Anybody tried a Double Fog filter?

Hi,

I am looking to buy a tiffen double fog filter as i read that this filter will create the same effect as in real fog, with forground objects clearer than objects in the background.

This is interesting as the usual fog filter is making everything foggy, foreground or background the same.

I was wondering if anyone tried the double fog filter and if so, is it possible to see some samples?

thanks

Daniella3d,

I'm interested too, so I'll bump up the post~ I've not heard of this filter, but you have certainly raised my interest.

Jim

Hi,

I am looking to buy a tiffen double fog filter as i read that this
filter will create the same effect as in real fog, with forground
objects clearer than objects in the background.

This is interesting as the usual fog filter is making everything
foggy, foreground or background the same.

I was wondering if anyone tried the double fog filter and if so, is
it possible to see some samples?

thanks

I’ll try and post this again (this site has been having problems lately!)

My original post (now lost) was: Why bother with filters like this? Why not simply take a “real” picture and make adjustments in a Paint program of your choice? I looked at a bunch of filters – but saw only one or two that could not (relatively) easily be done post picture taking.

I’m no photographer by the way – I just wonder why people buy these things for digitals.

Daniella3d wrote:

Hi,

I am looking to buy a tiffen double fog filter as i read that this
filter will create the same effect as in real fog, with forground
objects clearer than objects in the background.

This is interesting as the usual fog filter is making everything
foggy, foreground or background the same.

I was wondering if anyone tried the double fog filter and if so, is
it possible to see some samples?

thanks

first of all, it is very difficult to use post processing software and get the same result with a simple fog filter!

Second, the double fog is different as it keep the objects in foreground clear and make the objects in background foggy.
very different!

There are very few filter that you cannot recreate the look in editing. How about the polirizer???? how do you remove the annoying reflection on a window to see inside with an editing program? you cannot!

How do you remove the reflection from a water surface to see fishs in the water with an editing program? you cannot!!!

there are many occasion when you NEED a filter to get a good result.

the low constrast filter will let you capture details. If you try to make the contras lower with an editing program, you will not get details that is not already there. With the low contrast filter you will get these details in the pictures and that's the only way you can do that. An overexposed area in an image will be impossible to correct in any editing software.

All that said..i am still waiting for my answer about the double fog filter. I found it at 26.99$ so i guess i'll go for it.

Daniella

David Watts wrote:
I’ll try and post this again (this site has been having
problems lately!)

My original post (now lost) was: Why bother with filters like
this? Why not simply take a “real” picture and make
adjustments in a Paint program of your choice? I looked at a bunch
of filters – but saw only one or two that could not
(relatively) easily be done post picture taking.

I’m no photographer by the way – I just wonder why
people buy these things for digitals.

Daniella3d wrote:

Hi,

I am looking to buy a tiffen double fog filter as i read that this
filter will create the same effect as in real fog, with forground
objects clearer than objects in the background.

This is interesting as the usual fog filter is making everything
foggy, foreground or background the same.

I was wondering if anyone tried the double fog filter and if so, is
it possible to see some samples?

thanks

the low constrast filter will let you capture details. If you try
to make the contras lower with an editing program, you will not get
details that is not already there. With the low contrast filter
you will get these details in the pictures and that's the only way
you can do that. An overexposed area in an image will be
impossible to correct in any editing software.

Low contrast filters look promising, although I've never tried one. My KR ( color tempature conversion ) filter is giving me pretty good results in bright sun. My polarizer is invaluable, like you pointed out. I need an ND set, too, because you can't fake a time-exposure in Photoshop.

But most of the other ones can be done better on the computer, and faking an enhancing filter should teach you a lot ... if you have the time.

Daniella3d wrote:
Hi,

I am looking to buy a tiffen double fog filter as i read that this
filter will create the same effect as in real fog, with forground
objects clearer than objects in the background.

