cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

My circular polarizing filter doesn't seem to have a very wide change spectrum?

iris
Enthusiast

Do circular polarizing filters come in various strenghts or ranges of change?  ARe all C-polarizing filters the same?  Yes, I know how to use them. I know the 90degree angle to the sun and all that ...I feel that I should be able to rotate the filter and see through the lens excactly what the change will be...frankly I find it very difficult to see the amount of change in the blue of the sky using the filter that I have....shouldn't you be able to rotate the filter and observe the change gradations?  Shouldn't they be obvious as in a ND filter?  Should I ask for a "stronger" polarizing filter?

4 ACCEPTED SOLUTIONS

Skirball
Authority

Polarizers can have different strengths.  Technically they should all be similar, since theoretcially they should eliminate all waves perpendicular to the axis.  But that's theoretical, and cheap polarizers might not be efficient.  What brand?

 

It's unlikely it's a complete fake, but I wouldn't be totally surprised if you bought a cheapo somewhere.  I've seen plenty of polarized sunglasses that aren't.

 

One thing: technically it's not 90 degrees to the sun, it's 90 degrees to a reflected surface.  The reflection has become polarized, which allows the polarizer to block it.  The effect on blue sky can vary, depending on how much reflection (haze) there is in the sky.  The best way to check that it's working is to look at sunlight reflecting off of something, like a shiny object.

View solution in original post

Polarizing filters do increase color saturation.  You should be able to see it in your view finder and LCD display.

 

A good way to visualize how this works is to aim your pointer finger at the sun while holding your thumb straight up. Everywhere your thumb points when you rotate your hand (while still pointing it at the sun) is where the polarizer will have the strongest effect. They require the camera to be pointed at a right angle to the sun for maximal effect.

 

The problem is all color saturation is not equal.  It can vary and not be uniform across the frame.  Another is when used on a wide angle or UWA lens the effect can be less.  Which can make it quite difficult to see the effect in a viewfinder or LCD screen.  Cheap ones can degrade IQ.

 

If I missed anything maybe Tim can help me out.  This is right up his alley. Smiley Happy

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and less lenses then before!

View solution in original post

It is easy.  Basic set up. Take three or more exposures.  One under, one correct and one over exposed.  You need a post editor.  I like and use Photomatrix Pro.  It automaticly stacks the exposures and applies the correct settings.  Plus it has other features for further adjustments.

There is a free trial version.  BTW, Photoshop can do it, too.

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and less lenses then before!

View solution in original post


@iris wrote:

Remarkable results with your HDR....I am interested in HDR but have no real understanding of it.  I get the impression you dont need a lot of lenses?  ? what? I saw friends on a recent trip to the mountains raving about the little bit of weight they took with their cameras...I'm not sure I understand HDR at all right now?


You need a tripod, not a lens.  Well, obviously a lens, but a tripod is the standout requirement for HDR.  Basically all you're doing is taking photos as multiple exposures (very dark, dark, normal, light, very light) and combining them into one image with a large (or "High") dynamic range (the 'distance' between the darkest and lightest points in an image); hence the name HDR.  You can shoot it without a tripod, most software can try to align the frames, but it's much better to just use a tripod if available.

 

As mentioned above, Photomatix is the name brand in HDR, but that's changing and the technique evolves.   It's far superior to control in Photoshop, however.   There's a plug in for Lightroom called Enfuse (free) that is very powerful, but not as user friendly.  And the soon to be released Lightroom 6 will have HDR built in; we're all eager to see what that looks like.

 

The examples that eBiggs posts really show tone mapping more than HDR.  All HDR (and non-HDR) images have to be tone mapped to display on a LED screen, but if you search for "tone mapped" you'll see that there is a look associated with the term. 

 

On the flip side, HDR images can be tone mapped to look normal, mearly trying to squeeze a large dynamic range into one picture. A very common use is in Real Estate/Architectural photography when dealing with lots of windows.  The difference in light levels between the inside lights and outside can often be far too large for a camera (even though your eyes can adjust ok).  So you're left with either completely white windows, or dark interior.  The goal isn't to make something that looks 'tone mapped', but to have it look normal.  Like this:

 

16268587496_a482740283_z.jpg

 

Even with lighting I couldn't completely balance out the sun, so I simply stack a few images to fill in the low spots.  It doesn't look like anything special, but it's not supposed to.  You can see the outside has a slight bluish tint to it.  Poor tone mapping on my part. 

