Which IR filter?

[Pasha Patriki]

stacking

stacking

Tiffen's whitepaper says that their IRND's should only be stacked with Hot Mirror ND's and not the regular ND's.
That makes very little sense to me. In my understanding, a regular ND shgould be able to stack behind either a HT or an IRND.

 

[Jack Shanahan]

Tiffen's whitepaper says that their IRND's should only be stacked with Hot Mirror ND's and not the regular ND's.
That makes very little sense to me. In my understanding, a regular ND shgould be able to stack behind either a HT or an IRND.

yes i am finding it impossible to make a decision on what to get. its kind of an expensive game to trial and error...

i did a 3 day spot where DP used 3 stage MB with tiffen hot mirror and regular tiffen NDs behind it. seemed to work well...

my problem is I have the obox with only 2 stages and cant seem to get a straight answer on how to get effective ND without possible ghosting,IR pollution or not enough ND variations.


I am thinking buy an IRND -- perhaps a .6 -- and add regular NDs behind it. Maybe also get a IRND screw on filter in case I need a polarizer or something else?

 

[Will Keir]

You don't need IR with your ND until .9 up.

 

[Max M.]

We very recently did a pretty extensive test comparing Shcneider Platinum vs. Schneider "Tru-Cut IR" vs. Tiffen IRND vs. Tiffen T1 vs. Rosco IR.
We tested every combination we could get our hands on from the local rental houses in Toronto.
I would like at this point to thank PS Productions Services Toronto and Image Gear Inc for providing the filters and facilities for testing.

I will make a nice table in the coming days and will post the results here.
The test was done using Epic-X camera and Red Pro Primes.

can we already see they results somewhere?

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

You don't need IR with your ND until .9 up.

Not entirely true, it depends on your shooting environment. It's recommended that you have IR protection with strong ND's -- usually anything in the realm of 1.2 / 4 stops and stronger. I would also recommend having a hot-mirror filter that can be used alone, or combined with other ND / filtration. There are times when IR anomalies can show up when not expected, even when not using ND's. Some types of synthetic fabrics will reflect more IR than visible light -- here's a thread where this is happening.

While the MX sensor handles IR contamination better than original M, it's OLPF still doesn't seem to block as much IR as what we've seen on some DSLR cameras. OTOH, DSLR's have a lot of internal correction and compensation, even in their so-called "RAW" modes, so it's difficult to ascertain what is preserved by their own IR filtration vs. internal color re-sampling and correction/compensation. With RED, it's just RAW, so we have to be prepared to deal with more contingencies or compromises in exchange for other additional abilities or choices in post.

Look at this discussion from past few days where we see an example of high IR reflectance from a tungsten source. http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?86459-Epic-X-Color-Rendering-Issues

IMO, they're setting themselves up for failure with their lighting setup, before even taking IR into account. The OP and one or two others seem to disagree with my assessment, so I guess I've said what I had to say and I"m done...


For use with MX sensor, my ideal ND and IR kit is this:

IR Hot-Mirror, ND .3, ND .6, ND .9, ND 1.2, IR+ND 1.2, IR+ND 1.5, IR+ND 1.8

You may also want an IR+ND .9, but I haven't found it necessary. If I need IR protection at .9 and under, which is rare, I can combine the lower ND's with the hot-mirror. I can also get to ND 2.1 without IR via 2 filters, or to 3.0 with IR protection with 2 filters.

I think I've decided that the Formatt IR+ND's work the best. The Tiffen and Pancro are a bit more color neutral, but Tiffen don't block as much IR and Pancro uses a surface coating that easily scratches/wears off.

 

[Bob Gundu]

Thanks for your insight Jeff. Just to clarify your kit. When you state "IR+ND 1.2" is that an IRND 1.2, or a combo of the hot mirror and regular 1.2 ND?

IR Hot-Mirror, ND .3, ND .6, ND .9, ND 1.2, IR+ND 1.2, IR+ND 1.5, IR+ND 1.8

Not entirely true, it depends on your shooting environment. It's recommended that you have IR protection with strong ND's -- usually anything in the realm of 1.2 / 4 stops and stronger. I would also recommend having a hot-mirror filter that can be used alone, or combined with other ND / filtration. There are times when IR anomalies can show up when not expected, even when not using ND's. Some types of synthetic fabrics will reflect more IR than visible light -- here's a thread where this is happening.

While the MX sensor handles IR contamination better than original M, it's OLPF still doesn't seem to block as much IR as what we've seen on some DSLR cameras. OTOH, DSLR's have a lot of internal correction and compensation, even in their so-called "RAW" modes, so it's difficult to ascertain what is preserved by their own IR filtration vs. internal color re-sampling and correction/compensation. With RED, it's just RAW, so we have to be prepared to deal with more contingencies or compromises in exchange for other additional abilities or choices in post.

