stickyfilters anyone? (flash gels)

jeffreaux2

I have lately been hearing about these. There is a bit about them in the latest "shutterbug" in the new products article.

I was curious if anyone has tried them, and if so what you thought about them. It seems they have solved the age old question....how to attatch to a speedlight......

There is also a lifetime replacement.

Here is their web link.

www.stickyfilters.com

Nikolai

jeffreaux2 wrote:

I have lately been hearing about these. There is a bit about them in the latest "shutterbug" in the new products article.

I was curious if anyone has tried them, and if so what you thought about them. It seems they have solved the age old question....how to attatch to a speedlight......

There is also a lifetime replacement.

Here is their web link.

www.stickyfilters.com

Interesting idea! Thank you for sharing!

Andy

We're checking out Phoxle right now

http://phoxle.homestead.com/Products.html

jeffreaux2

Andy wrote:

We're checking out Phoxle right now

http://phoxle.homestead.com/Products.html

"We're checking out".... as in a deal for Smugmuggers?

Or are you trying their products?

Do they also offer a lifetime replacement?

I do outdoor portraiture, and prefer to work in shade. I have found a 1/2 CT Blue Lee filter to be especially useful for fill on my 580. I recently tried a 1/4 CT Blue Roscoe, but was not pleased with the results. I am wanting to begin experimenting with matching flash to indoor lighting as well. My hope is that one of these vendors has something in 1/2 CT Blue that I can use now, as well as a selection sufficient for indoor work.

Keep me posted. Especially if you are testing!!!

Also, I have been tempted to get one of the over the lens WB tools on the market but have stayed away because of price. I usually use the thin white foamy stuff my XTi came wrapped in. Hey...it works!!!

Nikolai

Andy wrote:

We're checking out Phoxle right now

http://phoxle.homestead.com/Products.html

Nice!
However I couldn't find out from their website, is their filter size matching only small hot-shoe flash units (e.g. Canon 580), or they provide some slack for bigger ones (like SunPak 555, 622, etc)?

ChrisP6

Phoxle Flash Match vs 1/2 CTB Filter

jeffreaux2 wrote:

"We're checking out".... as in a deal for Smugmuggers?

Or are you trying their products?

Do they also offer a lifetime replacement?

I do outdoor portraiture, and prefer to work in shade. I have found a 1/2 CT Blue Lee filter to be especially useful for fill on my 580. I recently tried a 1/4 CT Blue Roscoe, but was not pleased with the results. I am wanting to begin experimenting with matching flash to indoor lighting as well. My hope is that one of these vendors has something in 1/2 CT Blue that I can use now, as well as a selection sufficient for indoor work.

Keep me posted. Especially if you are testing!!!

Also, I have been tempted to get one of the over the lens WB tools on the market but have stayed away because of price. I usually use the thin white foamy stuff my XTi came wrapped in. Hey...it works!!!

Jeffreaux2, The Phoxle Flash Match 6500K->8000K filter is close to the 1/2 CTB you've been using, and yes, it's designed to make fill flash in shade look more natural. There's also a 6500K->10000K filter that's close to a 3/4 CTB filter for matching even bluer skies. Phoxle doesn't offer a life-time replacement, but the filters are good for 100+ installations in clean conditions. Hope that helps. Chris (Phoxle Founder).

ChrisP6

Nikolai wrote:

Nice!
However I couldn't find out from their website, is their filter size matching only small hot-shoe flash units (e.g. Canon 580), or they provide some slack for bigger ones (like SunPak 555, 622, etc)?

Nikolai, the current Phoxle Flash Match Filters are designed to fit inside the bezel of the Canon 550/580EX flashes, and over the bezel of the smaller flashes like the Canon 420/430EX. The Nikon SB800 is something in between the two, so it covers that as well. The actual dimensions are 1 5/16" x 3 3/16". It would be fairly easy to make larger sizes if there's enough market pull. Thanks for the interest Chris (Phoxle Founder).

jeffreaux2

ChrisP6 wrote:

Jeffreaux2, The Phoxle Flash Match 6500K->8000K filter is close to the 1/2 CTB you've been using, and yes, it's designed to make fill flash in shade look more natural. There's also a 6500K->10000K filter that's close to a 3/4 CTB filter for matching even bluer skies. Phoxle doesn't offer a life-time replacement, but the filters are good for 100+ installations in clean conditions. Hope that helps. Chris (Phoxle Founder).

