Tiffen "Film Look" DV Kit

Kevin Burnfield · June 13th, 2003, 04:14 PM

This is rather weird... I called a couple of usual places and they are telling me that they don't show any of the Ultra Con filters in 72mm except for Ultra Con 3. (and 3 is massive overkill for what I'm doing now)

That's wacked.... they also said that he couldn't get me the Low Con 2 in 72 either.

I put in a call to Tiffen directly but had to leave a message.

Has Tiffen changed the name on them or discontinued them?

Charles Papert · June 14th, 2003, 07:48 PM

Tiffen is still "re-organizing" (aka Chapter 11) so their products are somewhat back-ordered by dealers.

Kevin Burnfield · June 17th, 2003, 12:26 PM

Wow... I've learned a LOT about dealing with Tiffen and getting things from them from a lot of dealers in the last couple of days. UGGGGGGG-----

someone told me that "the company is very badly managed" and things like that.

the great news is that Chris at ZGC was able to find me what I was looking for and set me up.

no 1/2 or 2 but I was able to get a 1.

Thanks for the tips Charles, normally I wouldn't just dive into a new filter and buy it without trying it or seeing it in use but considering how hard it was to find ANYONE that could get it for me I had to.

I'll let you know what I think once I get it.

Any experience with the LOW CON filters?

Charles Papert · June 17th, 2003, 07:30 PM

Low cons lift the shadow areas, but at the cost of a flaring effect in highlights. Generally the problem with digital video is not in murky shadows but in blown-out highlights. I don't feel this is a valuable filter for DV production, myself. The soft cons are perhaps more pertinent, in that they can reduce the highlights somewhat, but will also flare. The Ultracons were a more modern approach to managing dynamic range.

Neil Slade · July 18th, 2003, 06:10 PM

I'm personally not a fan of any of the so-called film-look filters, including those from Tiffen.

Tried them ALL. Gave them a fair trial.

Sent them all back. Bleechh.

All they do is degrade the image, and in a way that you are stuck with forever on tape.

It makes much much more sense to do any of these little modifications in post-production (or in the camera if possible) using decent software, i.e. Vegas Video can do pretty much anything the glass filters do, and you have ultimately more control, and you don't risk messing up your original takes.

Sorry, I've been through the filter thing twice with different cameras, and hated it both times. I was greatly dissapointed myself.

Neil

June 14th, 2003, 07:48 PM	#17
Charles Papert Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 6,810	Tiffen is still "re-organizing" (aka Chapter 11) so their products are somewhat back-ordered by dealers. __________________ Charles Papert www.charlespapert.com

June 17th, 2003, 07:30 PM	#19
Charles Papert Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 6,810	Low cons lift the shadow areas, but at the cost of a flaring effect in highlights. Generally the problem with digital video is not in murky shadows but in blown-out highlights. I don't feel this is a valuable filter for DV production, myself. The soft cons are perhaps more pertinent, in that they can reduce the highlights somewhat, but will also flare. The Ultracons were a more modern approach to managing dynamic range. __________________ Charles Papert www.charlespapert.com

July 18th, 2003, 06:10 PM	#20
Neil Slade Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Denver Posts: 131	Filters, bleechh I'm personally not a fan of any of the so-called film-look filters, including those from Tiffen. Tried them ALL. Gave them a fair trial. Sent them all back. Bleechh. All they do is degrade the image, and in a way that you are stuck with forever on tape. It makes much much more sense to do any of these little modifications in post-production (or in the camera if possible) using decent software, i.e. Vegas Video can do pretty much anything the glass filters do, and you have ultimately more control, and you don't risk messing up your original takes. Sorry, I've been through the filter thing twice with different cameras, and hated it both times. I was greatly dissapointed myself. Neil

June 13th, 2003, 04:14 PM	#16
Kevin Burnfield Major Player Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Princeton, NJ Posts: 363	This is rather weird... I called a couple of usual places and they are telling me that they don't show any of the Ultra Con filters in 72mm except for Ultra Con 3. (and 3 is massive overkill for what I'm doing now) That's wacked.... they also said that he couldn't get me the Low Con 2 in 72 either. I put in a call to Tiffen directly but had to leave a message. Has Tiffen changed the name on them or discontinued them?

June 17th, 2003, 12:26 PM	#18
Kevin Burnfield Major Player Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Princeton, NJ Posts: 363	Wow... I've learned a LOT about dealing with Tiffen and getting things from them from a lot of dealers in the last couple of days. UGGGGGGG----- someone told me that "the company is very badly managed" and things like that. the great news is that Chris at ZGC was able to find me what I was looking for and set me up. no 1/2 or 2 but I was able to get a 1. Thanks for the tips Charles, normally I wouldn't just dive into a new filter and buy it without trying it or seeing it in use but considering how hard it was to find ANYONE that could get it for me I had to. I'll let you know what I think once I get it. Any experience with the LOW CON filters?