Not sure about that.. but here is a sample:

And what filter exactly did you used on that one? Can i see the full size image?

it is very hard to judge an image so tiny, but it look blurred to me.

I am interesting in the double fog filter, not the fog filter...as you can have the same fog density as the background objects and that does not look natural. Also objects look blurred and that is not true for foreground object in the foreground.

You can acheive cheap effects with these post processing effects, but if you want real good looking image that does not look smudged, i'll go the the double fog filter.

I ordered it from the http://www.cameraworld.com so i'll see what it give as result.

If you look at real fog scene, you will see that not everything as the same degree of foggyness and close by objects are cleared....try to fake that in Photoshop.

Clicker wrote:

Daniella3d wrote:
Hi,

I am looking to buy a tiffen double fog filter as i read that this
filter will create the same effect as in real fog, with forground
objects clearer than objects in the background.

Not sure about that.. but here is a sample:

Here is a sample from Tiffen page...you can already see the difference between the fog filter and the double fog.

In the double fog, the cabin in the foreground is clear...which look like REAL fog.

Also with fog filter the objects are still relatively sharp...the fog filter mimic the real fog by having a special surface that affect the light itself...so in lighter area you have a more prononced effect..just like in real fog. This you cannot acheive with post processing..if anyone can show me a good looking post processing fog image, i am more than willing to consider that choice..but so far none.

Daniella

Clicker wrote:

Daniella3d wrote:
Hi,

I am looking to buy a tiffen double fog filter as i read that this
filter will create the same effect as in real fog, with forground
objects clearer than objects in the background.

Not sure about that.. but here is a sample:

Sorry here is the liink

http://www.tiffen.com/fog%20filters.htm

this is from http://www.tiffen.com web site.

Daniella

Daniella3d wrote:
Here is a sample from Tiffen page...you can already see the
difference between the fog filter and the double fog.

In the double fog, the cabin in the foreground is clear...which
look like REAL fog.

Also with fog filter the objects are still relatively sharp...the
fog filter mimic the real fog by having a special surface that
affect the light itself...so in lighter area you have a more
prononced effect..just like in real fog. This you cannot acheive
with post processing..if anyone can show me a good looking post
processing fog image, i am more than willing to consider that
choice..but so far none.

Daniella

Clicker wrote:

Daniella3d wrote:
Hi,

I am looking to buy a tiffen double fog filter as i read that this
filter will create the same effect as in real fog, with forground
objects clearer than objects in the background.

Not sure about that.. but here is a sample:

Without getting into a huge long debate - I think you're wrong there.

The double fog (as described by yourself ) would be quite easy to do with layers in either Paint Shop Pro or Photoshop.

You could remove reflections - but it would take time. But it is doable with software skills. Again - I was just asking. In my original post (which the board lost) I did state that I do have a UV filter. And I have seen one or two filters that reproduce things that would be difficult to do in a software package - but that's about it. The fog ones shown in the thread would certainly be doable. All but a handful can be duplicated easily - and I dare say BETTER than a filter -since every aspect of it is tweakable. I define "difficult" as time consuming. But I have learned time and again that learning something takes time - reproducing it doesn't take much time at all. I have also learned that nothing can save a truly horrible picture

But I was asking- not laying down hard and fast rules. I really don't know. I do know that spending time learning the software has returned huge dividends for me. I simply have no need for 95% of the filters on the market because of software.

Daniella3d wrote:
first of all, it is very difficult to use post processing software
and get the same result with a simple fog filter!

Second, the double fog is different as it keep the objects in
foreground clear and make the objects in background foggy.
very different!

There are very few filter that you cannot recreate the look in
editing. How about the polirizer???? how do you remove the
annoying reflection on a window to see inside with an editing
program? you cannot!