It seems that your 6500-8000 would fall somewhere between the Lee 1/2 and 3/4 CT Blue filters. Do you have a sample of this particular filter...even if it is not "sticky". Or, if it is a standard Roscoe color I would have something to compare with to see if it would work for me.

Is there a way to purchase other than PayPal?

Thanks for the info.

Nikolai

ChrisP6 wrote:

Nikolai, the current Phoxle Flash Match Filters are designed to fit inside the bezel of the Canon 550/580EX flashes, and over the bezel of the smaller flashes like the Canon 420/430EX. The Nikon SB800 is something in between the two, so it covers that as well. The actual dimensions are 1 5/16" x 3 3/16". It would be fairly easy to make larger sizes if there's enough market pull. Thanks for the interest Chris (Phoxle Founder).

Wow, that's you! Nice to see a familiar face behind a brand!:-)
Thank you for the info!
I will check my sunpak dimensions and get back on this.

ChrisP6

jeffreaux2 wrote:

It seems that your 6500-8000 would fall somewhere between the Lee 1/2 and 3/4 CT Blue filters. Do you have a sample of this particular filter...even if it is not "sticky". Or, if it is a standard Roscoe color I would have something to compare with to see if it would work for me.

Is there a way to purchase other than PayPal?

Thanks for the info.

Yes, you can pay with credit cards. If you click on the pay with paypal button, you can pay with a credit card or with paypal.

I don't have a "sample" program per se, but the product is very affordable.

Also, regarding the approximate CTB equivalents, thanks for getting me to double-check this. I just ran the MIRED calcs and compared them to the Rosco website data for their filters. Here they are:
* Phoxle 6500K --> 8000K is a -28.8 MIRED shift, close to the 1/4 CTB which has a -30 MIRED shift
* Phoxle 6500K --> 10000K is a -54 MIRED shift, close to the 1/3 CTB which has a -49 MIRED shift.

Hope that helps. Chris

jeffreaux2

ChrisP6 wrote:

Yes, you can pay with credit cards. If you click on the pay with paypal button, you can pay with a credit card or with paypal.

I don't have a "sample" program per se, but the product is very affordable.

Also, regarding the approximate CTB equivalents, thanks for getting me to double-check this. I just ran the MIRED calcs and compared them to the Rosco website data for their filters. Here they are:
* Phoxle 6500K --> 8000K is a -28.8 MIRED shift, close to the 1/4 CTB which has a -30 MIRED shift
* Phoxle 6500K --> 10000K is a -54 MIRED shift, close to the 1/3 CTB which has a -49 MIRED shift.

Hope that helps. Chris

Not sure either would produce what I am used to obtaining with the Lee Filter.

It is a -78 MIRED shift

ChrisP6

jeffreaux2 wrote:

Not sure either would produce what I am used to obtaining with the Lee Filter.

It is a -78 MIRED shift

Interesting -- when I looked up the 1/2 CTB at Lee it showed the same as Rosco: -68 MIRED shift. Still it's more than the -54 the Phoxle Flash Match Filter produces. I'd be keen to know if you really need the 68 (or 78). If so, maybe we should make it. Chris

jeffreaux2

This is what I have been using....





For results such as this....

BenA2

Red tint in warming filters?
Hi Chris,

I'm happy to see your Flash Matching Filter product line. I've been waiting for someone to put color correcting gels in a speedlite photographer-friendly form factor for some time.

One question: I and others find using Canon speedlites with a standard CTO gel results in an unatural red cast. This is difficult to correct for, even when adjusting white balance in RAW conversion, when the flash is used in mixed lighting conditions. So, I instead use CTS gels to balance with tungsten, since they are on the yellower side.

