Re: polarizing filters with b&w infrared

[boblong@xxxxxxxxxxx (Robert Long)]

On Wed, 30 Oct 1996 20:34:35 +0000 (GMT), JoePaduano wrote:

|Bob- haze penetration in the two photos is also minimal as is the =
darkening
|of the sky at the horizon line. The loss of light is not worth it either=
 and
|why would you want to reduce the light when it is to your advantage to =
have
|more light to use smaller apertures.

As I say, I am not trying to use a polarizer with a #87 filter, which
is where we agree the difference appears to be is slight, based on the
photos in reproduced in the Kodak booklet.  Still, if haze penetration
at a great distance is a high priority for the work at hand, use of a
polarizer might be deemed an advantage even with a Wratten 87.

But I was using it with a #25 filter, where a polarizer can make a
very material difference to the depth of tone in the sky, as I said.
=46or pictures in which that is a desideratum, the loss of a couple
stops in speed may be a relatively trivial matter. For what I was
doing it certainly was worth a try.  I haven't seen the contact sheets
yet, but judging by the negatives, it probably was a good idea.
=20
Bob Long
(boblong@xxxxxxxxxxx)

------------------------------

Topic No. 24