PetaPixel

Mount July Launches Its Color-Splashed Lens Filters, Now Taking Preorders

mountjuly

Want to play around with lens filters that add splashes of color to your photographs? Stanford design students Olivia Vagelos and Martin Bush want to help you out. They’ve designed a new line of color-splashed lens filters that can transform “the feel” of your photos.

Olivia Vagelos and Martin Bush

Olivia Vagelos and Martin Bush

As we reported when we broke the news on the filters last month, the filters are multi-colored radially graduated filters that are made out of multi-coated precision optical glass. The housings are created out of lightweight aluminum.

They’ll be available for interchangeable lenses that use standard 58mm threads. An optional step-up ring will also make the filters compatible with smaller 52mm lenses.

Once the filters are attached to the front of your lens, the resulting photographs will be saturated with new colors and take on a new look. The filters can even be stacked and twisted to create new looks that are unique to individual shots.

The same scene photographed multiple times as a filter is slowly twisted

Since they’re filters, the color can be added to video as well as analog photographs.

There are three different filters, each with their own flavor: Stinson, Sedona, and Sayulita:

flavors

flavor_examples

Here are some sample photographs captured using the filters:

sample1

sample2

sample3

sample4

sample5

Here’s a video in which the two founders introduce their new product:

The newly formed company is called Mount July. Vagelos and Bush are taking preorders to raise funds for the first batch of production filters. Contribute $30 or $35 to the project over on Kickstarter, and you’ll be signed up to receive one of the first Mount July filters to hit the market.

You can also follow along with the company on its official Facebook page.


 
Get the hottest photo stories delivered to your inbox.
Get a daily digest of the latest headlines:
  • http://alfanick.biz Amadeusz Leonardo Juskowiak

    Oh yeah, first!

    But seriously, oh no.. I can’t talk seriously in this post :D Why!? What for!?

  • A_Lwin

    I guess Kickstarter has become a new platform for con-artists and gifters to find easy marks.

  • http://www.purseblog.com/ Vlad Dusil

    I am not a fan of criticizing the dream of a small startup that’s looking for kickstarter funding, but…

    No, just no.

    Filters come in post. Non-destructive, less gear to haul around and infinitely flexible.

    I don’t see the point in these IG-type-hipster filters.

  • Chris

    The fact they only come in 52 and 58mm goes to show exactly who they are aimed at.

  • Trythe1

    Shooting with a kit lens!? Only the best ;)

  • KewlDewd

    How long have screw on lens filters been around? Yeah…a long time. If this was a good idea, wouldn’t it have been done a long time ago? That said, if they make them and people buy them, then more power to them…I guess.

  • http://www.facebook.com/burnin.biomass Burnin Biomass

    Its because for years and years, people were trying to get their pictures to NOT look like s**t.

  • Super Timor

    They can shove it up where I think…

  • http://www.facebook.com/duke.shin1 Duke Shin

    Remove Instagram Filters Co.

    I will be bathing in money in a few years.

  • Chapu

    April fools was more than a month ago

  • Jason Kim

    “spontaneity, adventure, and a lack of inhibition.” I thought I was watching a video for Lomography for a second there.

  • analogworm

    Nah, that’s bull. Before digital coloured filters were very useful to compensate for white balance or to enhance contrast. Nowadays, because of digitals versatility, only ND filters and Polaroid filters make sense to me.

    As noted by Chris and Trythe1, the size of the filter 58mm surely indicates the amateur photographer as the target group. Who can now happily create instagram photos with a dslr

    Nevertheless the Sayulita filter does seem to exaggerate sun-set/rise colours, which under normal circumstances can come out rather weak and normally requires some good work in post to pop beautifully. But that’s about the only potential use i see for it.

  • Fullstop

    It’s just…

  • Grokular

    PetaPixel posts some digitally made selective focus effects and everyone cries foul and says the effect should be done with a tilt-shift lens.

    PetaPixel posts some effect filters and everyone cries foul saying the effect should be done in post-processing.

    The photography community is really never pleased by anything.

    In before people start yammering on about how to properly do tilt-shift effects like that is somehow the point.

  • Kaitlin

    I think these are pretty neat and I’m a professional photographer. I’m a photojournalist primarily and can’t stray away much from straight documentary for work but I do like to play around with color and film in my spare time. I don’t see a problem with buying a set of these and slapping them on my film camera to create strange photos for fun. People bash “amateur” or “hipster” photography too much these days. Don’t turn your nose up and be a gear snob! If it gets people taking photos and if it gets people creating art I don’t see any problems with it no matter how lame or “unprofessional” they are. I think that if it gets people away from their computer screens it’s something to support. There is no greater betrayal to photography than making your image do a 180 in Photoshop afterwards.

  • http://twitter.com/intensitystudio Antonio Carrasco

    Can’t wait until the whole film-look, nostalgia, polaroid, hipster style goes away

  • Brixton

    Totally agree. It’s not for everyone but if you’re enjoying the outcome and process then who cares. No one’s forcing people to buy them.

  • Kaitlin

    Agree. Also, it kills me how people now say “oh we can do it in post processing”. REALLY? Makes me want to rip my hair out. I bet that most “photographers” wouldn’t even be able to call themselves as such if Photoshop didn’t exist. People rely too much on post processing. It’s not photography then. There’s a reason why magazines often say “photo illustration by”. Why not try things in camera? Filters, lights, splicers, etc. So much more rewarding to say that they were unedited afterwards, at least in my opinion.

  • analogworm

    Although you do have a point when saying some rely too much on post. And i agree wholly a good photograph starts with, well, a good photograph.
    You do have to understand the role of recording and post in photography. To me none exist without the other, not in digital, not in analog. Saying ‘my pictures are unedited’ implying they are better that way, Is to understate ones role, not only in post but also in recording.
    why? Well, when recording you start off making artistic choices. Lens, camera, film/digital, settings, position, subject, lighting and so on. Why then would you let the creative process end there by letting the automated process take over? Its like sending your pictures straight to the printing shop for them to decide on the final result, instead of continuing the creative process by correcting/optimising for flaws in camera/printing/displaying/digital processing/filmdevelopment techniques and getting the picture to correspond to your feeling/memory inside.

    And believe it or not, some things are better left in post.

  • Baaxee

    Tacky is in vogue again. Welcome back to the 70′s, and no, that’s not a good thing