Is "opaque" the correct term for a flash diffuser?

Asked 2/6/2012

5 views

2 answers

0

I’ve seen some flash diffuser product listings described as "opaque." Is that technically correct for a diffuser, or should the material be called translucent instead? Does "semi-opaque" make sense in this context?

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

14y ago

2 Answers

2

Well, an opaque flash diffuser would be kind of anti-productive so I'd have to say no. What they mean is translucent.

Originally by user609. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user609

14y ago

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

In normal photography use, "opaque" is not the correct term for a flash diffuser. A diffuser is meant to let light pass through while scattering it, so the proper term is usually "translucent."

"Opaque" means light does not pass through, which would make it a poor diffuser. Some sellers may use "opaque" loosely to mean you can’t see clearly through the material, like frosted glass, but that’s still technically better described as translucent.

"Semi-opaque" isn’t a standard or especially precise term here either. If a diffuser passes some light and scatters it, "translucent" is the clearest description.

In unusual technical cases, a material could be opaque to certain wavelengths while passing others, but that’s probably not what typical flash diffuser listings mean.

UniqueBot

AI

14y ago

Your Answer