How do you remove the reflection from a water surface to see fishs
in the water with an editing program? you cannot!!!

there are many occasion when you NEED a filter to get a good result.

the low constrast filter will let you capture details. If you try
to make the contras lower with an editing program, you will not get
details that is not already there. With the low contrast filter
you will get these details in the pictures and that's the only way
you can do that. An overexposed area in an image will be
impossible to correct in any editing software.

All that said..i am still waiting for my answer about the double
fog filter. I found it at 26.99$ so i guess i'll go for it.

Daniella

David Watts wrote:
I’ll try and post this again (this site has been having
problems lately!)

My original post (now lost) was: Why bother with filters like
this? Why not simply take a “real” picture and make
adjustments in a Paint program of your choice? I looked at a bunch
of filters – but saw only one or two that could not
(relatively) easily be done post picture taking.

I’m no photographer by the way – I just wonder why
people buy these things for digitals.

Daniella3d wrote:

Hi,

I am looking to buy a tiffen double fog filter as i read that this
filter will create the same effect as in real fog, with forground
objects clearer than objects in the background.

This is interesting as the usual fog filter is making everything
foggy, foreground or background the same.

I was wondering if anyone tried the double fog filter and if so, is
it possible to see some samples?

thanks

The image I linked to is from B&H and a $150 Double Fog filter! I realize the image is small.. but your Tiffen images are smaller yet! lol

Good luck with the filter and please post some shots!-- Clicker~C-2100 UZI, C-2020, B-300, B Macro

So far i got a Polarizer, and that is impossible to fake with post processing, especially for removing the reflection on the glass or water surface.

I got a UV filter, VERY important to protect your precious lense.

Also got a Haze2 filter, so i will get rid of the haze when taking picture of the grand Canyon or other high altitude shot....you get so much more details in your pictures with this filter. again you cannot fake that later on, as you cannot add details that is not there.

I got a diffuser filter and this is also hard to fake as it diffuse the light but still keep things sharp..this give a soft focus effect without looked blurred.

I got a set of closeup lens and i love them..as i can get much closer with them, i can focus around 2" close.

Low contrast filter, you cannot add details after in an overexposed area...if its totally white, nothing you can do. But with the low contrast filter, you can have details in all areas and after you can increase the contras in post processing..impossible to add detail in post processing if its not already there from the beginning.

All this is not something you can fake after, it has to be there from the beginning. This is why people spend $$$ on filters. I bought most of mine for very cheap..so far the cost is around 100$ for all of them, including the close up lens and the adapter.

Also your comment about making a "real" picture is funny, as doing post processing is nothing real...using filters is more real to me, as they are simply just another glass lens added to your existing glass lens

The only filter easy to fake later one is color correction...and i did not bother to buy these.

Daniella

David Watts wrote:
I’ll try and post this again (this site has been having
problems lately!)

My original post (now lost) was: Why bother with filters like
this? Why not simply take a “real” picture and make
adjustments in a Paint program of your choice? I looked at a bunch
of filters – but saw only one or two that could not
(relatively) easily be done post picture taking.

I’m no photographer by the way – I just wonder why
people buy these things for digitals.

Daniella3d wrote:

Hi,

I am looking to buy a tiffen double fog filter as i read that this
filter will create the same effect as in real fog, with forground
objects clearer than objects in the background.

This is interesting as the usual fog filter is making everything
foggy, foreground or background the same.

I was wondering if anyone tried the double fog filter and if so, is
it possible to see some samples?

thanks

The double fog filter cost only 25$..dunno where you got that price. I looked at B&H and they sale it for 27$

The image there is not a representation of the real double fog filter. Yes the samples images on Tiffen web site are small but if you blow up these in editing program and look at details..you will see what you already can see in the small thumbnails..the foreground is definitly not so foggy and whashed out in color.

Also i have a regular fog filter and took a sample picture with it...it is not as blurred as the image they showing on B&H.

They don't specify what filter they use to do this...they wrote simulation but did they use a post processing effect or simply used this image as a general fog sample..because if you take a look, they are using the same sample for both regular fog and double fog..but these 2 filters are very different.

