------Original message------
>Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 08:02:23 -0500
>From: "Walt Wayman" <hiwayman@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: [OM] Re: circ. polarizer question
>This is all very interesting, but it's kind of like asking
>someone what time it is and being given instructions for building
>a clock. The question was which way round to put the glass back
>in the ring, and my answer was the essence of simplicity AND was
>correct: Just look through the damn thing!
Apologies Walt, you are quite correct! (But I did try my method before
posting my previous comments!)
The method that I described can be used to determine the way to fit a loose
polarising filter without having to use a subject that reflects polarised
light. But when the subject DOES reflect polarised light and the filter is
fitted reversed, the polarised light from the subject strikes the
randomising element first, which destroys the polarisation, so when the
light emerges from the randomising element and strikes the polarising
element, there is no (or little) effect. Hence, when looking at a subject
reflecting polarised light and rotating the polariser, there IS a difference
in the appearance of the subject between correct fitting and reversed
fitting (which is precisely what you said). Apologies once again.
-- from Cy in the UK
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|