Grad ND filters unnecessary thanks to exposure blending?

I've been thinking about buying some gradual ND filters for my landscape photography, but then it hit me.. Aren't these filters unnecessary thanks to the ability to blend exposures in PP?

I am not talking about "chaotic color fest HDR". I mean a simple fusion of two different exposures. One for the sky and one for the ground, and perhaps one in between for a softer transition.

Why not do this instead of using GND filters?

I'd love to hear some opinnions on this.

some people tend to agree with you, some don't. i find it easier to use a gnd instead of waiting until I need to process my images.

I use GND filters and exposure blending. GND filters are fun and give you another tool to work with. I'd get one or two just to play.

There are benefits for both ways.

As Daveyboi points out, it is easier (and much less time consuming) to shoot with a grad than deal with it later in post.

However, doing it in post is more versatile, one of the big drawbacks of a GND is that it can't be shaped around the scene. They are great if you have a nice straight horizon with nothing sticking up across it, but if you do then the grad effect will cover that too. So, if you have a bunch of trees at the left of the scene and a building, maybe a nice old stone church, in there somewhere then the grad will darken their upper sections too.

That means that the trees with nice green sunny foliage lower down, will go dark and blacker part way up, the churches lovely grey stonework will also develop a "tideline" where it gets much darker. This can look very unnatural. Taking two images and blending them in post (or even one image and making two different starting points from the raw, one for the sky and one for the scene) allows you to add the effect to the sky but mask it off from affecting the trees and the church.

There is no right, or wrong, way to do it. Grads are best at some times, doing it in post is best sometimes and is always a viable option if you are prepared to take a bit longer over your editing. Which you choose is up to you, but to answer the question as worded, a GND is not necessary but can save time and do a good job with some scenes.

I see. Thank you so much for the explanations.

In that case, I'll happily skip using gnd filters, because I'm more into the fun of doing PP anyway. Besides, my camera bag is already way too packed. The last thing I need right now are more accessories.

Thank you for starting this thread. I too wondered the same as to why spend so much money on filters and holders which can add up to close to $1000.00 depending on what you get such as a Lee kit. Yes, post processin will take longer bu it will give us a chance to learn and I also love working in post too.

One of the benefit using a filter I think is great is that it allows you to shoot during daylight at shallower depth of field and allows to blur waterfalls by letting you change shutter speed to 1/4 or 1/2 second depending on which filter is being used. Comes in handy when shooting outdoor portraits when sun is very bright.