 

Another example, where the left and back walls were windows, creating a bright gradient out of the lower left, leaving the back completely dark. 

 

8467443718_e475fee384_z.jpg

 

Again, you're not suppose to look at it and think HDR, it's suppose to look like an ordinary photo.  Just some examples of another side of HDR...

View solution in original post

37 REPLIES 37

It occurred to me the other day that if the 90 degree angle rule to the sun is always applied, one can only get good blue sky effect faceing North or South....youll never be 90 degrees to the sun facing East or West?

 

I find some of the best use for polarizing filter for seeing though windows or removing glare from surface water.....

 

 


@iris wrote:

It occurred to me the other day that if the 90 degree angle rule to the sun is always applied, one can only get good blue sky effect faceing North or South....youll never be 90 degrees to the sun facing East or West?

 

I find some of the best use for polarizing filter for seeing though windows or removing glare from surface water.....

 

 


You can get dramatically blue skies during the golden hours, too.

--------------------------------------------------------
"The right mouse button is your friend."

"...one can only get good blue sky effect faceing North or South....youll never be 90 degrees to the sun facing East or West?"

 

Yo always get blue skies in Photoshop!  Smiley Very Happy

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and less lenses then before!

logan78
Apprentice

I followed the method you have posted and it did not work out for me and I am a user of canon error b200 and I purchased it 2 months ago.

yopifaklo
Apprentice

@iris wrote:

Do circular polarizing filters come in various strenghts or ranges of change?  ARe all C-polarizing filters the same?  Yes, I know how to use them. I know the 90degree angle to the sun and all that ...I feel that I should be able to rotate the filter and see through the lens excactly what the change will be...frankly I find it very difficult to see the amount of change in the blue of the sky using the filter that I have....shouldn't you be able to rotate the filter and observe the change gradations?  Shouldn't they be obvious as in a ND filter?  Should I ask for a "stronger" polarizing filter?

[links removed per forum guidelines]

I look through the lens and turn it  how much I am affecting the "blueness of those patches".  I thought you were supposed to be able to see those changes as you rotate the lens...but I have not found much success noting those changes using the LD display or through the lens


@yopifaklo wrote:

@iris wrote:

Do circular polarizing filters come in various strenghts or ranges of change?  ARe all C-polarizing filters the same?  Yes, I know how to use them. I know the 90degree angle to the sun and all that ...I feel that I should be able to rotate the filter and see through the lens excactly what the change will be...frankly I find it very difficult to see the amount of change in the blue of the sky using the filter that I have....shouldn't you be able to rotate the filter and observe the change gradations?  Shouldn't they be obvious as in a ND filter?  Should I ask for a "stronger" polarizing filter?

[links removed per forum guidelines]

I look through the lens and turn it  how much I am affecting the "blueness of those patches".  I thought you were supposed to be able to see those changes as you rotate the lens...but I have not found much success noting those changes using the LD display or through the lens


Remember that when you're looking through the lens, the lens is at full aperture, which is not necessarily the aperture at which the image will be captured. You might get more accurate results by using the preview button.

Bob
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania USA

sergiuslane
Apprentice

Polarizing filters, first of all, are made to reduce reflections. A polarizing filter can occasionally be used when a longer exposure is necessary. For example, when photographing waterfalls, it is an indispensable tool. If you are thinking that a polarizing filter is just needed to create the sky bluer, you certainly require some help in understanding their principal function.

eplaylist cari-mp3 downloadlagu-mp3 xepozone

iris
Enthusiast
I have stopped,using the polarizing filter except for lowering glare and haze in otherwise BLUE skies. It 8s also great for taking glare off of water....I Now meter for the sky and usually under expose it....and usually just opening shadows in PS does the rest.

JosephOwen
Apprentice
it might be teh cheap polarizers. Go for best polarizers to get the best results. basically they have many varients according to their strengths. so take higher to one to see the change

jimmy1
Contributor

If you used a polarizer in the film days you might be disappointed by they way they work with digital because the effect isn't as dramatic. Same goes for comparing a polarizer to polarized sunglasses. 

I have no idea if this is correct, but I assume the reason is that lenses today are better at cutting through glare. 

They still have their uses and they still make blue skies bluer and let you see past the glare on water so I don't leave home without mine. 

But yes, you're correct, they don't change images as much as I remember them doing in the 80s. 

Announcements