The Mighty Circular Polarizing Filter Explained in Pictures

Because I have a new toy, you all have to suffer through blog posts about my camera every weekend. Until I get bored of it. Which is not yet.

Back in the day, I had a circular polarizing filter for my Leica rangefinder. But then I got a new camera, and then another and another. For some reason, I forgot all about the polarizing filter and never got another one. But someone in comments mentioned this a while back, so I got one when I ordered the new camera. It’s definitely worth having.

Most light that comes into your camera bounces off the ground first, where it scatters in thousands of different directions. However, certain kinds of light are polarized in only a single direction, which means you can reduce or eliminate it with a polarizing filter. The filter contains two pieces of polarized glass in a single mounting, and it’s easy to use: you just rotate one of the pieces until the light you want to get rid of is gone. The most common use of a polarizing filter is to reduce reflected glare from water:

The filter doesn’t get all the glare, but it gets a lot of it. However, there’s a lot more you can do. For example, because of the way light scatters in the atmosphere, you can make the sky bluer and clouds more defined:

And it’s not just clouds. We got a little bit of rain a few days ago (hooray!) and this left a light dusting of snow on the mountains. A polarizing filter can make those snowy mountains pop a little more:

Another common use is to reduce reflections off glass. If you’re in a museum taking shots of the paintings, a polarizing filter will help reduce hot spots from the lights or reflections off the glass if the painting is behind glass:

This also works for shooting out of airplane windows or car windows:

It’s also handy for commercial photographers, because sometimes you don’t always have full control of your lighting:

So there you have it: the wonders of a circular polarizing filter. Basically, anytime there’s glass or water involved in your picture, a polarizing filter might help. It doesn’t generally alter the color of your photos since both halves of the filter are a neutral gray, but they do cut down the amount of light entering your camera. This will force a lower shutter speed or a higher ISO setting, which might be a problem shooting indoors. Whether the tradeoff is worth it depends on how bright the lighting is and how bad the glare is.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate