It also cuts out blue, if it is a true green filter.
And that's why it's green.
Here are the opposites:
C M Y < Secondary colors or subtractive colors
R G B < Primary colors or additive colors
So, a filter that passes red appears red and a filter that cuts red appears cyan. A filter that passes blue appears blue and a filter that cuts blue appears yellow.
The best blue passing filter is a WR98 (or WR99, sorry OTOMH I have forgotten - sorry). The best red passing filter is a WR70.
There are no sharp cutting dense secondary color filters.
PE
If it were that simple, ortho films would not be made.
Look at the transmission curves of blue filters.
Look at the information data for available pan films.
Calculate the effect of blue filters on pan films.
Look at the information data for available ortho films.
They are very different.
What needs to be explained?
Steve
A blue and green filter superposed passes nothing since they block light that each passes.
PE
???
A blue filter will actually pass m & c
and green...... will pass both y & c
So, c should get through,
the result being cyan which blocks R
Cyan is "cyanish" and is not related to blue in any way being subtractive, since blue is additive.
In any event, a blue filter, seen in block form, reaches from 400 - 500 nm and passes only blue light, not blue and green. Therefore it is not an "ortho" friendly filter. [...]
I am thinking spectrum. Contained in that spectrum are the Additive and Subtractive colors which behave differently when viewed by transmission or reflection.
Since we are talking about film here, and not a spectrum, a film is "tri color", even a B&W film.
A sharp cutting Wratten blue filter does not pass green light. And, a blue sensitized film does not see green light. If you add something to the blue sensitive film to see green then it is ortho. How much green it sees depends on the amount of additive present. If you are giving this film a WR blue filtered exposure however, you will not see any change in sensitivity. If you give it a WR green exposure you will see an increase in sensitivity.
Since magenta is a combination of Blue and Red at opposite ends of the spectrum, it falls off the norm and is not easily represented on CIE charts or by other methods of describing color other than by being anti-green. Of course we see it. Just as we see yellow which is a combination of Red and Green.
PE
Depending on how "blue" a blue filter is, it may pass only wavelengths shorter than a certain cut-off wavelength in the short end of the spectrum.
Magenta, being a mix of the opposite ends of the spectrum, will certainly be lost.
You said Magenta is not a part of the spectrum.
Is this true? I mean REALLY true.
I THINK it might be more accurate to say that magenta,
unlike some other colors,
cannot be represented by a single wavelength
nor a single very narrow band of contiguous wavelengths...
Never the less, I wonder how closely this matters, as gold and silver might also be considered not part of the spectrum (?) yet as a photographer, one might need to deal with imaging both magenta and gold....
"cannot be represented by a single wavelength nor a single very narrow band of contiguous wavelengths..." defines a color as not being in the spectrum.
Steve
I suspect a blue which passes no magenta would technically
not be blue any longer but rather... "cyan".
and this goes back to your earlier use of the term "blueish" to describe "cyanish"....
You said Magenta is not a part of the spectrum.
Is this true? I mean REALLY true.
I THINK it might be more accurate to say that magenta,
unlike some other colors,
cannot be represented by a single wavelength
nor a single very narrow band of contiguous wavelengths...
This is the CIE chart used by EK and others for color rendition.
As you can see, it stretches from about 400 - 700 nm with Blue and its shades being considered from 400 - 500 nm, Green from 500 - 600 and Red from 600 - 700. This encompasses yellow, being a mix of Red and Green and the other colors. Magenta is not on this chart but is represented as points on the lower horizontal(ish) axis of the chart.
Since G = -M, this can be represented directly with no problem in Subtractive systems.
PE
Except that logic leads to the paradoxical situation where removal of what IS there, (ca. 500-530nm ?) creates the presence of something which is still not there, since nothing was "added".
I would prefer to conceptualze it as being there but hidden.
A magenta can be represented by a dye or pigment with an absorption peak centered at about 550 nm. A yellow can be represented by a dye or pigment with an absorption peak centered at about 420 nm, and a cyan dye or pigment would have an absorption peak at about 690 nm.
The half band width of these dyes or pigments represent the "purity" or "hue" of the dye.
OTOH, the additive colors represent only dyes or phosphors, not pigments and are represented by transmission peaks at about those same wavelengths.
So, with subtractive systems you think of density absorbing light, but with additive systems you think of transmission of light.
So, while magenta can only exist as a mix of colors, it can exist as a single dye. Yellow also is a mix of colors but exists as a single dye and etc. Look closely at a TV screen and you will see no yellow dots, but you will see R/G/B and black. Yet you see yellow. BTW, some current screens use a yellow emitter to jazz up yellows. George Takai has been the spokesperson for this new type of 4 emitter screen type.
PE
Please read this first:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_vision
then this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RGB_color_model
You will then see clearly how Red and Green make Yellow (I hope), unless you are distracted by references on Google to the Red Green show if you do your own search!
PE
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?