So what make you think the image they showing is postprocessing?

Daniella

Clicker wrote:

The image I linked to is from B&H and a $150 Double Fog filter! I
realize the image is small.. but your Tiffen images are smaller
yet! lol

Good luck with the filter and please post some shots!
--
Clicker
C-2100 UZI, C-2020, B-300, B Macro

Seem to me you have a dilike for post-processing. And that's fine by me. keep on buying the filters You seem to miss the points where I say SOME filters are good. --shrug-- Not really sure what you're getting hot about.

You also might want to spend some time with software - because I'm sorry - there is a LOT you can do with it - beyond color filters. In fcat - software will do things NO filter can do.

As for what's "real" - none of it is "real" - it's a PICTURE. A bunch of pixels. Sheesh.

Daniella3d wrote:

So far i got a Polarizer, and that is impossible to fake with post
processing, especially for removing the reflection on the glass or
water surface.

Here is a quick shot i just took with the Tiffen Fogalizer filter. I paid only 12$ for this filter, but its not exactly what i am looking for.

Although i think there is some part that cannot be faked with a postprocessing..as you can see the text remain sharp..not blurred. The halo around lighter object is more foggy than in darker area also. When you use a postprocessing filter it will add the effect with a uniformity that does not look natural and will probably be blurred as well.

I want the double fog because it is also making a difference with the distance, jut like real fog.

The fog fiilter i have is making a difference with light intensity in different area of the image but it does not make any difference for distance, the double fog will make that difference.

If you can find me a postprocessing filter that will do that, i am more than willing to try it, just let me know what i can download it!

Here is a sample with the regular fog filter, the Tiffen Fogalizer, 52mm 12$

Daniella

Clicker wrote:

The image I linked to is from B&H and a $150 Double Fog filter! I
realize the image is small.. but your Tiffen images are smaller
yet! lol

Good luck with the filter and please post some shots!
--
Clicker
C-2100 UZI, C-2020, B-300, B Macro

This will be my last post in this thread since things seem to be getting a bit heated – and I’m having to repeat myself. Getting a fogging effect WITHOUT blurring the characters would be easy to do with LAYERS and MASKING. There are misting/fogging filters out there that could help with the rest – or a mix of opacity and blur. This type of thing is – in my opinion – perfect use for post-picture taking. Therefore I state categorically – of course this could be done in software! I wouldn’t pay a dollar for that filter – it is far too easily done in software. But that’s me – I was a computer guy first – so I guess I’m more comfortable with a software solution. Purists from analog cameras probably prefer filters. What is definitely true is that a hybrid of both is probably optimal – since no single solution will do everything. I simply have not come across instances where the software has not been able to realize my ultimate goal. I have stated elsewhere that my C3000 lacks a decent zoom for instance, and the same would apply to macro capability. So yeah, I can see a new lens would help with that (though a new lens in this case isn’t really a “filter”, is it?)

What if I want to use that image WITHOUT fog? If you used a filter – you cannot. With something like Photoshop or Paint Shop Pro – you could. That was my only point. As I stated before – you seem to like the filters and have an aversion to post-production software. And that’s okay! You seem to think “digital darkrooms” (which they are often called) is a limited field – it’s far from it – and extend way beyond filters in re-interpreting and presenting photographic art. But that’s just my opinion. To me every picture I take is not only an image within itself but also material for future work in software.

I’m not sure how I’m supposed to comment on the picture you’ve posted. It’s nice – but it’s a simple fog – so I can’t fathom the issue. As I said – I’m getting out of this thread now. We could go on like this for days. I’d rather stay friends

Daniella3d wrote:

Here is a quick shot i just took with the Tiffen Fogalizer filter.
I paid only 12$ for this filter, but its not exactly what i am
looking for.

hmm i did not feel like there was a battle going on..sorry if you felt that way.