Can you comment on whether your warming filters are tinted toward the red side like CTOs or toward the yellow side like CTSs?

Thanks

ChrisP6

Jeff,

Well I'll be -- that's certainly a 78 MIRED 1/2 CTB filter, and your results are beautiful! It looks to me like you might be pushing the flash to a point a little bluer than the ambient light, but that has the effect of warming the background if you balance for the flash. Whatever it is, it looks great. I think you may have just convinced me to put the bluer filter into the set in our next production run. It would be a 6500K-->13000K filter (which is close to a 14000K filter I've prototyped before).

I'm curious, how are you doing your white balance? Are you using custom-white balance off of a target for the flash plus filter & diffuser? Something else?

Chris

jeffreaux2

ChrisP6 wrote:

Jeff,


I'm curious, how are you doing your white balance? Are you using custom-white balance off of a target for the flash plus filter & diffuser? Something else?

Chris

No, nothing that technical I'm afraid. It's a little more "seat -of-the-pants" than that. I usually set daylight, or shade WB in camera(whichever looks best to me), and then make adjustments by sight in Lightroom....to my own tastes which may or may not produce a true white. I tend to like some warmth in images more often than not.

ChrisP6

BenA2 wrote:

Hi Chris,

I'm happy to see your Flash Matching Filter product line. I've been waiting for someone to put color correcting gels in a speedlite photographer-friendly form factor for some time.

One question: I and others find using Canon speedlites with a standard CTO gel results in an unatural red cast. This is difficult to correct for, even when adjusting white balance in RAW conversion, when the flash is used in mixed lighting conditions. So, I instead use CTS gels to balance with tungsten, since they are on the yellower side.

Can you comment on whether your warming filters are tinted toward the red side like CTOs or toward the yellow side like CTSs?

Thanks

Ben -- good question. I did a little looking at the Rosco spectra and the Phoxle spectra, and shot some test shots through the CTO, CTS and Phoxle filters. The quick answer is that the Phoxle filters are more like the CTO filters, but they aren't the same. Filters all have their own personalities, just like flashes and cameras. I'm not sure which of these (camera, flash or filter) is the reason for the unatural red cast you mentioned, but I'd have thought it could be dealt with through a custom white-balance setting. In my own work, I'm usually bouncing a filtered flash off of the ceiling (who knows what color that will be), so I usually do a custom white-balance of the flash bounced off of the ceiling using the Phoxle SpectraSnap, and that takes care of things. If I'm shooting direct, then I do a custom WB of the filtered flash off of a Lastolite target.

Thanks again for the input, I'll keep an eye out for more information on the CTS filter preference for Canon flash filters.

Chris

jeffreaux2

ChrisP6 wrote:

Jeff,

Well I'll be -- that's certainly a 78 MIRED 1/2 CTB filter, and your results are beautiful! It looks to me like you might be pushing the flash to a point a little bluer than the ambient light, but that has the effect of warming the background if you balance for the flash. Whatever it is, it looks great. I think you may have just convinced me to put the bluer filter into the set in our next production run. It would be a 6500K-->13000K filter (which is close to a 14000K filter I've prototyped before).

Chris

I made my choice on this gel at first by thinking it would add 1100K to my flash's temp. Is this a faulty assumption? Either way I have been happy with the results.

ChrisP6

jeffreaux2 wrote:

I made my choice on this gel at first by thinking it would add 1100K to my flash's temp. Is this a faulty assumption? Either way I have been happy with the results.

It depends on what your starting flash correlated color temperature is. If your flash is 5000K, then a -78 MIRED shift will shift it to about 8200K, adding 3200K. If your flash is 6000K, then it will shift it to about 11200K, adding 5200K. I've measured my Canon 550EX using a spectraphotometer and it comes in at around 6000K to 6500K depending on the power -- shorter flashes result in higher correlated color temperatures.

The way to figure the CCT shift is to start with the definition of MIRED:

MIRED = 1M/(color temp in degrees K).

