Oops - yeah, you're right... :-) I guess it's the 486 filter that I first purchased to solve the IR problem- how about a trade-in for that? ;-)

I know the IR problem is not Schneider's problem and I'm happy to see that they're continuing to work on a solution. I just wish they weren't so problematic...

Sounds good, but many had high hopes for the T1 which has some noticeable tradeoffs.
Having said that, we'll have to wait and see. I certainly hope at this price it fairs well.
I'm looking forward to checking it out Ryan.

I will be testing the filter out within a few weeks (hopefully) and would like to hear more about this fake tan issue. Is it with the spray on tan/creams? Where else is the green most noticeable?

If there are any scenarios anyone wants me to test the new filter out on, please let me know. Leave a message here or send me a PM.

I find the T1 works well when proper WB is taken.

It certainly appears to work. However as I have pointed out, even with a proper WB I'm having problems where the two subjects have fake tans. I get a very slight green tinge on skin highlights. It seems that fake tan reflects UV in a different way to normal skin and its causing very small green tinges.

It's colour correctable, but only at the expense of pushing the rest of the image further towards magenta in the colour wheel than I would like.

That's understandable as red is opposite to green in the color wheel. But I submit that one would have trouble with a fake tanned face no matter what. Even with no far red issues you still would have to decide whether to correct their fake looking tan back to a more natural looking skin tone (which would throw off the rest of the shot's color), or leave it looking fake - which is unsettling to the human eye. I see fake tans on TV often and that orange color really pops whenever an editor saturates the colors at all. It's like trying to correct a clown's face - no can do.

Certainly fake tans pose a problem, but the T1 isn't helping matters at all. I've found it's a difficult colour correction job than requires more thought than the usual correction you'd have with such a tan.

It kind of strengthens my view that the T1 only goes on when absolutely needed.

What in the world is a fake tan, and why are they apparently so common?

My impression is that people complaining about it use the Hisat color matrix (which exaggerates reds), and/or fail to WB properly :)

With Cinema (or even Standard) color matrices, and with good white balance, I've never noticed anything like that.

In response to most issues raised in this thread, please check out my new thread here:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-xdc...s-sensors.html

Ryan Avery
Schneider Optics

For those still looking for a solution to the IR (or far red) contamination problem, here's some pictures showing the effectiveness of the $69 T1 filter.

These were shot in my room, with a mix of a typical home lighting bulbs and my on-camera, 35W tungsten light. Initially, there was no filter, and the WB was set to 2700K - the upper left screen grab shows the black speaker grill evidently contaminated.

Then I just put the T1 filter on - the upper right pic shows the improvement of blacks, with the evident, overall green tint.

The middle row shows how the casual white balancing got rid of the green tint, while the camera CT read-out only changed some 100K - from 2700 to 2800K. It's obvious the mere 100K difference could not improve the WB if simply dialed up in the PP; some specific compensation of each of the RGB channels must have taken place.

The result is shown in the bottom picture; black is black, and there is no green tint.

Of course the same could be achieved with the 486 filter (I used to own one), but at wide angles the green vignetting was impossible to get rid of in post.

The decision on which filter to use is up to you guys - but personally, I invested in both the 77mm screw-in and the 4x5.65" T1 filters, and am happy so far. The light loss is no more than half a stop.

To answer the OP question of this thread: definitely no, I don't keep those filters on permanently - only use them when needed.

Just my $0.2 to consider:)

Saw my first example of a green shirt that went purple on the EX today. The T1 brought it back to green. It was just the director's shirt but it was an eye opener for us all.

One thing though Piotr, with the T1 attached look at what it has done to the colour of the wood and to the walls. All very green and sickly looking. Those are very similar to skin tones, and is one reason I try to avoid using the filter other than when absolutely necessary now.
[Edit] Just seen that it is the bottom picture you had the T1 on. Though I still haven't had great experiences when it comes to peoples faces with the T1

Simon,

Yes it's the bottom picture that shows it corrected. BTW, when you hover the mouse over the pics, their titles tell it all!

Also, the procedure shown with my examples has been very casual - the white balancing should have been done using a proper white card, in the exactly same lighting as the original picture (the speaker).

I had several weak light sources in the room, and to perform WB I just turned the camera 180 degrees for it to look at the white sheet, casually dropped on the sofa. The lighting was definitely not the same as in the direction of the speaker!

I mainly do live performances of classical music - all in rather low and usually rather warm lighting. Without the T1 filter, the colors of musicians' suits would be unacceptable.

Other than that however, I always take the filter off - if only because of rather cumbersome WB procedure needed with every light change, and inability to use WB presets.

Late to the thread apparently...lots of good input here. The suit fabric thing is pretty crazy. I'd also have to agree that imaging fake tans (particularly since everyone who does this seems to completely overdo it) so they look good is a tough gig in general.

I tend to run the T1 all the time. I'm not sure I've noticed any 'murkiness' but that doesn't mean that there isn't any I suppose. I see far less effect from the filter in daylight, so I haven't bothered with putting it on and taking it off.

For me, it seems to make a significant difference what pic profile you may be running... I'm particularly fond of Philip Bloom's setting examples, but if you're trying to stretch to perform in inadequate light with minimal gain, you're better off turning PP to off and doing some CC later. The T1's slight effect on light transmission is more evident when light is at a premium of course.

I'd have to agree with the earlier assertion that lighting with daylight reduces the effect of the far red sensitivity (infra red is actually cut off pretty well in these cameras) to the point where I'd have to admit I really didn't experience the extent of the problem that many did. I try to light with daylight any time it's possible.

What I do find with the T1 is that tungsten-lit scenes have a much more accurate palette (even after color balancing) and the fact that they've made the screw-in version thin enough to fit under the manufacturer lens hood is a significant bit of common sense design. In my opinion, you'd be hard pressed to find a bigger return on a 69.00 USD investment for a first generation EX1 or EX3, than you'll get from a T1 Filter.

...old guys like me who have used Sony gear for decades are just trying to get used to the idea that a Sony camera has a red over-sensitivity... Unless you had a engineer go in and boost the red gamma on most BetaSP camcorders, a really pale Caucasian would need some BA on the key so they didn't look like they were anemic. It was a significant, if not THE significant factor in driving customers to Ikegami cameras.

Now I'm dating myself I suppose.