Little is capable of sending violent shivers up a cinematographer's spine faster than the oft-overused decree of “Fix it in post!” For a former cameraman, the concept of post image filtration instead of on-camera filtration is a terrifying one. It means that you surrender control over the image, putting yourself at the mercy of digital algorithms rather than physics and light. When I heard some 10 years ago that Tiffen was developing digital filtration software, I was skeptical, to say the least. What use would that serve? Why would anyone want to filter their image after it had been shot? Doesn't that just open the door to all kinds of problems later on?

The reality, however, is that post filtration has some phenomenal benefits over the classic glass-on-the-lens technique and, in some cases, offers infinitely more control over the desired effect, although it in no way replaces the traditional method, as I plainly discovered.

As well as a standalone software version, Tiffen Dfx plug-ins are available for platforms including Apple Final Cut Pro and Aperture, Adobe After Effects and Photoshop, and Avid AVX. I worked with Dfx for After Effects CS3 on a Mac and Photoshop CS3 on a PC; each platform integrates the software differently, but with identical results.

I tested the results of the Tiffen Dfx software against the traditional glass filters Dfx's effects attempt to replicate. During two recent shoots, I shot DVCPRO HD video with a Panasonic AG-HPX500 and digital stills with a Canon Rebel XT 350D, both without filtration and with Tiffen professional glass filters. I then applied the Dfx software to the unfiltered images and compared the results.

I deliberately selected some filters whose effects I knew would be difficult, if not impossible, to replicate—polarizer, streak filters and basic color-correction filters—in addition to those with which I thought the software would shine, such as Tiffen's Pro-Mist and Soft FX diffusion filters.

The results of applying the Dfx filters were exactly what I'd expect. The digital version of the classic Pro-Mist gave me pluming highlights and softened contrast. However, when I compared the digital results with the traditional glass results, I was a little surprised.

The effects are not identical. Although they are close, there are some significant differences. With the classic glass version of Tiffen's Pro-Mist filter applied to the lens, the highlights plume nicely and the contrast is softened, but the color of the image is unaffected. The digital version plumes the highlights nicely, but it also desaturates the colors.

To that end, I tested the Tiffen Ultra Contrast filter in some very harsh lighting conditions. The glass filter cuts down the contrast nicely to give me a slightly softer look. I actually wasn't able to replicate this look with the Dfx version, although I got close. The Dfx Ultra Contrast filter started to affect the skin tones more than I would have liked. Trying to minimize the area of the image that was affected by the Dfx Ultra Contrast yielded a slightly different result than what I was going for.

Additionally, possibly because the results are not exactly the same, the systemic naming of the Dfx filters doesn't match that of their real-world counterparts. I found this frustrating, as I wanted to compare a 1/2 Pro-Mist real glass filter with the Dfx 1/2 Pro-Mist results, but the Pro-Mist filters in the software are numbered 1 through 10, as opposed to 1/8, 1/4, 1/2, 1, 2 and 3 in the real-world system.

This was disappointing at first, as I wanted the digital versions to behave exactly like the real-world versions. Upon further contemplation, however, I realized that this isn't necessarily a bad thing. Where the Dfx software really shines is in doing things that glass filters can't do—starting with dynamic effects.

One of the problems with using certain glass filters is that you're locked into either not moving the camera or moving it in a very limited range of motion so as not to not “give away” the filtration effect. With software like Tiffen's Dfx, these issues are no more, as you can integrate dynamic filters that move and adjust as needed.

Additionally, as Tiffen has acquired and integrated my favorite plug-in filter set—the Digital Film Tools 55mm suite—Tiffen's Dfx software incorporates the same kind of dynamic masking technique, where you select the range and position of the image to be affected, and the software will create its own custom traveling matte.

The software gives you more options than just the traditional Tiffen glass filters, including laboratory effects like skip-bleach, cross-processing, flashing and two- and three-strip Technicolor looks, as well as all of the GAM and Rosco gel swatchbook colors, faux film effects and even simulated lighting effects.

I was initially disappointed with the imperfect results of comparing the traditional glass filters to their digital cousins, but I realized that the goal of the Dfx suite isn't to replace traditional glass filtering but, rather, to augment it and provide a greater creative toolset from which to work. To that end, the Dfx suite is an extraordinary tool providing incredible versatility and nearly infinite control over your image effects.

Since this review was written, Tiffen introduced version 2.0 of the Dfx software, which expands the number of filters and special effects by more than 1,000. Tiffen Dfx is priced from $99.95 for the standalone version to $599.95 for plug-ins.