Jump to content

1930s Diffusion Filters


Jack Anderson

Recommended Posts

I have twice seen a beautiful diffusion made in the 20s, 30s, or 40s. What I have seen are small round filters (around 55mm) meant to attach directly to a lens. The filter is reminiscent of a Fresnel lens, in that it has a number of concentric rings, about 3/8" apart.

 

I just saw an example at an Academy seminar. The filter was displayed by the ASC's archivist, and it was part of the collection of Joseph Walker, ASC (It Happened One Night, and many more).

 

This filter provides and extremely subtle and beautiful softening of faces without extremeflaring and without very much sense of defocusing.

 

I would like to get a filter like this, preferably in a modern format (preferably 4" X 5"). I have used a filter that Schneider (B+W) makes, and it's very nice. But it is less subtle than the old ones.

 

Does anyone know where this kind of filter can be obtained or where it can be made?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
I have twice seen a beautiful diffusion made in the 20s, 30s, or 40s. What I have seen are small round filters (around 55mm) meant to attach directly to a lens. The filter is reminiscent of a Fresnel lens, in that it has a number of concentric rings, about 3/8" apart.

 

I just saw an example at an Academy seminar. The filter was displayed by the ASC's archivist, and it was part of the collection of Joseph Walker, ASC (It Happened One Night, and many more).

 

This filter provides and extremely subtle and beautiful softening of faces without extremeflaring and without very much sense of defocusing.

 

I would like to get a filter  like this, preferably in a modern format (preferably 4" X 5"). I have used a filter that Schneider (B+W) makes, and it's very nice. But it is less subtle than the old ones.

 

Does anyone know where this kind of filter can be obtained or where it can be made?

 

 

What was the one the archivist displayed? I assume he spoke a little about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What was the one the archivist displayed? I assume he spoke a little about it.

 

The filter ring was either scraped or covered with ancient masking tape. In any event, it was impossible to tell who made it or what degree of diffusion it provided. In talking about it, he only talked about Joe Walker and showed the haystack sequence from It Happened One Night.

 

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
The filter ring was either scraped or covered with ancient masking tape. In any event, it was impossible to tell who made it or what degree of diffusion it provided. In talking about it, he only talked about Joe Walker and showed the haystack sequence from It Happened One Night.

 

Jack

 

I wonder if you could polish a neutral filter (like a UV maybe) with compounds so it's just short of optical quality, essentially leaving tiny scratches evenly on the surface.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

The Walker filter that was shown is an example of "circular" diffusion. The idea was resurrected (at the request of Roy Wagner, ASC, I believe) by Schneider Optics as "Soft-Centric". However, their filter is a little more subtle than Walker's. I'd probably use a heavier Classic Soft instead if I wanted more halation than the Soft-Centric creates, but maybe a heavier Soft-Centric would do the trick. This is from their website:

 

 

Soft-Centric Filters

 

Schneider Soft-Centric filters are a series of mild diffusion filters that soften a scene without significantly affecting contrast, creating flare or making the subject look out of focus. Reminiscent of some of the softening filters created in the early days of Hollywood - but with total consistency - Schneider Soft-Centric filters can help Directors of Photography achieve a unique "look."

 

Developed with the help of a leading Hollywood Director of Photography, Schneider Soft-Centric filters are ideal for romantic close-ups. Particularly useful to smooth out wrinkles and facial blemishes, they are the perfect filters for glamorous close-ups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

 

Thanks, I found it on my own. I've seen ym eye really maturing where that sort of thign is concerned. I started into film school a little over a year ago and drastic effects were cool to me but I've seen ym preferences go for things that are subtle more and more lately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Mr. Anderson,

I don't know but maybe "Ziess Softar's", I have never used them but

have heard about them. They are covered with tiny droplets that are

supposed to be lenses in themselves. David Mullen ASC may know of

them. I have always wanted to look at one but have never had a chance.

Some of the filter makers of resin type filters are now including net patt-

erns in their filters. The only other thing that I can think of is the stretching

of nylon over the lens for soft look or over an old UV filter. I personally be-

lieve that stray light can really mess up a soft filter effect, so I always use

with lens hood. I tend to favor the Tiffen soft filters and the Cokin pastel fil-

ter.

 

Greg Gross, Professional Photographer

Student Cinematographer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Andy Sparaco

You may be describing "mitchell diffusion" Check out the Panchro Website for info. I have a set "A/B/C/D" and they are wonderful....and old school. :o No Batteries necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

All diffusion works on the principle of some of the image being thrown out of focus while other parts are left sharp, using a pattern of lenslets or something (or the weave in stocking).

 

Mitchells, Soft-FX, Classic Softs, etc. all only vary by the pattern of the lenslets and their design. Classic Softs use a regular pattern of round lenslets bubbles; Soft-FX use an irregular pattern of kidney-shaped lenslets, the newer Mitchells use a pattern of trombezoid or rectangular lenslets. Unfortunately, the sharp-edged pattern used by Mitchells tend to throw more of the image out-of-focus creating more of a blurry effect than a diffused effect (there's a difference, believe me.) The regular pattern of the Classic Soft can make it more noticeable sometimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Hi David, is this difference noticeable at SD resolution, or subtle enough to discern only when using a higher resolution format like film (or HD)?

 

It's odd but sometimes we can get away with heavier diffusion for material to be seen on standard def TV rather than projected in 35mm. But I think this has more to do with the degree of enlargement than the resolution, but there is a connection of course.

 

The problem with the pattern of lenslets in diffusion filters is more to do with depth of field -- i.e. the excessive depth of field of cameras with small CCD's can make the pattern in the glass start to come into focus. So a fairly regular pattern like the grid of lenslets in the Classic Soft can be very noticeable when there's too much depth of field.

