Filters vs. Photoshop?

I'm wondering how many DSLR users continue to use lense filters (red, green, soft, 812 etc.), or were they gone with

the rest of the 35mm gear? Is using photoshop easier than filters when using the DSLR? I would guess there's

really no need to use lense filters (other than the uv) on an image that can be adjusted with PS?

 

I'm likely to buy my first DSLR soon and I'm wondering what to do with all of my accessories. Thanks.

 

Javi.

<p>You won't need color correcting or contrast filters when shooting digital. That's easier to do in PP. If you get into HDR you won't need graduated neutral density filters either. What you will need is a polarizer...that can't be replicated digitally. You'll also need neutral density filters if you want to shoot with large apertures in bright light or if you want to blur motion using slower shutter speeds (waterfalls, etc.).</p>

 

<p><i>"Is using photoshop easier than filters when using the DSLR?"</i></p>

 

<p>It's a bit of a learning process, just like everything in photography. But it's not hard. And the advantage is...almost unlimited.</p>

Some folks claim that you're better off making color corrections before light hits the sensor. Post-exposure WB boosts the deficient channel(s), while color correcting filters drop the light levels of the strong channels to match the deficient channel/

 

http://www.dantestella.com/technical/lightbalance.html

 

But I've never seen any conclusive testing. And color correcting filters will force you to shoot at higher ISOs anyway. So it may not even be a viable choice. You will be probably be better off without CC filters if you want to convert to B&W.

the difference between using filters in front of the lens (witthe exception of poalrizing filters and i n some instances graduated neutral density filters ) and apply simialr "filter' effects i n Photoshop is that the former is permanent (even if you shoot raw you'd have to neutralize the effect in processing and that isn't optimal) while the latter is much more malleable and the specific effect can be limited to a small areas in the photo and can also be easily cancelled.

I use only a polariser and an ND filter where appropriate. As was mentioned before, you can't really get that done in

software. Be very wary of Photoshop and similar programs. They can become crutches very easily. Rely on your

photography skills. Remember, talent doesn't come in the box, no matter what the ads promise !!

Bill P.

The beauty (to me at least) of Photoshop vs. using a "real" filter is the undo command. You can apply photo filters and unapply them trial and error as needed, along with the ability to fade the filter effect following application.

So true, Tom. I use software filters only for minor color corrections if I don't like the results given with the white balance on location. The 'undo' function is a blessing. I shoot either totally unretouched photos or heavily manipulated photos, which is a different matter altogether. I was referring to the gang that just points and shoots, and then 'fixes' the shots in post.

 

 

Bill P.

There are a few highly saturated colours that can play havoc with getting a satisfactory exposure - typically produced by highly coloured flowers such as gentians and African violets (although even Ferrari red has been known to be troublesome). In these cases, the red or blue channel may become overexposed with normal metering. Avoiding overexposure in the affected channel will result in underexposure in the green channel which will reduce the perceived resolution of the image with a Bayer sensor (which has twice as many green pixels as red ones or blue ones). The way round these problems is to use a filter that is complementary to the bright colour, and then correct the white balance in software. This recording compression technique will also allow a wider than normal colour space to be used. Now we are heading towards the concepts involved in colour management. There is a nice introduction to the principles involved in this series of tutorials:

 

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/color-management1.htm

i have a tiffen plug in for PS i haven't used it much yet i think its called dfx, its wowed me so far, and

simulates lots of different filters they make. it might be worth a look for you

This is really a question but on the same subject. When using a circular polariser on a D300

and 12-24 the sky is lighter towards the sun. I understand why so is is better just not to use it wide and correct later. It does seem to make clouds more interesting or is there another way round it.