Graduated Neutral Density Filter

[Whaler]

Do any of you use them or do you take more than one exposure and do the job in Photoshop? :?:

[G3]

MUCH easier to use a ND filter.

[BCdives]

Whaler, I have a handful of them from Singh-Ray, you probably won't use them a lot, but they reallly do a nice job... (IMO) you would have to work for hours to get the same effect in PS, they have a really rich, very smooth effect... Get a Cokin P bracket and you are good to go. Just make sure you take off any UV/ or CirPLs that are ahead of the ND Filter. I also LOVE the reverse ND filter, fantasitc effect you would be hard pressed to get in PS.

http://bc.kf4oal.com/ND-Filter.jpg

Example : (Not a great photo) but you can see that you can shoot into a bright sunrise yet preserve all the forgound color and detail and still see stars in the dawn sky. A lot of this would be blown out with an un filtered shot.

BC

[MarkK0120]

This is very cool --- I've had trouble many times with bright sky and darker foregrounds.

Can someone recommend a good graduated neutral density filter? (58mm and 52mm) I looked on B&H, but I don't know what all the different numbers after the filters mean (.6, 2x, etc.)

Thanks for your help.

[Whaler]

Thanx for the info. As far as a filter recommendation, I like and use B&H. . . not cheap though. I buy my filters from Freeman who runs an e-bay store out of Canada. http://stores.ebay.ca/EC-TRADE He's honest, delivers a quality product, and fast.

[PhotosGuy]

I have some Conkin ones that are 3X4”. Advantages are that you only need to get 1 adaptor for each new lens & they have ‘spacers-holders’ that can stacked to put the filter away from the front element of the lens to soften the effect. Makes it easy to slide the filter up & down to get it right where you want it, too. Disadvantage to stacking is that you need to use a progressively longer focal length to avoid cut off.

[lcoleman]

Despite what others have said here, I think taking two shots and blending in Photoshop gives me much more control and doesn't take that much time. Take a look at this article: www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/digital-blending.shtml

[robertwgross]

Cokin works for me.

When I first saw a graduated neutral density filter, on a filter holder, stuck on the front of a big Canon lens, I thought "That's a big mess."

Then I saw the results, and I changed my mind.

This arrangement is not the sort of thing that I would want to be hiking down the trail with, at least not stuck on the front of my lens. However, if you are out there for the perfect pre-sunrise shot, it works.

If the horizon is relatively flat, then it works pretty good. If the horizon is not flat, then the effect is much harder to get.

---Bob Gross---

[msvadi]

I think that one should use a filter if he wants the best possible quality. Besides, sometimes you just cannot produce two identical shots, for example if it's windy and you have trees in the picture.

[paul162brown]

I always use a grad ND filter for landscape shots. I use a Cokin holder and have several ND grads, which can be adjusted to ensure the correct amount of bright sky is being covered. Lee Filters are the best however, although they come at a cost.

Trust me, almost every pro-landscape picture that you will have seen will have used a ND grad filter of some kind to balance the exp difference between the sky and the foreground.

In my opinion, it is much much better to get as much of a picture right at the shooting stage rather than have to recover it in PS. That said, I have seen some superb double exposure shots done with PS although these have mainly been night-shots using a tripod and as a previous post mentioned, wind and other factors can make getting the whole thing together very difficult. I suppose one factor is just how good are you using PS and how much do you enjoy sitting at the PC?.

Personally, although I have been taking pictures for many years, I have only recently moved over to digital and have my own learning curves in some areas to deal with. I don't want to add to that by spending hours in front of a screen.

I do know a few people who like the post processing stage but, the reason that I enjoy photography so much is that I love taking pictures, outside or in, with my camera. The least time I spend stuck at a PC the better............ more time to shoot!
:)

[BCdives]

Paul, Well said! My thoughts exactly!

[Ken Fong]

I use HiTech ND filters from B&H (Cokin holder size, but I hold it by hand usually)...each value (.3, .6, .9, 1.2) represents a stop of light. If you purchase .3 .6 and 1.2, you can combine them for any possible combination between 1 to 7 stops. These are not glass, so they tend to scratch (especially when removing/inserting them into the sleeves they came in.)

My first preference is to use the ND filters...I always try to get the most amount of data up front.

My second preference, and if I had a lot of time, is to do the 2-shot method (shoot once metering on the highlights, shoot again metering in the shadows, then merge in Photoshop). John Paul Caponigro has a good chapter on this in "Adobe Photoshop Master Class". Autobracketing is an alternative to the dual-meter sequence if you want to minimize camera movement between shots. The techniques at Luminous-landscape.com describe this well.

My third preference, which is the fastest method for the post-capture side, is to make a contrast mask (again, Luminous-landscape has a good article)...but this might not give you the same effect.

My last resort would be, if I only had one shot, to select the highlight area in Photoshop and adjust the curve on the selected area...but the result will probably look unnatural. Learn to make a contrast mask before you do this.

[Desperate Dan]

You can also take a slightly under-exposed RAW and then "develop" two images from it, one for the sky and one for the ground. That way, you don't need a tripod for what might be just a "grabbed shot". Of course, that depends on how bright the sky is.

Also - there is a nice Photoshop Action which works well. It gives you the "Ansel Adams" effect in B&W...

http://www.creativestoke.org.uk/action.html

[rick barclay]

Can someone explain to me how to use those square filters I see on
many sites? Do they slide into a holder, which then screws into your
lens.

I want to buy some of these 77mm square filters I see, but I need to know how they work beforehand. Thanks for any help.

[PhotosGuy]

Can someone explain to me how to use those square filters I see on
many sites? Do they slide into a holder, which then screws into your
lens.
The Conkin ones do, yes, but they're rectangular, not square, so maybe you're looking at something else.

[Ken Fong]

Yes, the square filters need Cokin type holders...you will probably see this at your local camera stores, but be sure you are buying the right size. I have a Cokin holder, but I don't use it for my NDs...I usually end up holding it with my hand as I compose the shot...not graceful, but it works.

[Malok]

I shoot using Graduated ND filters almost every day to balance the sky and the foreground. Most of my landscape photography is done early morning and so I find it to be almost a necessity.

I use the Singh-Ray filters which are reputed to be the best, using the Cokin P holder. These GND's were actually designed by the late Galen Rowell who was something of a hero in the world of landscape photography. I've been very impressed with the filters. (http://www.singh-ray.com/grndgrads.html)

The actual Cokin filters on the other hand are pretty bad. They have quite a significant color cast and are not truly neutral. I've also heard very good reports on the Hi-Tech filters which are cheaper than the Singh-Rays. While these are great tools for landscape photography, they are rather expensive; however if you are getting into this seriously then you will want to get a couple of good GND filters.

One other note. I find that a soft edge ND filter isn't necessary for digital cameras as a hard edge acts like a soft edge with a digital camera.

Hope this is helpful.

Malok