Exposure Blend vs Filters...

Exposure Blending vs. GND Filters

What are the pros and cons?
What is your preference and why?

Like most things in photography, "it depends".

It is better to get things done in camera, then fanny around later in post. So, a GND is the better option, in theory. If there is a nice, fairly level, horizon with nothing protruding from the foreground, I would choose a GND every time.

However, when the subject is a building, maybe an old church, and the spire goes up way past the horizon, and you have some trees off to the left going all the way up the frame, it can be a different matter. Using a GND will give you a church spire that gets significantly darker half way up, trees that go from green and sunny lower down, to dark and almost black higher up. Neither effect looks right.

In that case, I would shoot two shots - one for the sky, one for the subject (possibly 3 shots if I had shadow detail somewhere I wanted to preserve) then blend them later in post, with layer masks. A bit more work than using a GND, but a more natural looking result.

So, I don't believe there is a one size fits all answer, like everything else you use what you need, to get the shot you have in your mind.

sandpiper wrote in post #13631787
Like most things in photography, "it depends".

It is better to get things done in camera, then fanny around later in post. So, a GND is the better option, in theory. If there is a nice, fairly level, horizon with nothing protruding from the foreground, I would choose a GND every time.

However, when the subject is a building, maybe an old church, and the spire goes up way past the horizon, and you have some trees off to the left going all the way up the frame, it can be a different matter. Using a GND will give you a church spire that gets significantly darker half way up, trees that go from green and sunny lower down, to dark and almost black higher up. Neither effect looks right.

In that case, I would shoot two shots - one for the sky, one for the subject (possibly 3 shots if I had shadow detail somewhere I wanted to preserve) then blend them later in post, with layer masks. A bit more work than using a GND, but a more natural looking result.

So, I don't believe there is a one size fits all answer, like everything else you use what you need, to get the shot you have in your mind.

sandpiper,

Since writing this thread, I've been reading some really interesting articles on both methods...

I subscribe to your recommendation!!!

Thank you very much

I'm ready to get my feet wet and enjoy the time learning

I'm in the "it depends" camp as well. As mentioned with a nice straight delineation between the light and dark areas, a gnd works great. The more complex the delineation, the less effective a filter is and it's easier to do so in post.

Can someone explain the easiest way to blend exposures.i use lightroom 3 & elements 9.i really suck at p&p.

galjoe wrote in post #13633273
Can someone explain the easiest way to blend exposures.i use lightroom 3 & elements 9.i really suck at p&p.

There are several decent tutorials out there. here are two. Google "photoshop tutorial GND effect" and you'll get way more.

http://ronbigelow.com …nsity/neutral-density.htm
http://pshero.com …ed-neutral-density-filter

with blends or HDRs:


because you have multiple negatives, you capture as much data as possible, that is always good
you still have your negatives from which to do other final images
you did not spend money on filters that add weight and can be scratched/broken

MCAsan wrote in post #13638794
with blends or HDRs:


because you have multiple negatives, you capture as much data as possible, that is always good
you still have your negatives from which to do other final images
you did not spend money on filters that add weight and can be scratched/broken

I agree with this. The ONLY trouble is that sometimes when you properly expose your foreground, your sky is so blown out that you get all kinds of fringing on your foreground edges that meet the sky - I see this even with my ZE21. Its a pain to deal with and sometimes I much prefer to deal with dodging some shadows caused by the GND than mess with fringes on edges that should be sharp.

It depends, not just on the image but the location.

It's easier to take 7 different exposures in rapid succession than using a graduated ND filter on a beach in 40 mph winds with seaspray coming at you.

Always best to get it right in camera though but it's whatever gets you the desired result.

I use both and don't have a preference. Sometimes it's just easier to use a GND filter, sometimes (if things are moving) it's a necessity. Other times, I can do what I want with a filter and am not sure I'll remember exactly what I was going for in PP. Other times it's definitely better to blend.

I think it comes down to experience. If you're not sure, try doing both for a while, or as much as you can to develop a feel for when one is better (for you) than another.

galjoe wrote in post #13633273
Can someone explain the easiest way to blend exposures.i use lightroom 3 & elements 9.i really suck at p&p.

Watch this a few times, this is how I figured things out (to the extent that I have at least).

http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=2zyGZlf7bWU

Thanks for the link patrick,he made it look really easy.i will give it a go later.

Gel wrote in post #13639381
It's easier to take 7 different exposures in rapid succession than using a graduated ND filter on a beach in 40 mph winds with seaspray coming at you.

...but how do you deal with all the moving elements that naturally come with 40mph winds and a body of water when blending shots?

Gel wrote in post #13639381
It's easier to take 7 different exposures in rapid succession than using a graduated ND filter on a beach in 40 mph winds with seaspray coming at you.

Why is that? If you attach the holder beforehand, then isn't the time taken to slot in the filter and take one shot going to be about the same or quicker than taking 7 shots? Especially when the light gets low and exposures get longer.

I have never had any luck at all with blending exposures to get anything even remotely right...so I stick with filters now.