Re: [Largeformat] Red Dot Artar 14" f:9

["Karl Wolz" <wolzphoto@worldnet.att.net>]

I agree.  You can use some incredibly poor quality stuff in front of the
lens and get away with it.  Not so with the rear, which will project any
flaws directly to your image.

Karl Wolz

----- Original Message -----
From: "Pam Niedermayer" <pam@pinehill.com>
To: <Largeformat@egroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2000 9:13 AM
Subject: Re: [Largeformat] Red Dot Artar 14" f:9


> It seems that many people recommend "behind the lens" filter
> placement; but this confuses me a bit. Logically it would
> seem that placing the filter (whatever kind, I also use
> square gels and/or glass) in front of the lens would provide
> more optical protection from filter scratches, smudges,
> fingerprints, and the like. It seems that those flaws behind
> the lens would get directly projected to the film. Is this
> incorrect? What are the advantages of placing the filter
> between lens and film?
>
> Pam
>
> Lee Carmichael wrote:
> >
> > I use gels for the reasons that they are reasonably cheap
> > and easy to find.  I don't have to buy the same filter in
> > different sizes.  I use them behind the lenses.  To mount
> > them I use some of that  double sticky goo that comes in
> > rolls.  Just a dab and presto the gel is attached and then
> > I remount the lens board and shoot the shot.
> > ...
> --
> Pamela G. Niedermayer
> Pinehill Softworks Inc.
> 1221 S. Congress Ave., #1225
> Austin, TX 78704
> 512-416-1141
> 512-416-1440 fax
> http://www.pinehill.com