Must have filters for digital wedding photography

Hi, guys!

 

I just want to ask you maybe a stupid question, but: Do you have a

filter or filters on your digital camera lenses when shooting

wedding? If yes what kind?

 

The reason I'm asking, is that I noticed that most of you have very

nice, smooth and warm looking images especially skin tones (while

keeping the whites white and blacks black). Are you doing this in PS

postprocessing or do you use a specific filter on your lenses to save

post processing work?

 

I usually do CustomWB everytime when lighting conditions changes and

I'm getting pretty decent and consistent results especially when

using L lenses the quality is much better. But I'm warming it up

slighly in PS.

 

Any help would be appreciated.

 

Thank you.

 

Dusan

With digital imaging the only filters you need are neutral gradients and a polarizer. Use UV or skylite filters only for lens protection (e.g., spray or splashes from beer, sparkling wine, or salty sea spray) if you think that's important. Shoot in Raw and the digital darkroom is your "filter." It is best to do all your filtering work with your software; there's no reason to use a warming filter or anything similar when shooting digital -- you basically are limiting yourself; in this aspect digital is completely different than film where a collection of effects filters are important (for film).

The only real filters I use are the UV for protection, the polariser, quirky ones like stars and softeners like glimmerglass. The rest are safer to apply in post in case you change your mind.

Thank you guys. I know that PS has wider range of warming / cooling capabilities than any filter, but I was just wondering that maybe you use something to post-process faster.

 

Thanks again.

 

 

Dusan

For fun take a look at nik color efex pro for a bunch of useful/fun filters..........

ND and Softar, neither are on all the time, of course. So far, haven't seen any PS softening that can mimic the Softar--close, but no cigar. I might buy a Tiffen Hollywood star effect, but that is not a high priority--most brides don't really like the overly dramatic stuff.

The only one I really felt the NEED to buy was a Polarizer (aside from the protective UV filters), in order to keep skies blue in outdoor digital photography. Most other things I can deal with in camera or in post production, but editing a sky to be blue for 50 outdoor ceremony images is just not my cup of tea. I user a polarizer for a clear to partly cloudy sky when the sky will be a large part of the framing as in a landscape shot or outdoor shot of the ceremony site. When my framing is tight on the people, a polarizer is not as important.

 

Most of my warm skin tones come from the ambient lighting. I usually never warm things up in PS.

Although I will be shooting my first wedding on the 25th, I have done many functions and events, which is similar shooting. I've been shooting EOS for 10+ year, and digital since 2001, so I'm not new to shooting in general, nor post-processing useing PS.

 

I get the sharpest image I can get with selective focus, and at the time I take the shot, I don't worry about soft focus. I shoot RAW 100% of the time for best quality and control.

 

I deal with softening the focus as required in post-processing. In the digital age, it is my humble opinion that using a soft focus filter or lens is silly, even if you want that end result.

 

Better to use the sharpest lenses, giving the best color rendition, and contrast (for this I use L glass mostly), then at the time of post processing, I control the focus making it soft as required.

 

As for filters, I of course use the UV filter to protect the lenses from damage, and if I'm shooting outside, I might use a polarizer as required.

 

For skin tones, I use custom white balance, but as a safety net, I shoot in raw so that I can override the WB as required. Even though my 5D images are mostly noise-free, even at high ISO's, I run a light noise reduction process in CS2, not too strong, as to remove detail, but enough to give skin a nice smooth, creamy glow, and this works fantastic. Of course I also use levels, and saturation changes to really improve the skin texture, and color.

 

Here is one of my examples, where I use the methods I write about here:

 

http://www.photo.net/photo/10010430

Hi, guys!

 

Thank you very much for your opinions and recommendations. Definitelly I'm going to get UV filters to protect my L lenses. The one I found is called Tiffen 77mm Haze 1 Filter. Do you have any suggestion for a good Polarizing filter? I mean it is not high on my priority list but I want to get one eventually for outdoor shots. I used to have Optex C-POL filter, which I used to have on my EF-S 17-85 lens, but I had a very mixed feelings once I opened pictures in Photoshop. I mean I know the best results you get when you are shooting 90 degress to the sun and by rotating the filter to get appropriate amout of reflection or amount of blue in sky. But I also noticed that apart from boosting saturation it also boosted color fringing. I don't know if it was just boosting color fringing caused by the lens or it was introducing some by itself.

Here's my two bits: Don't forget the flash filter.

 

If you're under fluorescent lights you can always WB the camera. But if you use flash something's gonna be off. It can help to gel the flash with an appropriate filter.

 

I don't mind a little extra warmth when the ambient lighting is predominantly incandescent (tungsten or halogen). But green hair from fluorescents is yucky.

 

I know some folks fix their RAW files in Photoshop to get rid of the color casts in hair highlights, cheekbones, etc., but it's probably easier to do it on the camera. (At least that's my excuse - I'm lame with photo editing, despite years of trying.)

I've found that sliding Neutral Grads are more useful than Polarizers for darkening the sky.

You have to be at a certain orientation for Polarizers to work ... you don't with a NG Grad.

 

There are a number of very useful sliding grads which allow you to control where the

effect happens and with some filter holders even the angle of the effect. Amber ones are

beautiful, as are the Tobacco grads often used in movies.

 

I personally like the Lee system, and occasionally use them with both film and digital.

 

Another nifty filter is the Lee Net series. White net makes shimmering higher key images

yet keeps the detail. My favorite is Flesh Net which turns any Bride into a Cover Girl ... in

fact it's often used just for that purpose ... if you've ever wondered how the skin could

look so good that close up even with great make-up.<div></div>

Of course you can drop in a gradient layer in post processing but I really dig those Lee filters Marc illustrated and it looks quicker then a sort of time-consuming posty job. In fact I need to put them on my short list of new stuff to buy. Wow, thanks!

<p>

Their Web site:

<a href="http://www.leefiltersusa.com/NewCameraProducts/CamNewProdFiltersets.html">

www.leefiltersusa.com</a>

This is really cool! Not heard of the lee filters, but having looked at the website theres some really nice stuff.

 

Marc, do you have an example of the "flesh filter" and what it does? Thanks!

Gradient layer isn't the same as using a grad filter when shooting. A grad decreases the

exposure level and closes the exposure gap (between a whited out sky and the

foreground, for example) ... and does it at the same ISO and noise level as the rest of the

image. So clouds are white with detail and the sky a deep blue toward the top where it

should be darker.

 

A Neutral Density does it without any additive coloration. The one shown in my pic above

is a .45 ND which provides about 1.5 stops density at it's darkest area. The different color

filters not only close the exposure gap, but add a color tint to it. The Amber and Tobacco

filters are used in a lot of Westerns.

BTW, LEE is a British Company I believe, so go to the international site where there is more

information and products. However, I couldn't find the Flesh Net filter anywhere on their site.

They may have discontinued it, or it was a special run back when I got mine. Coarse net

stockings provide a similar effect by the way. Just cut piece, stretch it over the lens and

secure it with a rubberband ; -)

B&H still lists the Lee Flesh Net filters but they are "accepting orders". These used to be popular a while back, as Tiffen and a few others used to make them too, but don't now. Filter manufacturers must be feeling some effect from digital causing people to think there is no need for any kind of filter on the lens and that they can conjure up almost any effect in Photoshop.

I just adding what Mrac said about the stocking. I have used it several times with video, it is great way to soften the skin.