Kaesemann is a brand name, owned by Schneider.  There was a Kaesemann company, which was purchased by Schneider quite some time ago.  Kaesmann was famous for high quality polarizers and Schneider has maintained the high quality level for the brand. When I was with Schneider, Kaesamann was only available in small round screw-in filters.  I believe that’s still true

I tried a number of times to get my team at Schneider Optics to do AR coating and I always failed to get it done.  I got the same answer as you report.

I have it summed up in my head pretty simply. Polarizers compensate for reflections of light. A linear polarizer will block deflected light from a specific angle. So as you rotate that filter, you can change the source of reflections directly. Circular Polarizers are a more complex system that block out reflections from multiple angles at once. So typically you will get cleaner images through office windows and on water and such but you have to play around a bit more to find the exact position of the filter for the best result.

You may well want to remove enough reflection that you can see through the window or windshield, but not so much that the glass disappears . . .

s-polarizationvsppolarization

The polarizer, either circular or linear, allows management of polarized light in the scene. Effects include providing deeper blue sky and more dramatically white clouds; reducing or eliminating reflections from the surfaces of windows or water; increasing color saturation of certain objects in bright sunlight; and so on. The difference is that the circular polarizer, as mentioned earlier, actually serves to, in effect, depolarize the light after the polarizer layer has done its job for image management, and before the light enters the camera. This was initially offered years ago as a solution to the then-new auto-focus/auto-exposure cameras that bounced light off a partially silvered mirror, or beamsplitter, within the camera that directed some of the light to the sensor that determined exposure/focus. Since this reflected light is polarized, it will suffer adversely for having polarized light entering the camera system. Given the low chance that the light entering the system through the polarizer will be in the same polarization angle as the beamsplitter, since you have to rotate the polarizer according to what is required for each scene, the auto-focus/-exposure would likely not function as designed. The quarter-wave retarder effectively temporally corkscrews the linearly polarized light to eliminate the problem. Just be sure the circular polarizer is mounted with the retarder facing the lens. For round filters, this should be done by the manufacturer when the filter is placed in the ring (which only attaches one way). For square filters, the manufacturer will mark “This Side Out” on the glass so you know. If there is no marking for some reason, look through the filter and put the side facing the lens that is the side that through which you can see the polarization effects. The other side you won’t.

Our Zygo Phase Shift  laser interferometer is available to members of this list.  Feel free to bring a filter or filters to our shop North of Los Angeles, or send them to us.

We’re also putting a serial number on every filter.  So we’ll know who we sold it to and when we sold it.  I suppose this might also be useful to rental houses.

The short answer is in fact that both Linear and Circular Polarizers do the same thing. The actual polarization effects such as reducing reflections on glass surfaces, increasing color saturation in foliage, darkening a blue sky . . . are the same with Linear and Circular.

On the square, rectangular and cine round filter front:  Many years ago, we at Schneider introduced the True-Pol polarizers in linear and circular.  They were, in my opinion, better than the currently available product for cine matte boxes. Tiffen then matched us with the Ultra-Pol, which is, in my opinion, equivalent.

Now some details:  A circular polarizer is a linear polarizer with an added component, a clear layer called a quarter-wave retarder. The retarder layer has to be on the side of the filter that faces the camera lens in order to work properly. The linear polarizer component of both filters is generally identical (for a given manufacturer) and as such performs the same functions within the image.

With a circular pol, the quarter wave plate on the rear of the polarizer spins the light so that the partial mirror in the video tap doesn’t cross polarize and block the light.  So if there are mirrors in your optical system, the circular pol solves any problems or potential problems.

As an aside, I’m always amused that physicists describe light as a wave, when it’s convenient (colors and polarization). They describe it as a particle, when it’s convenient (photons, photo-electric solar panels).  When they speak quantum physics, things get really strange.

While we’re on the subject of reducing reflections with polarizers, I’d like to say that it has always struck me as odd that we use uncoated filters in cinematography.

A very flat filter with good surface quality (scratch/dig) and an AR coating, won’t have a negative effect on image quality with long lenses, even if its not “ultra thin”.  BTW, normal small round screw-in filters are often 2mm thick.  Round drop-in filters in 138mm and 4.5” by the major manufacturers, and us newbies, are usually 3.43mm thick.

There is a much more scientific explanation for all this, so I do apologize for the over simplification of a science. Dwight Lindsey at Lindsey Optics can probably give you a much more thorough answer.

Linear polarization

If you have no mirrors in your system, such as video tap a DSLR mirror or a beam splitter . . . then the Linear-Pol will not cause you any trouble and you can’t put it in the matte box backwards, which might save you some time and trouble.

While we’re on the subject of reducing reflections with polarizers, I’d like to say that it has always struck me as odd that we use uncoated filters in cinematography.

There is a much more scientific explanation for all this, so I do apologize for the over simplification of a science. Dwight Lindsey at Lindsey Optics can probably give you a much more thorough answer.

If you have access to a Flexible Spending Account or Health Savings Account, you may be able to set aside pre-tax earnings to save for your procedure and ultimately end up spending less on the overall cost. There are restrictions with these plans regarding the timeframe when the money must be used, so make sure you know all of the specific rules of your plan before enrolling. It is also advised to have a consultation with us prior to enrolling to ensure your eyes are right for the procedure and you know how much it will cost. You don’t want to under- or over-save and end up losing money.

Linearpolarizervs circularpolarizer photography

Hey Y'all I'm sure this has been covered, but what is the advantage of a circular polarizer vs linear?  When would you use one vs the other?  If you are building your own kit, which is the most useful if you can only buy one. Asking for a friend ;) John Tarver, csc DP in even snowier Toronto

Polarizers have tiny parallel lines which pass light polarized in one direction and clip light with other polarizations.  When the lines are closer together, the polarization is better . . . and the transmission is less. So as manufacturers, we need to choose between better polarization and better transmission.

