ND filter vs Photoshop

Gooshin · 03-11-2008, 10:21 AM

producing HDR's and post processing is still much faster and less messy then developing film in a darkroom.

whether you get HDR right or wrong depends entirely on your skill set as eye for colour and balance.

letting the camera do all the work for you is a step backwards if you ask me.

Buddha Jones · 03-11-2008, 10:40 AM

I read that article that aegisphan posted and it looks like a lot of work, but man the results are stunning. Now I am really confused....

Gooshin · 03-11-2008, 10:42 AM

Originally posted by Buddha Jones

I read that article that aegisphan posted and it looks like a lot of work, but man the results are stunning. Now I am really confused....

creating art is never easy

jshurak · 03-11-2008, 11:28 AM

just practice, practice, practice! I've personally never liked the results I've gotten with PS's HDR plugin. Photomatix on the other hand...

TaoMaas · 03-11-2008, 11:40 AM

I'd go with a couple of graduated filters because if you go the HDR route, you pretty much have to use a tripod. Plus, by getting the filters, you keep all your shooting options open. You can use them or not, depending on the situation.

jmax · 03-11-2008, 11:46 AM

Buddha, it has been a long time since I was at the Grand Canyon and perhaps there is now less air pollution. However, the filter I used the most was a polarizing filter. It did a great job of reducing the haze caused by light reflecting off of particles in the air. People were often amazed at the difference between what they saw when viewing with the unaided eye and looking through my viewfinder. (So yes, there are things that a filter can do that photoshop can't.)

The choice between using a ND Grad and HDR may boil down to which one will work under the circumstances. It's not like both are always an option. If there is enough breeze to move foliage--the ususal case where I photograph most of the time--then HDR is very difficult. On the other hand, using a grad is difficult if the light/dark separation isn't a fairly straight line.

If I remember correctly, the canyon rim is usually flat enough so that a ND Grad can usually be used if you are including both sky and canyon. On the other hand, moving foliage won't be a problem on distance shots. Hey, it's the GRAND CANYON, I'd want the entire tool box at my disposal.

JohnV3 · 03-11-2008, 12:41 PM

Buddha:
I live in Arizona and I take most, if not all, of my photos outdoors. I have never had a problem getting blue skies using a CP or UV filter unless the sky is heavily overcast which is very seldom. On clear days, pictures can have such deep blue skies that it almost doesn't look natural or looks like it has been enhanced. The CP reduces glare and will darken the sky even more. At times, it seems like an overkill. You won't have to worry about not getting blue skies unless you run into unusually bad weather. AFAIK, there is no haze around the canyon or or other parts of northern AZ. It's too remote.

When taking photos from the south rim of the canyon, you will be looking down because the land is flat around the rim and you will probably have little or no sky in the frame. If you hike down into the canyon, you will probably be shooting straight ahead or up the canyon walls and will have little sky in the frame.

There are only so many views that you can get from the canyon rim in the National Park and you have seen them in photos millions of times. If you have the time and the means (transportation), for truly amazing landscapes and the bluest of skies, Monument Valley is around 200 miles or so to the northeast. You can drive into the Valley and get different views of all of the rock formations and arches. Bring a lot of memory cards. This area is very remote and lodging can be scarce. Kayenta (20 miles south of the Valley) has some motels but plan ahead and they are not cheap.

Now, having said all of that, it is just my take on things and I am not an accomplished photographer. Have a great trip.

John

Buddha Jones · 03-11-2008, 01:38 PM

I am afraid that I am going to end up packing more camera gear than clothes. Well the good news it that the GC isnt going any where, and God willing I will have many other chances to go out there. I think I am going to take the minimalist approach this time around as to not confuse myself when I get out there. I will take a UV and a CP and be done with it. Thanks again for the replies everyone. Most appreciated.

emalvick · 03-11-2008, 01:51 PM

I think you'll find the CP adequate. I went to the canyon about 10 years ago with a manual 35mm SLR. At the time, I knew very little about photography when it came to the little details like polarizers, etc. My knowledge was really just with regard to exposure. Anyway, I had a polarizer, and while the days I was there were extremely hazy, the photos came out fantastic. The polarizer completely wiped out the haze and gave the canyon a nice color that seemed wiped out to the naked eye. At the time the UV and Polarizer were the only filters I knew about (besides a couple of color filters for BW photography).

That being said, when shots involved the sky, they tended to have a very linear boundary that could have been fine for a standard ND filter.