Look at this discussion from past few days where we see an example of high IR reflectance from a tungsten source. http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?86459-Epic-X-Color-Rendering-Issues

IMO, they're setting themselves up for failure with their lighting setup, before even taking IR into account. The OP and one or two others seem to disagree with my assessment, so I guess I've said what I had to say and I"m done...


For use with MX sensor, my ideal ND and IR kit is this:

IR Hot-Mirror, ND .3, ND .6, ND .9, ND 1.2, IR+ND 1.2, IR+ND 1.5, IR+ND 1.8

You may also want an IR+ND .9, but I haven't found it necessary. If I need IR protection at .9 and under, which is rare, I can combine the lower ND's with the hot-mirror. I can also get to ND 2.1 without IR via 2 filters, or to 3.0 with IR protection with 2 filters.

I think I've decided that the Formatt IR+ND's work the best. The Tiffen and Pancro are a bit more color neutral, but Tiffen don't block as much IR and Pancro uses a surface coating that easily scratches/wears off.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Bob, I mean "IRND" or as in IR cut and ND filter in one. Some manufacturers label them as IRND, some as IR+ND and I guess I just got into a habit of typing it that way.

 

[Bob Gundu]

Bob, I mean "IRND" or as in IR cut and ND filter in one. Some manufacturers label them as IRND, some as IR+ND and I guess I just got into a habit of typing it that way.

Ok. Makes sense. About the stacking practise, you are only using the Hot Mirror in front of the regular ND's, and not the IRND?

Thanks,

Bob

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Ok. Makes sense. About the stacking practise, you are only using the Hot Mirror in front of the regular ND's, and not the IRND?

Thanks,

Bob

Correct, the IRND filters are hot-mirrors themselves, you don't want to stack multiple IRND [hot mirror] filters, as they are reflective. I firmly believe that the less you can put in front of your lens, the better. I almost never use more than two filters.

 

[Nate Clapp]

I have been using true cut 750 ir filter with my epic- I generally haven't seen clearly identifiable ir pollution but occasionally I feel foliage isn't being truly represented, with or without the true cut filter. Anyone have done a side by side of a truecut and any of these ir combo filters? I don't want to have to buy even more filters but curious if te true cut isn't cutting it, as it were. I know it came out to address RED One rather than Epic, but it is the same sensor if not same oplf....

 

[Phil Holland]

I'm with Jeff here on using less filtration if possible. I rarely have more than 1 filter and at the max 2 if need be.

Something to remember is that not all IRND filters out there are using a Hot Mirror. Some are just plain green filters with varying degrees of intensity. I'm not fond of that. The Hot Mirror/ND combo filter where the Hot Mirror is fused to the ND seems to always produce the better result.


Nate, here was my initial quick test that led me to purchase and "believe" in the Formatts.

Quick and Dirty Deep ND Filtration Test (Schneider Platinum 1.8 and Formatt HMND 1.8)
While running about and in between meetings I zipped over to Panavision for something else entirely. However, while I was there we did a very quick and dirty deep ND filtration test using the Schneider Platinum IRND 1.8, my Formatt HMND (Hot Mirror/ND) 1.8, and just the clean lens as a control. We jogged out into the parking lot and shot these all within a few seconds of each other. The results shocked me and I feel I may have to do more tests. Like a lot more tests. Let me show you the test image:

So "raw" is just the R3D out of the camera at 5600k, ISO 320 due to bright daylight. The "WB" means I white balanced off that center building, again this was quick and dirty. The "WB+DRX" is a white balanced and DRX set to 1.0 adjustment to remove the red/pink tint. The top row is the control and was shot with just the bare lens.


So my observations of what's going on here is that the white balanced Formatt HMND is pretty damn nice, which I knew. Rich shadow detail with no color tint and that's with no DRX applied! The odd thing here, and the thing that really shocked me was that the white balanced Schneider IRND image retains so much of the pink in the highlights and there's a color cast in the sky. Another odd thing I noticed in the Schneider IRND images is that the rolloff to highlights is slightly different, almost as if it's brighter in general. The area you should pay special attention to is the white rectangular bar on that center building and also the general hue of the blue sky.


Honestly, this confused me and is causing me to recondsider everything at this point as I was going to order a set Schneiders and a new matte box this week. Now I feel I'll actually need to rent a full set and really test them under different lighting conditions to really "know" what's going on. I've got a few days to sort all this out though. Right now I'm feeling the Formatt HMND are currently the best solution, which is really not what I expected.