Hey Y'all I'm sure this has been covered, but what is the advantage of a circular polarizer vs linear?  When would you use one vs the other?  If you are building your own kit, which is the most useful if you can only buy one. Asking for a friend ;) John Tarver, csc DP in even snowier Toronto

I don’t personally recall an ultra thin Kaesemann polarizer from my time at Schneider.  I don’t doubt that it existed and may still exist, it’s just that the B+W product range is HUGE.

I have it summed up in my head pretty simply. Polarizers compensate for reflections of light. A linear polarizer will block deflected light from a specific angle. So as you rotate that filter, you can change the source of reflections directly. Circular Polarizers are a more complex system that block out reflections from multiple angles at once. So typically you will get cleaner images through office windows and on water and such but you have to play around a bit more to find the exact position of the filter for the best result.

For as long as anyone can recall, small round screw-in filters for photography have had good multi-layer anti-reflection coating (MC coating).

Linear vs circular polarizationcar

In fact a Circular Polarizer contains a Linear Polarizer component.  It has a second layer inside the filter called a Quarter Wave Plate, which “spins” the light after it goes through the linear layer.

There are a lot of articles that cover this actually. I spent a lot of time researching this as Abel Cine's Rental Manager back in the day and Mitch Gross and I used to have hour long conversations about it. So I feel your pain.

For as long as anyone can recall, small round screw-in filters for photography have had good multi-layer anti-reflection coating (MC coating).

Circular vs linearpolarizer for mirrorless camera

Applying your tax refund toward your eyesight improvement or appearance can be a smart use of this “found” money. Rather than spending it on vacations, electronics or shopping sprees, you will be putting that money toward improving your quality of life and self-confidence.

If you want better vision or an updated appearance, the team at Eye Associates of Tucson doesn’t want cost to stand in your way. Some vision improvement procedures (such as LASIK) and cosmetic treatments are not covered by insurance if they are considered elective procedures. However, we have several recommendations to help make your best vision an attainable goal for your budget:

Now that I have my own company, with a much smaller team, I feel able to just decide to do it, without any need to “encourage” the team.

Linear vs circular polarizationreddit

Our staff will be happy to help you understand your options when it comes to affording procedures to enhance your life. Contact us today!

One problem that the circular polarizer addresses is other reflective surfaces in your system.  The classic one in film was the video tap.  Using a linear polarizer on a film camera with a video tap, could and often would cause the video feed to go dark.

Wow Don’t know where I’ve been but I never knew there were better polarizers - just thought they were all the same . What about Kaeseman polarizers, what the heck are those anyway? Good or Bad?

I don’t imagine that the thickness or thinness of the filter was the primary problem or solution.  For long lenses filters really need to be flat within fractions of a wavelength of light.  You can test that either with a laser interferometer in a lab . . . or as you did in a more practical way, by putting the filter on a long lens and observing the difference between sharpness with no filter and sharpness with the filter in place.

Linear polarizationexample

The only difference is that the circular polarizer includes a quarter wave retarder after the polarizer. If you only buy one, the circular is pretty much all purpose. The polarizer filter is used to block polarized light (Reflections are polarized, while ambient light is scattered) By rotating the filter so as to be cross axis to the polarized light (reflections) it will block them. As the rest of the light passes through the filter it becomes polarized. This now polarized light can sometimes be problematic for some systems particularly those using semi mirrored surfaces to read exposure. In this case you need a circular polarizer, that in effect will un-polarize the light passing through the filter. Having the quarter wave retarder and not needing it will cause no harm.

The CareCredit health, wellness, and personal care credit card gives you a convenient, flexible way to pay for care for the whole family—including pets! With everyday promotional financing for purchases of $200 or more, you can pay over time with convenient monthly payments. *

Linear vs circularpolarizer reddit

John: short answer—get a circular polarizer. It works in the same way as the linear, but does not have problems with certain internal camera and other optical systems. You can use it with most anything. The only drawbacks are that you need to know to mount it facing a certain way relative to the lens, and it costs a bit more than a linear.

There are a lot of articles that cover this actually. I spent a lot of time researching this as Abel Cine's Rental Manager back in the day and Mitch Gross and I used to have hour long conversations about it. So I feel your pain.

You can get as much as 4% reflection per surface on flat glass.  That’s 8% per filter (2 sides).  If you have just two filters in your matte box, 16% of the light entering your system is going somewhere unintended . . . reducing contrast and color saturation.  It’s “stray light” or flare.

Dwight - This has bothered me for some time. I have made this inquiry of both Tiffen and Schneider and the response was the same both times - "we certainly could coat filters, but there has never been a demand to do so. If there was high enough demand, we'd do it."

The linear polarizer element in the filter needs to be pointed at the world, with the quarter wave plate on the rear side, the camera lens side.  A circular polarizer doesn’t work if you get it in backwards.  With a screw-in filter that’s no issue.  With drop-in and rectangular filters for matte boxes, the filters are labeled with “this side out”.

If it’s still of interest, I suggest you call Kevin in the New York Schneider Optics office, he knows everything about the Schneider B+W and Kaesemann filter product range.

A number of years ago I bought a Canon 100/400 still zoom. It wasn’t very sharp at 400 mm. I realized it was because I was using the basic Canon Pola filter on it. I found that B+W offered an Ultra THIN Kaesmann Pola filter, designed especially for long lenses. Fairly expensive … if I recall $275 for a 77 mm filter … 11 years ago … but it made all the difference in the world! There must not be a market for it because I recently tried to find it in another size and could not locate one, Dwight.