 

I'd say, though, that there's no right or wrong diffusion so use whatever you like. Tiffen's Diffusion-FX are probably the most artifact-free (no halation or loss of contrast) but therefore they are also the most boring, however for people who want to soften an image without it looking filtered, this is a good filter to use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Hi David, is this difference noticeable at SD resolution, or subtle enough to discern only when using a higher resolution format like film (or HD)?

 

 

With all this talk of lenslets I wonder if this sort of thing could be made. I should gte some good glass and try spraying it lightly with an atomizer filled with nitrocellulose laquer (the very, very clear stuff used on high end musical instruments) and see what happens. Obviously I wouldn't do this to a good filter or lens but I'm an experimentor. :D :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

I've made emergency diffusion filters by spraying hairpray on a clear filter, but it's hard to make it subtle enough -- it doesn't take much to throw an image out-of-focus. Stretched pantyhose might work better because you naturally get a good pattern of clear holes in the weaver of the net material.

 

John Seale used a trick of putting a thumbprint on clear glass where the face would be in frame. In fact, a few close-ups of Kristen Scot Thomas in "English Patient" really looked like there's a thumbprint on the lens right over her face... but that's partly because I knew his trick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
I've made emergency diffusion filters by spraying hairpray on a clear filter, but it's hard to make it subtle enough -- it doesn't take much to throw an image out-of-focus.  Stretched pantyhose might work better because you naturally get a good pattern of clear holes in the weaver of the net material.

 

John Seale used a trick of putting a thumbprint on clear glass where the face would be in frame.  In fact, a few close-ups of Kristen Scot Thomas in "English Patient" really looked like there's a thumbprint on the lens right over her face... but that's partly because I knew his trick.

 

 

Wow, the thumbprint is a really good idea. I'll have to store that one away and experiment with it a little and see if I like it :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jon Armstrong
I've made emergency diffusion filters by spraying hairpray on a clear filter, but it's hard to make it subtle enough -- it doesn't take much to throw an image out-of-focus.  Stretched pantyhose might work better because you naturally get a good pattern of clear holes in the weaver of the net material.

 

John Seale used a trick of putting a thumbprint on clear glass where the face would be in frame.  In fact, a few close-ups of Kristen Scot Thomas in "English Patient" really looked like there's a thumbprint on the lens right over her face... but that's partly because I knew his trick.

 

Petroleum Jelly was the old tried and true since you could simply use an optical flat and control the degree of softness. Its worth noting though before you run off and find that this is not a 30's look that you thought it would be that the hard light that was used then is nothing like the lighting units we see now. We have put a lot of effort into lighting design to make it easier and quicker.

 

The old lights do still exist. These days we use them in theatres.

 

Jon Armstrong

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Also note that 1930's lighting was not as hard as 1940's lighting. You'll often note that big tungsten units had spun glass in front of it, creating not so much of a soft light as a softened hard light. Then you had some people lighting through silks as well, like Lee Garmes.

 

The new book of production photos by TCM shows a lot of the early studio lighting practices, with a lots of "scoop" lights close to the actors with spun glass right frames in front of them. This later evolved into the crisper, more sculptural look of the 1940's using harder fresnel lamps with no diffusion on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jon Armstrong
Also note that 1930's lighting was not as hard as 1940's lighting. You'll often note that big tungsten units had spun glass in front of it, creating not so much of a soft light as a softened hard light.  Then you had some people lighting through silks as well, like Lee Garmes.

 

The new book of production photos by TCM shows a lot of the early studio lighting practices, with a lots of "scoop" lights close to the actors with spun glass right frames in front of them.  This later evolved into the crisper, more sculptural look of the 1940's using harder fresnel lamps with no diffusion on them.

 

Too true.

 

The use of spun on large tungstens and frezis was probably the first step toward the current trend of fluro and wall lights

 

Jon A

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

No, those are just tungsten lamps with small frames of spun glass in front of them. In what looks like tubes in the second one above, those are just multiple frames in a row in front of the light.

 

The Silent Era used something like fluorescent lamps, mercury vapor discharge lamps in tubes called Cooper-Hewitt's (introduced around 1900). They were too noisy for the sound era though. But they were responsible for a lot of the soft-lit look of 1920's movies.

 

These photos are from the 1920's:

 

tcm3.jpg

 

cooperhewitt1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought the TCM Stills book for my uncle for Xmas, got a chance to skim through it quickly. I remember seeing what I thought were fluorescent tubes in the stills of "Crossfire", which would have been from 1947. Would that make any sense? Obviously the color temperature wouldn't be an issue in black and white, but what about flicker? Any thoughts, David?

 

There are some great stills from the set of "Metropolis" in the Screencraft Cinematograpy book in which Eduardo Serra discussed the use of mercury vapor lamps in the silent era. Learning about these lamps made me realize how soft the light often was in films from the 20's, I think the high contrast of the video transfers I've seen sort of fooled me into thinking the light was a bit harder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
I bought the TCM Stills book for my uncle for Xmas, got a chance to skim through it quickly.  I remember seeing what I thought were fluorescent tubes in the stills of "Crossfire", which would have been from 1947.  Would that make any sense?  Obviously the color temperature wouldn't be an issue in black and white, but what about flicker? 

 

That's an ordinary gooseneck 2-bank fluorescent desk lamp pointed upwards; I don't know it is a prop or was being used for lighting or as a worklight.

 

I don't know if the standard 24 fps constant-speed camera motors were consistent enough for shooting 60 hz fluorescents, but I do recall movies, especially b&w film noirs, shot on location in the 40's/50's with real flos in the background, not flickering, and this was in the day before crystal-sync camera motors. Look at the opening of "Sweet Smell of Success" for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...