So, for example, the MIRED number for my 550EX at Full Power is 1M/6000 or 167. Subtract 78 and you get the MIRED number for the flash through your 1/2 CTB filter, or about 89. Using a little algebra, and solving for color temp, we can find the temp of the filtered flash will be 1M/89, which is 11235K.

Hope that helps and isn't too geeky -- Chris

BenA2

ChrisP6 wrote:

Ben -- good question. I did a little looking at the Rosco spectra and the Phoxle spectra, and shot some test shots through the CTO, CTS and Phoxle filters. The quick answer is that the Phoxle filters are more like the CTO filters, but they aren't the same. Filters all have their own personalities, just like flashes and cameras. I'm not sure which of these (camera, flash or filter) is the reason for the unatural red cast you mentioned, but I'd have thought it could be dealt with through a custom white-balance setting. In my own work, I'm usually bouncing a filtered flash off of the ceiling (who knows what color that will be), so I usually do a custom white-balance of the flash bounced off of the ceiling using the Phoxle SpectraSnap, and that takes care of things. If I'm shooting direct, then I do a custom WB of the filtered flash off of a Lastolite target.

Thanks again for the input, I'll keep an eye out for more information on the CTS filter preference for Canon flash filters.

Chris

I don't have any quantitative evidence to back it up, but people say that the Canon speedlights have a bit more power in the red end of the spectrum than, say, Nikon speedlites. I've never shot whit a Nikon flash, but my experience is that I prefer the CTS on my Canon flashes.

A couple of other details that might be helpful...

- The red tint problem seems to manifest itself more with full CTOs than 1/2 CTOs. I think that's simply a product of the fact that there's more ambient mixing (which reduces the red tint) when I'm shooting with a 1/2 CTO.

- I really only find this to be an anoying problem with skin tones.

- The reason it can't easily be corrected with white balance is that, if I'm shooting with a full CTO, I am, by design, balancing with another light source. So, when I white balance the CTO-illuminated subject, it pushes the rest of the image too far to green. Also, I find that even if I correctly balance the CTO-illuminated subject, if it's a person, there still just seems to be somethong "off" with the skin tone results. Things like this are hard to quantify.

Regardless of this issue, I still look forward to purchasing a set of your flash filters.

ChrisP6

BenA2 wrote:

I don't have any quantitative evidence to back it up, but people say that the Canon speedlights have a bit more power in the red end of the spectrum than, say, Nikon speedlites. I've never shot whit a Nikon flash, but my experience is that I prefer the CTS on my Canon flashes.

A couple of other details that might be helpful...

- The red tint problem seems to manifest itself more with full CTOs than 1/2 CTOs. I think that's simply a product of the fact that there's more ambient mixing (which reduces the red tint) when I'm shooting with a 1/2 CTO.

- I really only find this to be an anoying problem with skin tones.

- The reason it can't easily be corrected with white balance is that, if I'm shooting with a full CTO, I am, by design, balancing with another light source. So, when I white balance the CTO-illuminated subject, it pushes the rest of the image too far to green. Also, I find that even if I correctly balance the CTO-illuminated subject, if it's a person, there still just seems to be somethong "off" with the skin tone results. Things like this are hard to quantify.

Regardless of this issue, I still look forward to purchasing a set of your flash filters.

Cool -- I'll look forward to your feedback when you've had a chance to try the filters.

Thanks again for all of the background above. It's given me more to think about.

jeffreaux2

ChrisP6 wrote:

It depends on what your starting flash correlated color temperature is. If your flash is 5000K, then a -78 MIRED shift will shift it to about 8200K, adding 3200K. If your flash is 6000K, then it will shift it to about 11200K, adding 5200K. I've measured my Canon 550EX using a spectraphotometer and it comes in at around 6000K to 6500K depending on the power -- shorter flashes result in higher correlated color temperatures.

The way to figure the CCT shift is to start with the definition of MIRED:

MIRED = 1M/(color temp in degrees K).

So, for example, the MIRED number for my 550EX at Full Power is 1M/6000 or 167. Subtract 78 and you get the MIRED number for the flash through your 1/2 CTB filter, or about 89. Using a little algebra, and solving for color temp, we can find the temp of the filtered flash will be 1M/89, which is 11235K.