To answer your post about you cannot remove the fog when you are using filter..well you can surely remove the filter and take the same shot without the filter as well. one shot with it and one shot without..instant with and without technique...no software needed

I just found that in some case you just cannot do this in photoshop or other software.

as example, lets say you have a tree in front and you wish the scene to look natural? You would then want to have the leaves of that tree more colorfull and cleared than what's in background..that's called distance cue i think.

Well i don,t know about you, but its not my idea of fun to spend hours trying to make the fog heavier in between each and everylittle leaves...or using the selection tool to try to isolate the background from foreground so i can make it in denser fog...

Most of my shots have tree in front or object closer so that's a problem in post processing. I am also a computer person and quite good with Photoshop...just don't want to spend days doing this

I will surely post photo taken with the double fog when i have it, so you can see the result and judge after that.

Daniella

David Watts wrote:
This will be my last post in this thread since things seem to be
getting a bit heated – and I’m having to repeat myself.
Getting a fogging effect WITHOUT blurring the characters would be
easy to do with LAYERS and MASKING. There are misting/fogging
filters out there that could help with the rest – or a mix of
opacity and blur. This type of thing is – in my opinion
– perfect use for post-picture taking. Therefore I state
categorically – of course this could be done in software! I
wouldn’t pay a dollar for that filter – it is far too
easily done in software. But that’s me – I was a
computer guy first – so I guess I’m more comfortable
with a software solution. Purists from analog cameras probably
prefer filters. What is definitely true is that a hybrid of both
is probably optimal – since no single solution will do
everything. I simply have not come across instances where the
software has not been able to realize my ultimate goal. I have
stated elsewhere that my C3000 lacks a decent zoom for instance,
and the same would apply to macro capability. So yeah, I can see a
new lens would help with that (though a new lens in this case
isn’t really a “filter”, is it?)

What if I want to use that image WITHOUT fog? If you used a filter
– you cannot. With something like Photoshop or Paint Shop
Pro – you could. That was my only point. As I stated before
– you seem to like the filters and have an aversion to
post-production software. And that’s okay! You seem to
think “digital darkrooms” (which they are often called)
is a limited field – it’s far from it – and
extend way beyond filters in re-interpreting and presenting
photographic art. But that’s just my opinion. To me every
picture I take is not only an image within itself but also material
for future work in software.

I’m not sure how I’m supposed to comment on the picture
you’ve posted. It’s nice – but it’s a
simple fog – so I can’t fathom the issue. As I said
– I’m getting out of this thread now. We could go on
like this for days. I’d rather stay friends

Daniella3d wrote:

Here is a quick shot i just took with the Tiffen Fogalizer filter.
I paid only 12$ for this filter, but its not exactly what i am
looking for.

Hi Mike,

Yes i will surely take tons of them when i'll get the filter. I just love fog photos.

I paid 26$ for the filter at http://www.cameraworld.com not so bad price i think.

Mike W wrote:
Daniella3d,

I have been interested in this filter also. If you get one, please
post a pic to share with us.

I've read all the posts. Not surprised it turned to kind of debate.
Obviously, one must balance between what one can do with a filter
and in software. I've thought of purchasing this filter so I could
see the effect I want through the LCD immediately, rather than
fidgeting in software later. As filters go, I have UV, polarizer,
and star. I would like to also soon purchase a ND filter to lower
shutter speeds, a grey graduated filter to make sky darker without
affecting landscape beneath, and perhaps the dbl fog filter! I
spend enough time post processing my pics already. It's nice to let
filters do some of the work!

Mike W
==========

Daniella3d wrote:

Hi,

I am looking to buy a tiffen double fog filter as i read that this
filter will create the same effect as in real fog, with forground
objects clearer than objects in the background.

This is interesting as the usual fog filter is making everything
foggy, foreground or background the same.

I was wondering if anyone tried the double fog filter and if so, is
it possible to see some samples?

thanks