Filter vs computer

[RaymondC]

Hi, I have a D70 and in some years will get a banged up D700.

 

If you were using grads, would you prefer filter or HDR on the computer or be it a digital gradient tool for one

exposure or two exposures?

 

Personally I find the digital way the images can look soft and ghost but I may be inexperienced.

 

Also, for simply night photography of the city central, skyscrapers on tripod would you ever do an HDR or just

leave it?

 

Cheers

[Matthew Brennan]

<p>Hi Ray,</p>

<p>I have gone down the ND grad filter route and also occasionally use a CPL filter. I also have PS 3 and Capture NX, Photomatix etc at my disposal but I too, find it difficult to to yield images with any true realsim to what I was attempting to capture. I'm the first to admit I have not spent nearly enough time playing with programs like Photomatix so my handfull of HDR attaempts are really only based upon 12 - 15 hours of working HDR on the computer.</p>

<p>I have occasionally made up an HDR image which pleased a little, but the time it took me to work on the computer has been considerable. By no means am I trying to capture exactly what I see before me but I do endevour to make an image which bears some truth to the scene that lay before me when I took the frames. With layers / HDR software etc I'm yet to really construct a stacked frame image which made my heart sing.</p>

<p>I'm not of the opinion that software will reproduce with speed and ease what physical filters will do for me with the type of photogrpahs I like to take. Nor is it important to me to be able to replicate in exactness any software effect with filter use or visa versa / I'm not expecting of a filter to reproduce exactly what certain software will do for an image or series of images.</p>

<p>Often I'm thwarted in higher dynamic photo stacking by the wind blowing grass or trees etc around as I'm shooting the bracket of images - in these instances the ND grads are essential for me as I can at least have some dynamic range flexability using just one exposure.</p>

<p>I use Lee ND grads and am pleased with thier true to form neutrality but others will argue than putting any filter even well manufactured gear will adversly effect your image. I shoot a lot of even portioned sky / land / water type landscapes so ND grad filters and CPL filters make good sence to me and I'd reach for these before I'd consider setting up a bracketed series and playing with them on the computer. Works for me.......</p>

[remco-jan.woldhuis]

<p>The best result can be obtained via filters. If the contrast between e.g. foreground and sky is too high, you can solve it with a grad filter. If you want to that with software you either overexpose the sky or underexpose the foreground initially. You will lose details when you make the corrections with software.</p>

[patriciomurphy]

<p>I've seen an ad yesterday that hits the nail in the head: it all comes down to whether you prefer to be sitting in front of the computer or out shooting in the field. it's a matter of taste, I think both ways are valid.<br>

I prefer using filters, ND and CPL. I find "obsolete" now shooting raw the colour correction filters, since I can tweak colour temperature with more precision in post-processing, but OTOH trying to replicate the effect of a CPL in software is just too much work for me, it's much more logical to me to get it done at the take.</p>

 

[mark liddell]

<p>Having used both extensivly, the best result will be obtained with 2 exposures.</p>

<p>Grad filters are a pain to use in the field, easily scratched, can introduce flare, and good quality filter systems are expensive (no, cokin isn't good enough!). Lee are the only ones that are actually neutral and with digital cameras you really need the more expensive glass filters due to IR/UV issues.</p>

<p>You can do exactly the same thing in PS later with two exposures. Just add a gradient to the layer mask. You have total control over how hard/soft it is and how strong instead of buying a whole load of filters. Not all scenes fit a perfectly straight line of graduation anyway, with two exposures you can customise the mask to any shape you want.</p>

<p>Do a google search on "exposure blending" - note this is NOT hdr</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>I am with Mark Liddell on this one - blending exposures is indeed the best solution - and that isn't HDR. HDR will always have problems with anything in the image that moves. Whenever I encounter a scene with a high dynamic range, I bracket the shot at least at +/2 EV (5 exposures in +1 1EV steps) - leaving me with the option to eiher blend two or three later, or do a HDR. If I have the time, I do another series, selectively exposing for highlights and shadows. I was never a friend of the grad filters - a lot of hassle to get things "about" right.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Any filter is another piece of glass/plastic in front of the lens and it will degrade your image a little more. If you manage to keep your GND filter clean and scratch free, the degradation is probably minimal. Another issue is that the light/dark transition on a filter is fixed. If the transition you want has an irregular shape, a computer merge gives you more flexability, but it is more post-processing work.</p>

[bsd230]

<p>I prefer just to use software. To get a wider dynamic range in a photo I sometimes use a double exposure, which works well with a tripod and a still subject. I shoot one photo metered for the sky and the other for the foreground then take the sky from one photo and put it in the other. Great for night shots with the moon and skyline. It looks very natural. As Shun points out the transition will often leave you having to fix areas in photoshop anyway.<br>

Although HDR often leaves an unnatural look to photo I do like the look, but I think I'm in the minority.</p>

[oskar_ojala]

<p>I think the best option is to be able to use both -- software for control and a filter for when you really need just one exposure. But that said if for example you need a single exposure quite rarely (and keep in mind that the D700 has excellent dynamic range) then the filter is just more item to carry without much use.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>with digital cameras you really need the more expensive glass filters due to IR/UV issues.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Huh? With a D700 and vanilla lens you run pretty much a zero risk to see any UV or IR on the sensor.</p>

[lwg]

<p>It's also hard (impossible?) to handhold two shots in exact alignment, so in this case a filter is better. The HiTech filters are also neutral and nicely priced. I have also not seen any distortion with them, unlike the Cokin filters.<br>

I have yet to see a HDR image that looks natural. Blending is the way to go if you are trying to mimic a grad, as Mark pointed out.</p>

[RaymondC]

<p>Thanks, I have a technique by Luminous Landscapes who does the 2 exposure blend using the gradient tool to reveal the background or foreground which I think is good. For night photography I tend to just shoot as is for one shot and play around with LR or D-lighting with Capture NX but I seldom use Capture NX. LR just has a better workflow.</p>

<p>You guys use much HDR - ie., Photoshop or Photomatix?</p>

[walterh]

<p>Ray whenever a new technique emerges there is great enthusiasm because we all can see the old problems are gone :-)<br>

After a while we learn that the new technique also has its problems - different problems.<br>

So there are several answers to your question.<br>

1) Use the technique you know best. The reason is that both require a bit of experience.<br>

2) If you are familiar with both techniques you will find that either one will have advantages depending on the case.<br>

3) Shooting more than one image is basically free in digital photography. So shoot a bracket series whenever you can and use your grad ND filter whenever you can. Later at home you pick what comes out best for that particular scene.</p>

 

[liljuddakalilknyttphotogra]

<p>I have to admit - having played both ways - - I'm actually the happiest with my Graduated ND filters or CPL filters. But I buy the best quality I can afford. It does it for me & I'm happier with the result personally...<br>

Lil :-)</p>

[white balance productions]

<p>now add the software to the filters and see the difference i can do a faster colour change using filters than i can get with software,you can not put back what you burnt out,</p>