho.
apart from remembering where the sun is, don't get too bogged down about cpl's. just turn the thing until you get the desired effect in your viewfinder
For landscapes with big blue skies.. that is generally what I do too.
Sometimes(and almost all the time!!) when polarising a vast blue sky using an ultra wide angle lens, depending on the time of day, time of year... etc you can get those 'ugly' dark patches in the sky where only a small portion of the huge field of view is darkened. In these cases, I sometimes only partially polarise ... so that maybe one corner of the sky will darken(you can clearly see the darkening effect across the sky through the viewfinder!), I'll adjust making sure that if I need to reduce glare in other parts of the image, that I'm polarising efficiently.. and not just at random... and then handhold a GND and an angle, to compensate for the other section of the sky not being polarised.
Reply With Quote
