Lee filters, have an issue with this shot

Hi guys,
I'm getting serious about my landscape stuff this month and bought myself a Lee filter holder, a set of hard and soft grads and a polarizer for use on my 1Ds3.

I have a question about the image below. This was the first outing with them and I thought I may as well throw myself in at the deep end.

The following shot was with the 24mm TS-E, on a tripod, with the polorizer and .6 + .9 hard grad. My issue is with the light falloff on either side of the sky. To me, I don't think there is anything I can do about it other than bracket exposures but wanted to see if any of the more experienced members have anything to add.

I know this is generally underexposed, but...first outing with the filters.

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

It would help to know which type polarizer that you used...round and threaded onto the lens with holder attached to the filter, or the Lee 4x4 square polarizer, or the Lee 105 polarizer mounted to the front of the holder. Also, where did you place the gradient line?

Hi, I used the Lee circular polarizer, the glass 4x4 square. It was the correct way around.
The gradient lines fell just above where the sky met the sea.
I looked through the eyepiece to decide when to stop.

The polarizer was in the holder closest to the lens, with the .9 grad next and on the outermost the .6 grad.

That looks to me like the holder was rotated oddly. Were the tilt/shift values "zeroed out" on the lens?

The holder was dead straight and there was 0.5 degree of tilt. (Focused on the distance, tilted to bring the foreground into focus - F/11). I wouldn't of expected such a small amount of tilt to cause this? Shifting would, but there wasn't any.

What adapter ring do you have on the holder? The standard ring or the wide angle ring?

Wide angle. I even checked to make sure the filters were in the right order (You have to have the polariser in front if the grads are polyester) but mine are resin so they are ok.

Isn't that normal? I mean, you can't really expect the filter to make the sun and the area right around it the same brightness as the rest of the sky?

For example, see these shots; same problem to a lesser degree:

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED

...I'm at a loss, then Hope someone can help sort you out...

Sirrith wrote in post #13403273
Isn't that normal? I mean, you can't really expect the filter to make the sun and the area right around it the same brightness as the rest of the sky?

This is what I thought, but I wanted to see if there was anything else I could do. For me it was quite a drop off. I guess I asked for it pointing the camera at the sky on a clear day with the light source off to the side.

Gel wrote in post #13403304
This is what I thought, but I wanted to see if there was anything else I could do. For me it was quite a drop off. I guess I asked for it pointing the camera at the sky on a clear day with the light source off to the side.

I think the reason the drop off is so dramatic is that you seem to have exposed for the very bright reflection in the water, so the parts that would have been dark anyway are even darker. The first shot I posted, for example, I exposed for part of the sky close to the sun as well, and you can see the falloff is quite a bit more severe than in the other 2 shots.

So I guess the only solution would be to either stack, or expose for something else and just let the sun be even more overexposed

To me it just looks like very difficult scene to capture with a single exposure, no matter what combination of filters you're using. You were able to bring the sun, sky around it, and that reflection down by 5 stops using the grads - but parts of the sky are lost to lack of exposure because they sure didnt need 5 stops of exposure reduction.

Landscapes shot directly into the mid-day sun (or even late morning, for that matter) are difficult. Although I try to do my shooting in the 45 min before and after sunrise/sunset, sometimes a scene needs to be shot during the day - in which case you're left with a problem like this.

I would probably try this same shot with just the 3 stop grad, find a good middle ground exposure time, and bring the sky/foreground out how you would like them in post. Either that, or just blend exposures. Even better yet, I see nothing compelling about why this image needed to be taken at this time of day pointed directly at the sun - try composing to avoid this or by shooting at "softer" times of day.

I have seen the same effect when using filters, I normally take care of it in post processing with a combination of "post-crop vignetting" and "lens correction" in LR. If you find a better solution I am all ears.

BrianS wrote in post #13460275
I have seen the same effect when using filters, I normally take care of it in post processing with a combination of "post-crop vignetting" and "lens correction" in LR. If you find a better solution I am all ears.

a couple of grad NDs in Lr (one in each corner) would probably take care of it

jcothron wrote in post #13460327
a couple of grad NDs in Lr (one in each corner) would probably take care of it

You need to teach me how to properly apply the grad ND in Lr. I can't seem to quite grasp how to confine it to one area of an image yet...