Hope that helps and isn't too geeky -- Chris

No that was not to geeky.

It does make it seem as if I am severely over blueing my flash though.

ChrisP6

jeffreaux2 wrote:

No that was not to geeky.

It does make it seem as if I am severely over blueing my flash though.

Maybe, but remember two things:

1. The amount of color shift we see is more related to the percentage change in degrees Kelvin than the total number of degrees Kelvin, so a change of 750 K on a 3000 K light about the same color shift as 1500 K on a 6000 K light.

2. Shade can be very blue. First of all, by definition, shade is where the direct sun is blocked, and the sun is much redder than the sky. Second, blue light scatters better and penetrates much farther into deep shady places than the red light.

Regardless, you can color balance for the light on your camera whether you shift it a little or a lot, but as you do, the background will go the opposite direction. If you push the flash strongly blue, and balance for it, then the background will get redder. If the background starts out blue (like in shade), then you could end up neutralizing it. If you push the flash more blue than the background, then you could end up with a warmer background. I think I see this in some of your shots, and I like it.

Chris

jeffreaux2

ChrisP6 wrote:

Maybe, but remember two things:

1. The amount of color shift we see is more related to the percentage change in degrees Kelvin than the total number of degrees Kelvin, so a change of 750 K on a 3000 K light about the same color shift as 1500 K on a 6000 K light.

2. Shade can be very blue. First of all, by definition, shade is where the direct sun is blocked, and the sun is much redder than the sky. Second, blue light scatters better and penetrates much farther into deep shady places than the red light.

Regardless, you can color balance for the light on your camera whether you shift it a little or a lot, but as you do, the background will go the opposite direction. If you push the flash strongly blue, and balance for it, then the background will get redder. If the background starts out blue (like in shade), then you could end up neutralizing it. If you push the flash more blue than the background, then you could end up with a warmer background. I think I see this in some of your shots, and I like it.

Chris

Yes you see this in some of my shots. Nearing sundown...when the western sky is already warm, if you park yourself in the shade, blue up the flash, and shoot in the direction of some sunlight the BG highlights will go very warm . That is IF you set WB for the subjects in the forground. It is a nice look at the right time of day.

STP03Bluesi

Sorry to be the idiot of this thread but How does the


Work when its on the front lens? Sorry for the stupid question. I am new to WB/Flash supplies.

ChrisP6

STP03Bluesi wrote:

Sorry to be the idiot of this thread but How does the <picture of Phoxle SpectraSnap white balance filter removed>
Work when its on the front lens?<img src="https://us.v-cdn.net/6029383/emoji/ne_nau.gif&quot; border="0" alt="" > Sorry for the stupid question. I am new to WB/Flash supplies.

There's no such thing as a stupid question. What the filter does is make it easy to take a picture that's all even and the color of the light illuminating a scene. Given that, it's not surprising you can't see anything through it. It looks milky white with a blue-ish correcting coating on one side. Once you've taken a picture (with the camera, lens and filter pointed at the dominant light source), you can set the camera custom white balance to use that image as a reference, and all of the rest of the pictures you take in that environment will have very accurate and neutral color. Basically, what you're doing with custom white balance is helping the camera figure out how much to scale the camera red, green and blue channels to do what your eye and brain do automatically. Hope that helps.

Chris

papajay

another noobie asks...

ChrisP6 wrote:

There's no such thing as a stupid question. What the filter does is make it easy to take a picture that's all even and the color of the light illuminating a scene. Given that, it's not surprising you can't see anything through it. It looks milky white with a blue-ish correcting coating on one side. Once you've taken a picture (with the camera, lens and filter pointed at the dominant light source), you can set the camera custom white balance to use that image as a reference, and all of the rest of the pictures you take in that environment will have very accurate and neutral color. Basically, what you're doing with custom white balance is helping the camera figure out how much to scale the camera red, green and blue channels to do what your eye and brain do automatically. Hope that helps.

Chris

Count me in the "definitely an amateur" group, but learning more all the time. I've looked at your website and believe I'm starting to understand some of the nuances. The "hockey-rink-green" and the "banquet-room-yellow" photos, unfortunately, felt like very familiar home-turf to me.:cry

I just got a flash attachment for my digital "bridge" camera (Leica VLUX1). The flash spec sheet says it has a 5600 deg. K (approx.) output.

Before getting the flash attachment, the RAW photos I took in a gymnasium with my on-camera flash in Auto WB mode were decidedly greenish/yellowish in hue. My Adobe Elements software "pegged" the resulting images' color temperature at around 7500 degrees "as shot", but I found I had to adjust the slider down to about 4800 degrees to get the skin tones looking halfway decent ( even though the background was still somewhat greenish/yellowish).

If I understand your product description, it sounds like I should:
1. Use the over-the-lens snap-filter to get the camera to "see" what the light source(s) in the gym are putting out, and use the camera's custom WB adjust feature to "capture" that information. (Lets assume the "actual" light source is somewhere around that 4800 number, even though I don't really have a way to independently verify that).Then...remove the snap-filter once the custom setting is "set".

2. Next...affix one of your flash filters on the bezel of the flash (either the on-camera flash or my new flash attachment) to match the flash output as close as possible to the "room" temperature.

Is this correct? If so, assuming the flash attachment's starting temperature will have some affect on filter choice) which filter would I apply to my 5600 deg K. flash attachment to best approximate a 4800 degree room?

ChrisP6

Papajay,

Yes -- you've got it. The two steps you outlined should make things look much more natural.

The question of which filter you would use is a little harder to answer. In my extensive testing of on-camera, add-on, and studio flashes, I find that they seldom measure as specified, and are usually more blue (higher color temperature) than they say. What's more, their color temperature will vary with the amount of power they output. Having said that, the 6500K --> 5000K filter would take a 5600K flash down to about 4300K, which isn't a bad match. If your flash is actually 6000K, then it would take it down to around 4600K. The best thing to do is experiment by going a little warmer or cooler and see how you like it.

Regards,
Chris

papajay

ChrisP6 wrote:

Papajay,

Yes -- you've got it. The two steps you outlined should make things look much more natural.

The question of which filter you would use is a little harder to answer. In my extensive testing of on-camera, add-on, and studio flashes, I find that they seldom measure as specified, and are usually more blue (higher color temperature) than they say. What's more, their color temperature will vary with the amount of power they output. Having said that, the 6500K --> 5000K filter would take a 5600K flash down to about 4300K, which isn't a bad match. If your flash is actually 6000K, then it would take it down to around 4600K. The best thing to do is experiment by going a little warmer or cooler and see how you like it.

Regards,
Chris

Thanks Chris...I think I'll be ordering your product(s).

ChrisP6

papajay wrote:

Thanks Chris...I think I'll be ordering your product(s).

Great! Don't hesitate to ask if you have more questions when you get going.

papajay

ChrisP6 wrote:

Great! Don't hesitate to ask if you have more questions when you get going.

Glad you "offered". OK, I reviewed your technical dissertations on your website, and while some of it makes sense to this old engineer, some of it is beyond my current ability to fully comprehend.

That being said, I'm curious about the technique for using the snap-filter in particular for setting the custom white balance on my camera. In looking at the photo in the banquet room for the wedding reception, you mention the multiple light sources (Fluorescents and Christmas lights)...the fluorescents are certainly in the ceiling, and the xmas lights are more likely on the tree at waist level, and perhaps strung along walls, etc.

It seems to me that the most logical orientation for aiming the camera with the strap-filter affixed over the lens would be at the light reflected off the subject...the empty (no people) room of tables in this case... rather than at the light source (fluorescents up in the ceiling).

I didn't really understand the technical stuff relating to "off-axis" angles...which seemed to suggest that setting the WB by directly aiming the camera at the light source is the correct procedure. That just doesn't seem practical in the typical multi-source environment. Why would I want to point the camera at the ceiling to get the WB when my subjects are on or near the floor, and seen by the camera as reflected, rather than direct, light?

Can you clarify, please?