The Development of a "Fixed" 35% Polarization Filter

[BrokenCanon]

deleted

[MikeSowsun]

---

@BrokenCanon wrote:

This all started when I was searching for a polarization or CPL for my Canon M6. But after testing 15 differant filters in conjunction with my camera, none of these filters worked. No matter what settings and adjustments, I was not able to achieve any sort of polarization to my images.

---

I am sure there are very many Canon M6 users who have no problem using CPL filters. What makes your situation so different? 

I also don't understand how a piece of tinted resin can act as a polarizer.

[rs-eos]

Isn't this basically a polarizing gel?  Rosco (and other brands) have such gels already.  e.g. their part #7300 which has a 38% transmission (1.5 stops).

[MikeSowsun]

I seriously doubt that a "sheet of tinted plastic/resin" can act as a true polarizer. And even if it could, would it be a linear or circular polarizer? 

Modern digital SLR cameras need circular polarizer to maintain accurate auto-focus and/or auto-exposure. 

[BrokenCanon]

deleted

[ebiggs1]

I don't want to throw water on your parade, or bridge, but I could do that in Photoshop and no filter.

[MikeSowsun]

---

@BrokenCanon wrote:

Check out what the filter does to the water below this bridge:

Either you believe it or you don't. Fortunately I found several people/photographers who wanted to be product testers for us and we can't wait to see their results.

---

The water in the foreground has a lot of glare. A Polarizer can remove that glare.

It appears you don't understand what Polarizers do. The fact that 15 different Polarizers didn't meet your expectations seems to confirm this. 

Please post identical photo taken with and without your "plastic/resin" filter so you can prove us wrong. 

[BrokenCanon]

It's purity obvious that even this canon community is against my findings. Therefore I've requested that thsi topic be removed or closed.

[ebiggs1]

Not against it at all, I am just trying to understand as the others I’m sure are, it. You must see or know of a reason or see a need for going to this effort.
That’s why we question it. What you offered as a example I could do in Photoshop to any picture.

[rs-eos]

I've had a polarizing gel (Rosco) in by B&H wish list for a long time now.  Even a small sheet is pricey.  If I ever get one, will run some experiments with my speedlites.  Then additionally add a CPL on my lens.

I've heard that if you polarize your lighting with said gels, it can help light up say artwork to remove all specular highlights.

And, if used in conjunction with a CPL on the lens, and you photograph clear plastic objects, you can end up with some very interesting outcomes.

Having said all that, I totally agree that a good CPL is best to use.  I personally have B+W high-transmission CPLs.