Comments on: Adobe Photoshop Lightroom vs. Polarizing Filter

By: Dan

Dan — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 23:00:42 +0000

Great tutorial thanks. I’m about to go and take photos of a classic car show so these tips are going to help as I don’t have a polarizing filter for my wide angle lens yet.

By: Ron

Ron — Sat, 04 Jun 2011 00:10:34 +0000

I live in the San Francisco Bay Area and decided to drive to Yosemite National Park for rather long day-trip one Saturday a couple of weeks ago. I took my Nikon D300 and my Nikkor 18-200 zoom lens. It was a rather odd day weatherwise…..sun. part sun, mostly clouds, fog and even snow (on the way home!). The waterfalls were the big attraction this year. I took quite a few shots of the falls, the Merced River, etc. When I got home and loaded the pics on my computer, I found that there were very serious exposure issues with the very bright white water scenes ……especially when coupled with the dark greens and yellow greens of the trees in the scenes. Bottom line……I did NOT have my digital polarizing filter with me….but I actually didn’t even think of is while I was take the photos. The result is that I don’t remember having such a challenging time editing many of these photos because the whites are literally “blown out” in many of the photos. I’ve played with Lightroom 3 and Aperture 3 and got the best result with Aperture 3 (perhaps I just haven’t how to use all of the tools in either of the applications). So, next time I’ll be trying the polarizing filter to see how such scenes come out.

By: rmvandy

rmvandy — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 00:24:05 +0000

Pardon my late arrival,Abhishek. Yes, you can hold a larger filter against the camera’s lens. It’s a problem with self-focusing lenses in that the front may move in and out to focus, and pressing against such a lens might harm the mechanics. Do not hold the filter too far from the lens, or light can reflect in from the edges and spoil the quality. (I had a few filters I’d bought for my large, old SLR telephoto, and often would hold them in front of the kit lens. It was awfully awkward, because I had to press this lever to engage the light meter, and rotate that ring for f-stop or twist the knob for shutter speed, plus focus — all while holding the polarizer at the proper angle. Much easier with automatics!)

Judy: You must be a dentist! Well, I’m not. But: The front of the tooth will reflect the flash, and perhaps overpower any internal reflections that illuminate the structure. (I guess it equally reflects your surgical lamp, huh?) What if you used a fiberoptic lamp (such as used for hardening resins) to backlight the teeth? It would require experimentation. Or post a query with your regional dental association.

And Scott: I agree with you, and Wikipedia has the facts here for disbelievers (be sure to see the bottom). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarizing_filter_(Photography)
I see this error almost everywhere. So many people who have non-SLR cameras buy circular polarizers when they could pay much less for a standard PL and get the same effect. Oh, and saving a half to a whole f-stop.

By: Abhishek Mishra

Abhishek Mishra — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 17:24:09 +0000

I have a question about using the polarizing filter. I have a Hoya 52mm circular filter that my father used with his Nikon SLR. I have a point&shoot – Fujifilm FinePix S2000HD. The filter is just a bit larger than the camera lens and fits like a lens cover. However I have to hold it in place. What I wanted to know is whether the filter would still work if used in this fashion? And any idea as to how best use it? Should I first focus and then place the filter or should I hold the filter on the lens while focusing??

By: indra satriani

indra satriani — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 16:54:43 +0000

i use both

By: judy mallen

judy mallen — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 06:36:43 +0000

im interested in getting more clearity in my photos of teeth ,top of the line canon with ring lens. but the internal characteristics of the tooth are not very notiable. thought polarization would be the key.

By: linty

linty — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 18:01:33 +0000

Polarizing filters are the among the few exceptions to the rule (along with neutral density filters and some special effect filters). Most filters are better applied digitally when using digital cameras. It’s a bit complicated, but look up a bayer filter on wikipedia and you will see the pattern that most cameras use in capturing light. Individual pixels on the sensor are filtered to be sensitive to either red, green, or blue light. These pixels are arranged by color sensitivity into a grid. Using algorithms the camera (or raw processing software) gives each pixel a final color which based partly on the colors of neighboring pixels.

in effect, applying a colored filter to a digital camera changes the incoming light (by removing information) in a way that the algorithms aren’t designed to process. It will usually still produce a decent picture but if you are able to photograph in raw (which is likely if your camera accepts filters) then you’d be better off applying most filters digitally.

By: Scott in Japan

Scott in Japan — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 06:51:52 +0000

I think you should clarify what exactly a circular polarizer is. IE: L-PL filters vs C-PL filters. A circular polarizer is not called a circular polarizer because of its shape or that it spins. Please do some research on the matter.

By: JHG

JHG — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 11:18:46 +0000

Very interesting thread and article. Since I’ve just purchased myself a 77mm Hoya Linear Polariser with a circular scale, I’m even more keen on saving more time on computer and spend it more outside shooting! Just that finding a 77mm is not that easy, but I got it for less than 70USD brand new! Now it will stay on my Sigma 10-20mm for long!
Cheers
Julien

By: Vimal

Vimal — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:37:43 +0000

Though Photoshop can create wonders, it can not do everything the polarizer can do eg. the polarized under water, behind the glass etc. So I suggest the use of polarizer.