Jump to content
UltravioletPhotography

a hypothetical filter made out of opalite


Fandyus

Recommended Posts

Definition of opalite according to wikipedia: Opalite is a trade name for man-made opalescent glass and various opal and moonstone simulants.

 

For those of you who know what it looks like off the top of their head, you might remember that it looks quite peculiar. https://media.istockphoto.com/photos/opalite-gemstone-collection-picture-id1214582849?k=6&m=1214582849&s=612x612&w=0&h=jGA_2Jt0wdz8LKpF90L2W6PKon4FUIPdG2ODmkqeMD8=

 

That makes me wonder what it would look like if somebody fashioned this into a 2-4mm thick filter. Maybe it's a dumb question since the material is naturally cloudy. But I don't know.

Link to comment

One of those things that you'll never know unless you try!!

I suppose if the material is naturally cloudy, then exposures might be long. But that's never stopped us. :grin:

 

Also the brittleness factor might play a role. Is this material sufficiently hard to permit a surface polish for optical use.

Link to comment

One of those things that you'll never know unless you try!!

I suppose if the material is naturally cloudy, then exposures might be long. But that's never stopped us. :grin:

 

Also the brittleness factor might play a role. Is this material sufficiently hard to permit a surface polish for optical use.

 

I'm not sure, but they are sold as decorative beads so I don't assume they're overly brittle, probably something like glass.

Link to comment

Well you could try it.

This one is cheap and should fit between 37mm to 52mm and 52mm to 37mm step rings:

https://www.amazon.c...1B8SKQG18JY1BTG

 

Its translucent, so that should help. Its 13mm think, so you will need to stack empty 52mm rings to sandwich it. The opening for a 37mm step ring is around 35mm.

Could be interesting but I also don't think it would be sharp at all.

Link to comment
Andy Perrin
No, it definitely would not be sharp. That's a scattering filter. But you might get some interesting effects anyway.
Link to comment
I think it would more or less be equivalent to a “sky” filter. The “Rayleigh haze” we see doesn’t reduce sharpness, it adds light instead. The Moon for example is still sharp in daylight, it simply has less contrast.
Link to comment
Andy Perrin
Stefano, I think it's more like the situation with frosted glass, which definitely does reduce sharpness? I don't know, I haven't seen one of those stones in person, but certainly lots of rocks with small bubbles and things in it will substantially blur the image.
Link to comment

Aerogel is blue because of Rayleigh scattering but judging from the images you can see online it doesn't blur images.

 

I think an important parameter is the refractive index. Both air and Aerogel have a very small one, while opalite probably has a glass-like one. This means that if it isn't flat it will distort the image.

 

Frosted glass scatters light because it isn't smooth. This works because of the difference in the refractive indexes between it and air. I think it isn't quite the same phenomenon.

Link to comment
Andy Perrin

What does aerogel have to do with anything? We were not discussing it?

 

If the scattering in Opalite is due to bubbles it will have the same issues as frosted glass. Doesn't matter if it's a rough surface or an inclusion. However, it will matter how big the bubbles are relative to the light wavelength. Smaller bubbles than the wavelength will probably not blur things much, but if they are similar sized then it may.

 

Another way to say that is, how sure are you that this is Raleigh scattering and not Mie/Tyndall? (Tyndall is the large bubble limit, Raleigh is the small bubble limit, and Mie is the general theory which includes both Raleigh and Tyndall for spherical inclusions.)

Link to comment

What does aerogel have to do with anything? We were not discussing it?

It resembles opalite in that it produces Rayleigh scattering (Tyndall in opalite, but they are similar). They are not the same material though, so probably we can't compare them.
Link to comment
Andy Perrin

That's what I'm trying to tell you -- Tyndall and Raleigh are not that similar. They don't behave the same way. They are opposites. One is for scattering by objects much larger than the wavelength and the other by objects much smaller.

--

ETA: Thinking about it, the blur is mostly coming from when you have multiple scattering (vs. single scattering). If the light changes directions multiple times, it diffuses, which makes the blur. So the density of scattering centers actually is the most important thing here, even more than Raleigh vs. Tyndall.

Link to comment
It's nice that my comment has sparked a discussion, but what I really was referring to when I said the image most likely wouldn't be sharp was the refraction that the opalite would cause, acting like a lens of it's own.
Link to comment

Fandyus, just polish it flat. Then it won't behave like a lens.

Would be nice but I'm not sure I have the tools for that to be honest. I was actually thinking I could ask Cadmium if I could pay him to fashion a piece of opalite into a filter, since I suspect he might have the right tools.

Link to comment

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...