Tiffen 77GG1 77mm Glimmer Glass 1 Filter

Product Information

People say that Glimmer Glass gives the most sharpness, I can’t really tell myself. The two Tiffen filters seem equally sharp, Cinebloom maybe a bit less sharp (maybe).

Earlier we saw flare from the filter and here it is again, though brighter and clearer. And again we see that it is not even—is there something in the flare? And there is—a picture of the Moon. With greatly reduced exposure the details of its surface are clear, the focused light having bounced off the flat filter in some way. There’s a coolness factor here that cannot be denied. I will try to demonstrate some of those digital effects here sometime in the not too far future. Let‘s see how it turns out. Sometimes the result is similar to what the Orton effect is achieving, the major difference is, that the Orton effect affects bright and dark parts of the frame alike, whereas the diffusion filters emphasize the brighter parts.Even after I introduced the thought that we were looking at sharpness, even after I set the stage, were your first thoughts when you looked at the images about sharpness? Or were they about color, about the ocean, and most of all about the dolphins? But one has more freedom for further creative modifications if the base itself is very solid. You can blur any sharp image, but the other way only works in action movies where crops of single frames of 240p/12fps surveillance cameras magically sharpen up to the same quality as if that cropped area was taken with a slightly stopped down 400mm/2.8. More Samples Sony A7III | 28mm | Tiffen Glimmerglass1 Sony A7III | 28mm | Tiffen Glimmerglass1 Sony A7III | 28mm | Tiffen Glimmerglass1 Sony A7III | Laowa 35mm 0.95 | f/0.95 | K&F Diffusion 1/2 Sony A7III | Laowa 35mm 0.95 | f/0.95 | K&F Diffusion 1/2 Sony A7III | Laowa 35mm 0.95 | f/0.95 | K&F Diffusion 1/2 Sony A7III | Laowa 35mm 0.95 | f/2.8 | K&F Diffusion 1/2 Sony A7III | Laowa 35mm 0.95 | f/0.95 | K&F Diffusion 1/2 Further Reading

For the displayed use cases (e.g. in the city) those filters reviewed here may be the smarter choice than a undercorrected lens or software based solutions as the results seem to be nicer. That’s why the errors occur but why do they keep them? Why doesn’t the director of the film just reshoot the scene, especially with a big-budget film? The reason is that sharpness is not the be-all, end-all deciding factor in the success of a scene. There are a host of things going on and a little unsharpness can be easily overlooked if the overall sense of the scene is powerful, if the actors did something really special, if all of the complex camera movements, lighting, everything, all came together to cast some magical spell, some primordial connection between the filmmaker and the audience. Or sometimes filmmakers just didn’t notice (they review scenes during the shooting on monitors that are much smaller than the big screen) or they noticed but they’d already moved on to something else. And sharp they are. Lenses are judged now by enlarging an image on a screen to 100%—image pixel per screen pixel—at a size and a viewing distance few images are ever seen at—and the best lenses pass the test, exhibiting a crystal clear resolution that can bring childish mirth to your face. It’s fun, in a way, to see that little detail in the photo now clearly visible after tapping the zoom-in button. It makes you want to zoom in on every image, test every lens to see how sharp it is under maximum magnification. Taking pictures in the dark with point light sources in the frame the effect is also similar to what you get when shooting analogue Cinestill 800T film.There’s a slight mist in the air here—actual water vapor, not residual smoke from the forest fires—which gives its own diffusion filter effect in the light. This is greatly augmented by the filter, as you can see, creating a glow all across the houses in this small town. It’s worth noting that Glimmerglass comes in several strengths—the one I am using here is the weakest.

That small dot between the bloom of the Moon and the flare spot is not another flare spot. It is Mars, a little over-exposed into white but hints of red remain at its edges. As this time Mars rises with the night and Jupiter and Saturn pair up higher in the sky—you can see several of Jupiter’s moons and Saturn’s rings with ordinary binoculars—the Moon racing by them and then leaving them as the month goes on. But there are situations where doing everything in software isn‘t viable or simply not wanted. First, if you shoot video, it will cause very heavy workloads in post. Second, if you shoot on film…well, that‘s obvious. Third, if you‘re a purist and don‘t want to treat every image in post, or if you try to improve your “analogue” photographic skills. I have never been a huge fan of these so called “effect filters” but my friend Simeon Kolev showed a few cool pictures where he used these Diffusion filters to good effect, so I decided to give it a try. All the photos are shot with the Fujifilm X-T3 + Fujifilm XF 35mm f2.0 R WR on a tripod. Test #1 – Statue at Vestre Cemetery If I read it another way, it may be that the model is supposed to see the "Sparkle" in the filter - and that is supposed give the model the added confidence (?) Might be cheaper to just glue some glitter to the front of your camera?The quality and taste of the whole dish are limited by the worst ingredients. For that reason I would never use a wine for cooking that I would not dare to drink pure.