Using a green filter

colrehogan · Jul 26, 2006

I have a shot that I'd like to take, but it would look much better if I could lighten the foliage behind the subject. Okay, before you say it, I can't get IR film in this size (5x12) and the film I will use would either be FP4+ or HP5+.

My questions are, which green filter is used to lighten foliage or is it a green one? Is there any particular type of lighting that would be best/or avoid?

Thanks.

Steve Smith · Jul 26, 2006

Assuming that the exposure is adjusted to compensate, any coloured filter will have the effect of lightening anything of it's own colour and darkening anything else. So a green filter will lighten green and darken anything with blue or red in it (including white).
If you have a selection of different shades of green, you should be able to match one to your foliage for a more pronounced effect.

Steve.

RalphLambrecht · Jul 26, 2006

This is actually trickier than one might think. Unfortunately, foilage has also a lot of blue light in it. That's why IR film lightens foilage so well. Now, a green filter lightens green, but it darkens blue a bit. In my experience, a green filter works best on light green foilage but can even darken dark green foilage. Evergreens darken for sure. Fresh foilage improves. Sorry, its probably not a lot of help.

To make it more complicated, have you considered to make a second much underexposed negative. Carfully bleach all areas you don't want to lighten on it. And then, sandwich the two negatives giving the foilage in question more density. You can also try to selenium tone the foilage in the first negative. Both techniques work better with larger negatives.

lowellh · Jul 26, 2006

I would suggest a "low contrast " developer to bring out the shades and detail you are looking to achieve.

colrehogan · Jul 26, 2006

The only green filters I have are the cokin P one and the one that comes in the Lee b/w gel set. I saw a picture on someone's website where they had used some sort of yellow green filter and the foliage was almost IR like under the canopy. I'll have to try and remember whose site that was. I think I linked there from here in a thread.

I have not considered making two negatives. I've never bleached a negative or selenium toned anything. I'll have to find the site I referred to above as I recall there was some information regarding the images.

Thanks to all who replied.

Donald Miller · Jul 26, 2006

If you can have the luxury of long exposures, I would recommend APHS ortho lith film (IS0 3 appr.) Photowarehouse (www.photowarehouse.biz) will probably cut to the size that you want.

Additionally, I checked and Freestyle has the film in 10X12 inch size (100 sheets --76.99). Since it can be used with a red or OC safelight, cutting it down should not be a problem.

The film is inexpensive and will do what you want. Jim Galli has worked out a Rodinal variant that gives continues tones with very nice resolution.

Another aspect of green foliage is that there is a good amount of IR emission...Probably as much a factor as blue emission...this does tend to confuse light meters and leads to underexposure.

In addition to bleaching a negative, a mask could be made by creating a sharp, low density and high contrast negative mask (second generation) of your camera negative. This would selectively increase high density in high density regions of the original image. The APHS film is what I use as a masking film...However I would use Dektol or D72 at 1-2 or 3 dilution as the mask develooer.

juan · Jul 26, 2006

I've never been able to make that Cokin "P" green filter work well with a landscape here in Florida. It seems to flatten out the negative, and I end up with little contrast. I've had better success using the old standby, the Kodak K-2 (Wratten 8) yellow filter.

I agree with Don about the IR - I tend to lean towards what the meter would consider overexposure if there's a lot of foliage.
juan

jim appleyard · Jul 26, 2006

Is there a time of day when the lighting is on the background and not on your subject? This may help solve your problem.

Simon E · Jul 26, 2006

I have seen some examples which seem to show foliage lightening with a standard green filter, here are a few of the English countryside (Northamptonshire, more specifically):

http://www.geebeephoto.com/2005/05126.htm

http://www.geebeephoto.com/2005/05145.htm

http://www.geebeephoto.com/2005/05159.htm

http://www.geebeephoto.com/2005/05167.htm

http://www.geebeephoto.com/2005/05184.htm

http://www.geebeephoto.com/2005/05193.htm

Some appear to verge on the infrared 'look'. There are others taken with this filter, as well as SFX200/red filter combination and some colour stuff.

BTW technical info is found by using the mouse to highlight the hidden text below the image.

Simon.

Flotsam · Jul 26, 2006

I use an #11 Green filter occasionally mainly to darken reds.

What Ralph said is very interesting. It think that I will experiment by shooting summertime foliage with the #11, and also a blue filter like an 80A as well as without a filter just to see how the results compare.

Terence · Jul 26, 2006

The current View Camera has several shots in a (redwood, I think) forest where the foliage is substantially lighter than the tree bark. It says a "yellow-green" filter was used, which seems to match what you mention in your second post.

Peter De Smidt · Jul 26, 2006

How about a cyan filter, say a + 50cc one used for color correction?

Adams used to use a blue/green filter for shots in a forrest. I don't remember the Wratten number, but when I looked into to, it wasn't easy to get.

