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
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.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI14y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
What does “OMP” mean when listed with a Canon lens?
Why do camera flashes use patterned front lenses or diffuser panels?
What is the Polaroid film "clearing" step after development?
What material can I use for a translucent, backlit background?
Why is a camera flash sometimes called a "flash gun"?