 

[Rome Will]

Redusers,

I just wanted to see if there's been any updates to this issue? I need an IR filter and wondered if there were any advancements since 2012...I've been looking at the Hot Mirror from Tiffen after a trusted friend recommended it. I want to start off with just a hot mirror/IR filter, and then I'll grab a Hot Mirror + ND filter (like a 0.9 and 1.2 IRND combo) later down the line. I have the Xenons so I didn't want to stop the lens down anymore as I planned on shooting low light. I know I'll need ND filters down the line, but for now I just wanted to check and see what the consensus was for a good hot mirror filter to use with the MX Epic sensor.

Thanks for the updated (if any) recommendations!

 

[Mike Nagel]

Redusers,

I just wanted to see if there's been any updates to this issue? I need an IR filter and wondered if there were any advancements since 2012...I've been looking at the Hot Mirror from Tiffen after a trusted friend recommended it. I want to start off with just a hot mirror/IR filter, and then I'll grab a Hot Mirror + ND filter (like a 0.9 and 1.2 IRND combo) later down the line. I have the Xenons so I didn't want to stop the lens down anymore as I planned on shooting low light. I know I'll need ND filters down the line, but for now I just wanted to check and see what the consensus was for a good hot mirror filter to use with the MX Epic sensor.

Thanks for the updated (if any) recommendations!

Formatt HMIRND work great, especially with the MX sensor...

the new (more expensive) Formatt Firecrest are supposed to deliver great results independent of camera or sensor...

- M

 

[Rome Will]

Mike,

Those look awesome! This is just the info I was looking for...so there has been some updates. But that filter you mentioned is an IRND filter. I was looking for just a IR/Hot mirror filter (from reading the threads, there is a difference, but they accomplish some of the same goals- keeping my blacks black and getting rid of IR). I found this pic on this site (that sound's so credible lol!)...but what's posted hear makes a lot of sense...it's older than this thread though, but it does favorably talk about the Tiffen Hot Mirror filter.

http://provideocoalition.com/aadams/story/ir_cheat_sheet_version_2/

Any disagreement?...

 

[Mike Nagel]

Mike,

Those look awesome! This is just the info I was looking for...so there has been some updates. But that filter you mentioned is an IRND filter. I was looking for just a IR/Hot mirror filter (from reading the threads, there is a difference, but they accomplish some of the same goals- keeping my blacks black and getting rid of IR). I found this pic on this site (that sound's so credible lol!)...but what's posted hear makes a lot of sense...it's older than this thread though, but it does favorably talk about the Tiffen Hot Mirror filter.

http://provideocoalition.com/aadams/story/ir_cheat_sheet_version_2/

Any disagreement?...

Formatt states that the new Firecrest is made using completely new method of filter manufacture and is the ultimate in IR prevention and neutrality and is completely neutral on all cameras and in all conditions, meaning: no color contamination. These filters are non-camera specific, so they might be a better, future-proof investment - but they are more expensive.

The Tiffen HM filters seem to work as well - I do not own them, but there is plenty of user feedback, they will introduce color contamination (as most filters do) which can easily be removed in grading.

The Formatt HMIRND have been proven to work really, really well with MX - that would be my recommendation (for MX sensor). lots of feedback and posts on this forum... and quite a few peeps selling Formatt HMIRND now in the marketplace (they are prob moving up to Firecrest or are on Dragon which needs less IR protection)... good time to get a deal !

But if you want to be future-proof and camera independent you might wanna pay for the more expensive Firecrest... ;-)

 

[Rome Will]

Mike,

I'm looking now! I'll check the marketplace and also see if they have the HM Firecrest filters on there...if they don't, I'll just grab one online. Thanks for your help!

 

[Hal Long]

Hi Rome, I went through all of the various IRND filters earlier this year. I really wanted the formatts to be a winner but found many imperfections in the external coatings. Didn't see it holding up like a tiffen or schneider. The Tiffen IRNDs IMHO are the only safe bet. The HM's are great but the mirror reflection doesn't work for every setup.

 

[Rome Will]

Hi Rome, I went through all of the various IRND filters earlier this year. I really wanted the formatts to be a winner but found many imperfections in the external coatings. Didn't see it holding up like a tiffen or schneider. The Tiffen IRNDs IMHO are the only safe bet. The HM's are great but the mirror reflection doesn't work for every setup.

Hal,

Thanks. Did you get a chance to test out the new Firecrest filters? I know you tested earlier this year, but these just came out and from initial reviews there's some Reduses who say they're pretty good.