RalphLambrecht · Jul 26, 2006

The #11 green filter is also called yellow-green by Kodak, B&W and others.

I don't allow Cokin filters to get within 10 feet from my lenses, therefore, I have no idea what their effect is. (sorry, I couldn't resist)

Helen B · Jul 26, 2006

I generally use a 'light yellow-green' for lightening foliage. It cuts out blue progressively rather than steeply, and a little red - again progressively. The current Wratten designation is #11 as Ralph says, and the B+W designation is 060. The old Wratten designation was X1, but that pretty much corresponds with the Nikon X0 filters I have. The 'medium yellow-green', which I use much less, is the Wratten #13 (old X2) or B+W 061 or Nikon X1.

Best,
Helen

colrehogan · Jul 26, 2006

jim appleyard said:
Is there a time of day when the lighting is on the background and not on your subject? This may help solve your problem.

Jim,
No, the subject is in front of the foliage background at all times. Well, I suppose either early morning or high noon could be answers to your question though.

colrehogan · Jul 26, 2006

Terence said:
The current Lenswork has several shots in a (redwood, I think) forest where the foliage is substantially lighter than the tree bark. It says a "yellow-green" filter was used, which seems to match what you mention in your second post.

Thanks, that could very well be. That sounds like the picture I saw. I'll have to check the CD.

colrehogan · Jul 26, 2006

Peter De Smidt said:
How about a cyan filter, say a + 50cc one used for color correction?

Adams used to use a blue/green filter for shots in a forrest. I don't remember the Wratten number, but when I looked into to, it wasn't easy to get.

I wonder how the cyan filter, the 50cc one you mentioned plus a wratten 12 (minus blue) would work? Or would they? I have these on hand for use with color IR film. I have no light green filters around, just the Lee gel and it's fairly dark.

Peter De Smidt · Jul 26, 2006

The filter I had in mind earlier is a Wratten #44a, a minus red filter. This will simulate an ortho response with panchromatic film. I don't know if these filters are available anymore.

Charles Webb · Jul 26, 2006

RalphLambrecht said:
I don't allow Cokin filters to get within 10 feet from my lenses, therefore, I have no idea what their effect is. (sorry, I couldn't resist)

Why??

Charlie.................................

I have seen some very excellent images made by many top notch photographers using them.......................................

naturephoto1 · Jul 26, 2006

Charles Webb said:
Why??

Charlie.................................

I have seen some very excellent images made by many top notch photographers using them.......................................

Hi Charlie,

The ones that come to mind are the Cokin Grad ND filters which are not known as being very neutral gray (ex. Lee, Singh Ray, and Hitech are much more neutral). I haven't heard anything about the other Cokin filters, but some of the other makers, may make resin filters of higher quality as well.

Rich

PatTrent · Jul 26, 2006

I have both the Hoya MC "Green XO" filter and their "Green X1" filter. To the eye, when looking at the filters placed on a white sheet of paper, the X1 is about 3 times darker than the XO. The XO is a light "chartreuse" yellow-green and the X1 is a "kelly green." I use a 1-stop filter factor for the XO and 2 stops for the X1. But on film there is not much difference (that is a straight print of each reveals very little difference that I can see). Maybe it's the lighting or the trees in my locale.

RalphLambrecht · Jul 27, 2006

Peter

I never heard of this, but it makes a lot of sense. Do you have more info?

RalphLambrecht · Jul 27, 2006

It's just me. I can't get myself to buy the best lenses ever made and then put a piece of plastic in front of it. The once I've seen, weren't even coated. B&W and other filter makers uses high-quality optical glass and coat it like lenses. If that doesn't make any difference, Cokin are OK. Cokin filters are bought for flexibility and cost reduction, never for quality reasons. But I agree, I probably couldn't tell the difference in the final image either. So, it's just me and this warm fuzzy feeling in my stomage. Go figure. But let's go back to the reason for this thread. Sorry to digress.

Early Riser · Jul 27, 2006

Charles Webb said:
Why??

Charlie.................................

I have seen some very excellent images made by many top notch photographers using them.......................................

Resin or plastic filters do not perform well in front of longer lenses. They can very noticably degrade sharpness. I think it's something about their optical flatness, I'm not sure of the science but I won't use them anymore having seen the results. They are satisfactory with wide to normal lenses, but a real problem with long lenses.

michael9793 · Jul 27, 2006

juan said:
I've never been able to make that Cokin "P" green filter work well with a landscape here in Florida. It seems to flatten out the negative, and I end up with little contrast. I've had better success using the old standby, the Kodak K-2 (Wratten 8) yellow filter.

I agree with Don about the IR - I tend to lean towards what the meter would consider overexposure if there's a lot of foliage.
juan

Juan,
If you look closly you wil see here in florida the plants are more of a yellow green than a true green. That is why a yellow filter will lighten the follage up quite a bit. As someone said earlier if you can find a yellow green filter that would hit the jackpot.
mike

Using a green filter

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency