Does it need to be either/or? GND filters and compositing? (not for typical "HDR")

MD Optofonik · 04-23-2013, 06:23 PM

I know that this is, by definition, about HDR but I'm not talking about the overly stylized images that have become associated with the term. I'm concerned with natural looking images that are, within the context of tradition photography, well exposed. Seems to me that some, not all, of the issues with moving objects in compositing two images to overcome DR issues could be mitigated with judicious use of a GND and compositing combined with some layering in PS. Am I stating the obvious? Common knowledge? Examples?

**Digitalis** · 04-23-2013, 07:06 PM

A perfectly valid point - and a technique I have used myself, however there are a few drawbacks involved - filters increase flare and ghosting effects - so if you have bright highlights anywhere in the scene be prepared to clone ghost images of them out, because flare and ghost lights can mess with the Automated frame registration used with HDR stacking software.

hks_kansei · 04-23-2013, 09:03 PM

Not to mention that GND filters have a straight line.

If you're taking an image of say, a tree, or mountain, against a bright sky, with a GND filter the top of the tree/mountain will be darkened with the sky.

Where with a HDR image you can simply cut around the edges.

But, in saying that, I would always try and get it right optically before using software. (but, I'm weird. My aim is to do as little PP as possible sicne it pisses me off)

SyncGuy · 04-25-2013, 02:09 AM

Originally posted by hks_kansei

Not to mention that GND filters have a straight line.

If you're taking an image of say, a tree, or mountain, against a bright sky, with a GND filter the top of the tree/mountain will be darkened with the sky.

Where with a HDR image you can simply cut around the edges.

But, in saying that, I would always try and get it right optically before using software. (but, I'm weird. My aim is to do as little PP as possible sicne it pisses me off)

I suppose most of us do that, or at least try hard. Me too! Coz i sure try to get the JPEG image as pleasing as possible so that i can PP it minimally using my iPad2 and posting it straight up for web..

Maybe it's me, but i seem to be lacking in creativity to PP all those cool and nice looking shots. Most of my shots seems to be technically correct in exposure, WB, DoF and what-nots and that's all..

Everytime i try to be a little bit extreme in PP-ing for HDR or anything like that, i don't seem to like it... But i sure do like those that are done by others. Weird eh?

Racer X 69 · 04-25-2013, 07:16 PM

Originally posted by hks_kansei

(but, I'm weird. My aim is to do as little PP as possible sicne it pisses me off)

So in the days before digital did darkroom work piss you off?

hks_kansei · 04-25-2013, 08:43 PM

Originally posted by Racer X 69

So in the days before digital did darkroom work piss you off?

I didn't really do a huge amount of darkroom stuff involving much more than cropping and a little dodging and burning.

PP has it's place, and it gets some brilliant results.
But for me photography is a hobby, I do it because I enjoy it.
I don't enjoy the computer part though, so I try to minimise that bit.

SyncGuy · 04-25-2013, 09:12 PM

Originally posted by Racer X 69

So in the days before digital did darkroom work piss you off?

Hehee.... I have never experienced the darkroom... Sure i did point and shoot a film camera back then. But dropping them off to be developed is just what we did back then..

Into "serious" photography only last year and up till today, i guess i lack the creative juice to PP a shot... Only thing i can do is, make it technically correct.. LOL!
THAT, pisses me off... So i'll just try my very best to get it all right in-camera and be done with it...

Racer X 69 · 04-26-2013, 08:42 AM

Originally posted by hks_kansei

I didn't really do a huge amount of darkroom stuff involving much more than cropping and a little dodging and burning.

PP has it's place, and it gets some brilliant results.
But for me photography is a hobby, I do it because I enjoy it.
I don't enjoy the computer part though, so I try to minimise that bit.

I really like digital for the ease and flexibility of the digital "darkroom". Much easier than fussing about in a dedicated area fiddling with chemicals and having concern that someone might open the door at the most inopportune moment.

And my digital "darkroom" is much smaller, and portable too!

Originally posted by SyncGuy

Hehee.... I have never experienced the darkroom... Sure i did point and shoot a film camera back then. But dropping them off to be developed is just what we did back then..

Into "serious" photography only last year and up till today, i guess i lack the creative juice to PP a shot... Only thing i can do is, make it technically correct.. LOL!
THAT, pisses me off... So i'll just try my very best to get it all right in-camera and be done with it...

I see.

For sure I do the best I can to get the shot where it needs to be in camera, but massaging photos in post adds another dimension that film just didn't quite have.

04-23-2013, 06:23 PM	#1
MD Optofonik Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 962	Does it need to be either/or? GND filters and compositing? (not for typical "HDR") I know that this is, by definition, about HDR but I'm not talking about the overly stylized images that have become associated with the term. I'm concerned with natural looking images that are, within the context of tradition photography, well exposed. Seems to me that some, not all, of the issues with moving objects in compositing two images to overcome DR issues could be mitigated with judicious use of a GND and compositing combined with some layering in PS. Am I stating the obvious? Common knowledge? Examples?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Nature "Hello!" Not your typical portrait	rbefly	Photo Critique	8	01-09-2013 12:11 PM
"The World Is a More Violent Place Than It Used to Be." -- NOT!!!	MRRiley	General Talk	3	08-18-2011 11:31 AM

04-23-2013, 07:06 PM	#2
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	A perfectly valid point - and a technique I have used myself, however there are a few drawbacks involved - filters increase flare and ghosting effects - so if you have bright highlights anywhere in the scene be prepared to clone ghost images of them out, because flare and ghost lights can mess with the Automated frame registration used with HDR stacking software.

04-23-2013, 09:03 PM	#3
hks_kansei Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 834	Not to mention that GND filters have a straight line. If you're taking an image of say, a tree, or mountain, against a bright sky, with a GND filter the top of the tree/mountain will be darkened with the sky. Where with a HDR image you can simply cut around the edges. But, in saying that, I would always try and get it right optically before using software. (but, I'm weird. My aim is to do as little PP as possible sicne it pisses me off)

04-25-2013, 02:09 AM	#4
SyncGuy Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 821	Originally posted by hks_kansei Not to mention that GND filters have a straight line. If you're taking an image of say, a tree, or mountain, against a bright sky, with a GND filter the top of the tree/mountain will be darkened with the sky. Where with a HDR image you can simply cut around the edges. But, in saying that, I would always try and get it right optically before using software. (but, I'm weird. My aim is to do as little PP as possible sicne it pisses me off) I suppose most of us do that, or at least try hard. Me too! Coz i sure try to get the JPEG image as pleasing as possible so that i can PP it minimally using my iPad2 and posting it straight up for web.. Maybe it's me, but i seem to be lacking in creativity to PP all those cool and nice looking shots. Most of my shots seems to be technically correct in exposure, WB, DoF and what-nots and that's all.. Everytime i try to be a little bit extreme in PP-ing for HDR or anything like that, i don't seem to like it... But i sure do like those that are done by others. Weird eh?

04-25-2013, 07:16 PM	#5
Racer X 69 Moderator Man With A Camera Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: The Great Pacific Northwet, in the Land Between Canada and Mexico Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,067	Originally posted by hks_kansei (but, I'm weird. My aim is to do as little PP as possible sicne it pisses me off) So in the days before digital did darkroom work piss you off?

04-25-2013, 08:43 PM	#6
hks_kansei Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 834	Originally posted by Racer X 69 So in the days before digital did darkroom work piss you off? I didn't really do a huge amount of darkroom stuff involving much more than cropping and a little dodging and burning. PP has it's place, and it gets some brilliant results. But for me photography is a hobby, I do it because I enjoy it. I don't enjoy the computer part though, so I try to minimise that bit.

04-25-2013, 09:12 PM	#7
SyncGuy Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 821	Originally posted by Racer X 69 So in the days before digital did darkroom work piss you off? Hehee.... I have never experienced the darkroom... Sure i did point and shoot a film camera back then. But dropping them off to be developed is just what we did back then.. Into "serious" photography only last year and up till today, i guess i lack the creative juice to PP a shot... Only thing i can do is, make it technically correct.. LOL! THAT, pisses me off... So i'll just try my very best to get it all right in-camera and be done with it...

04-26-2013, 08:42 AM	#8
Racer X 69 Moderator Man With A Camera Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: The Great Pacific Northwet, in the Land Between Canada and Mexico Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,067	Originally posted by hks_kansei I didn't really do a huge amount of darkroom stuff involving much more than cropping and a little dodging and burning. PP has it's place, and it gets some brilliant results. But for me photography is a hobby, I do it because I enjoy it. I don't enjoy the computer part though, so I try to minimise that bit. I really like digital for the ease and flexibility of the digital "darkroom". Much easier than fussing about in a dedicated area fiddling with chemicals and having concern that someone might open the door at the most inopportune moment. And my digital "darkroom" is much smaller, and portable too! Originally posted by SyncGuy Hehee.... I have never experienced the darkroom... Sure i did point and shoot a film camera back then. But dropping them off to be developed is just what we did back then.. Into "serious" photography only last year and up till today, i guess i lack the creative juice to PP a shot... Only thing i can do is, make it technically correct.. LOL! THAT, pisses me off... So i'll just try my very best to get it all right in-camera and be done with it... I see. For sure I do the best I can to get the shot where it needs to be in camera, but massaging photos in post adds another dimension that film just didn't quite have.