Is filters really needed?

rookies

rookies

Suspended / Banned
Messages
8,064
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
No
Hi Folks

Are Filters really needed like ND grad etc? As these can now been added with software now .... Or do proper set up do a better job than doing it through software?

Like Lightroom does ND Grad... Can get add on for CS3 and the like
 
Yeah... WHY???

Even that it can be done on software these days...
 
Personally I prefer to spend more time taking the perfect picture, than take a crappy pic and have to spend hours on PS fixing :)

But things like polarizers cant really have their effects replicated on photoshop
 
ND grads help reduce a difference in exposure, typically between sky and ground and you can retain a lot more detail in the sky than you would trying to recover it from the raw file.

ND filters are useful when you need to get a slow shutter speed in too much light.

Polarising filters just can't be done in post, well not without an awful lot of work painting out reflections by hand.

Most other filter effect can be done in post but sometimes it's just nice to see the result through the viewfinder to start with.
 
I do understand about the Polarizer I was more concern about ND Grad... I do have ND grade Cokin filters etc... But I am still having trouble getting the perfect picture just using filters for sunset... I still end up doing HDR
 
Id say you still need a CPL - to help stop reflections & enhance colours & a set of ND grads to allow you to expose correctly for the sky / ground and ND's to cut the amount of light entering the camera for longer exposures.

God i type far too slowly..........
 
When using a ND grad you need to work the exposure for the sky and the ground and then use the right filter to balance the two. So if the sky is 4 stop brighter than the ground your ND needs to reduce the sky by 4 stops and you shoot using the settings for the ground.
 
I agree it can all be done in PS or a similar programme, but for me that chance to take the perfect shot (for me) using good old rack of eye and a filter or two gives me more pleasure than editing.

On the other hand dealing with a picture from a pure editing point gives me as much pleasure, as i try to do the things photography cannot.

Then tweaking between the two is fun too, if i have have a shot that just needs a tweek then great (raw) thats as much as i do with a little dodge & burn.

regards Mark
 
pxl8 said:
When using a ND grad you need to work the exposure for the sky and the ground and then use the right filter to balance the two. So if the sky is 4 stop brighter than the ground your ND needs to reduce the sky by 4 stops and you shoot using the settings for the ground.
Click to expand...


Thank you for this information as I had no idea how I was suppose to do it to be honest.

So you say I should get the sky reading first.... How do I know what stop different it is between the sky and ground this is somthing I cant work out and need a little easy help on. After I got that reading I put on a ND grad to suite..

I then set it as the ground reading and then shoot is that right?
 
Take a reading from spot metering into the sky and foreground and then work out the difference between the two. Or guess work can work and after a while you can get to know how harsh or not the light is and what filter strength you need. HTH
 
rookies said:
Thank you for this information as I had no idea how I was suppose to do it to be honest.

So you say I should get the sky reading first.... How do I know what stop different it is between the sky and ground this is somthing I cant work out and need a little easy help on. After I got that reading I put on a ND grad to suite..

I then set it as the ground reading and then shoot is that right?
Click to expand...


It is a bit of maths m8

If you want to shoot at f8 and the sky reading is 1/2,000th sec but the ground reading is only 1/125th sec (still at f8) you count the difference, thus...

1/125th to 1/250th is 1 stop; to 1/500th is 2 stops; to 1/1,000th is 3 stops and to 1/2,000th is 4 stops

So to perfectly balance the two you need an ND grad that'll bring the sky's exposure of 1/2,000th down to around 1/125th = a 4 stop filter

:thumbs:

DD
 
DiddyDave said:
It is a bit of maths m8

If you want to shoot at f8 and the sky reading is 1/2,000th sec but the ground reading is only 1/125th sec (still at f8) you count the difference, thus...

1/125th to 1/250th is 1 stop; to 1/500th is 2 stops; to 1/1,000th is 3 stops and to 1/2,000th is 4 stops

So to perfectly balance the two you need an ND grad that'll bring the sky's exposure of 1/2,000th down to around 1/125th = a 4 stop filter

:thumbs:

DD
Click to expand...

Then take the picture at 1/125th ??
 
How do I work out the stops what the easy way of working it out or would it be handy having a chart?? If so is there any charts?
 
rookies said:
How do I work out the stops what the easy way of working it out or would it be handy having a chart?? If so is there any charts?
Click to expand...

Hmmm... you really are new to this aren't you :D

Have you bought yourself a 'How to...' on the basics of photography yet? If not, it'd help enormously m8 - honest

You need to get your head around how exposures and 'stop's work and are referred to, then it'll all make more sense

Soz, but I haven't the time now - perhaps others can explain succinctly

:thumbs:

DD
 
I've found a site called Photonhead very good at helping to explain exposure, amongst other camera concepts to people. The Sim Cam is especially good at helping to get the information across.

There is also another good site with a simulated camera with a more familiar layout here.

I've found you can tell some people about all this stuff till you're blue in the face, but they just learn better by doing/experimenting, and the sim cams can help them do that with a very clear interfaces imho.
 
I used to think that filters were just a roundabout way of saying to everyone "I am a proper photographer because I get it right in-camera."

Now, I do use them but I do tend to still shoot a lot of bracketed shots for post-production merging in PS. I suppose it's up to the 'togger - if they want to feel proud about getting it first time then fine; if they would rather comp several images together in software, then that's cool too...
 
Whatever works best for you.

I use ND grads frequently in landscapes, and although (IMO) they produce better balanced images than trying to do it in PS, an important reason I use them is time.

On any images I consider 'keepers' I'll generally spend an hour or so on each, gently tweaking, cleaning up dust spots etc, if I had to then start trying to balance or blend the image, it would add another 30 minutes or so to the processing time.

I usually leave the filter holders on the lens, so it's only a few seconds work to slot a grad in, I still bracket my shots and pick the best balanced one to work on.
 
specialman said:
I used to think that filters were just a roundabout way of saying to everyone "I am a proper photographer because I get it right in-camera."

Now, I do use them but I do tend to still shoot a lot of bracketed shots for post-production merging in PS. I suppose it's up to the 'togger - if they want to feel proud about getting it first time then fine; if they would rather comp several images together in software, then that's cool too...
Click to expand...

For me using filters is a way of saying "I am a dinosaur who has shot on slide film for a very long time and who is rubbish at correcting errors in PS"

Despite my best efforts to cut down the amount of kit I lug around with me I still feel naked without a polariser and a couple of ND grads in my bag or pocket not to mention red, orange and yellow filters if there is the remotest prospect of using b&w film.
 
Nicos Rex said:
For me using filters is a way of saying "I am a dinosaur who has shot on slide film for a very long time and who is rubbish at correcting errors in PS"
Click to expand...


I thought that was an insult for a minute, then I read the rest of your post.

Well said from one dinosaur to another.:nuts:
 
NDs and Polarisers can't really be ignored as the effect really can't be duplicated in PS.

Whilst an ND Grad effect can be produce in PS you hvae to remember that digital cameras have only a limited dynamic range and you can't pull back detail that has been lost, because it hasn't been recorded by the sensor. Yes 2 or more images at different exposures can be put together but if there is anything moving in the frame (water, birds, trees etc.) you make life very difficult for yourself.

IMO ND Grads, NDs and Polarisers are still essential kit in the digital age.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top