Now I didn't get to monument valley like suggested, although photos look beautiful, other places that give great photo opportunities include the Sedona area and Montezuma's Castle. Both are south of Flagstaff and a little less remote than Monument Valley although admittedly not quite as breath taking as Monument Valley.

Erik

calicojack · 03-11-2008, 02:26 PM

Originally posted by Buddha Jones

I am afraid that I am going to end up packing more camera gear than clothes. <snip> I will take a UV and a CP and be done with it. <snip>

While the CP will certainly deliver blue skies, the GC is one place where a ND Grad will work wonderfully. I would suggest a 4'X5" and hand hold it. One piece of glass in a case takes almost no room.
Watch out for those cliche shots that every one takes. A few are unavoidable, but go for details instead. If you have the time and the mobility, I would suggest you go to the North Rim for at least a day. 95% of the visitors don't bother going there. (at least it used to be 95% the last time I was there (years ago!)). Bring lots and lots of memory cards. You could probably fit about 90 sd cards in the same space as 1 pair of under shorts!
Have a wonderful trip. I'm Jealous!
Brian

rzarbo · 03-11-2008, 03:02 PM

I do not very often find myself in a position to offer advice to anyone when it comes to photography as I am a real beginner but I happen to have been experimenting with these techniques lately. If I were just a better photographer some of them might actually have been successful.

I would second the advice about either going with just a CP (the easiest) of a ND being the next best choice because they do take a little practice.

Here are the steps that were outlined to me and what I was doing BEFORE ordering a ND and holder...

1. A tripod is a must!

2. Meter off the sky and write down (or if you're young, remember) the F stop and ss.

3. Meter off the ground and do the same.

4. Now set your camera up with the view you want in the VF and, in manual, adjust to sky settings and take the shot. Without moving the camera at all do the same with the ground settings. You now have two images perfectly aligned with one exposed for the sky and one exposed for the ground.

5. Back at the computer, paint the underexposed foreground white which makes it transparent then sandwich that image with the other one.

There are people who swear by this method and prefer it to using an actual filter but having tried both I prefer the filter with the only drawback being I have not found a camera bag suitable for both camera gear and these somewhat fragile filters.

Enjoy the Grand Canyon!

attack11 · 03-11-2008, 03:49 PM

that's a lot of work for not much gain in the dynamic range. auto bracketing 3 or 5 shots and an hdr merge takes much less time.

jshurak · 03-13-2008, 05:36 AM

Originally posted by attack11

that's a lot of work for not much gain in the dynamic range. auto bracketing 3 or 5 shots and an hdr merge takes much less time.

I beg to differ. depending on the size of each image, creating an HDR can take a good while. then you've got to spend time tweaking so the tone mapping doesn't look horrid.

Unless you're shooting right into the sun, I think the method stated above is all the dynamic range you'd need.

Buddha, it looks like you've made up your mind. But for the sake of discussion I'd like to post the following link. It's simply great usage of a grad nd filter. Now, mind you, the photographer shot this with Fuji Velvia slide film, so the dynamic range is fairly high as it is. But this still shows a great example.

attack11 · 03-13-2008, 12:53 PM

Originally posted by jshurak

I beg to differ. depending on the size of each image, creating an HDR can take a good while. then you've got to spend time tweaking so the tone mapping doesn't look horrid.

Unless you're shooting right into the sun, I think the method stated above is all the dynamic range you'd need.

Buddha, it looks like you've made up your mind. But for the sake of discussion I'd like to post the following link. It's simply great usage of a grad nd filter. Now, mind you, the photographer shot this with Fuji Velvia slide film, so the dynamic range is fairly high as it is. But this still shows a great example.

this dumbfounds me. merging 5 raws into an hdr takes about 5 seconds on my opteron (amd64x2). tone mapping, takes as much effort as processing a raw? this rates up there with "don't use sdhc cards, because they might fail!"

hacking 2 images together to fake a foveon sensor output is silly.

jshurak · 03-13-2008, 01:09 PM

Originally posted by attack11

this dumbfounds me. merging 5 raws into an hdr takes about 5 seconds on my opteron (amd64x2). tone mapping, takes as much effort as processing a raw? this rates up there with "don't use sdhc cards, because they might fail!"

hacking 2 images together to fake a foveon sensor output is silly.

A) not everyone has a 64 bit dual core processor.
B) I do, with 4 gigs of RAM and it still takes way longer than 5 seconds to process 5 fine full size jpegs into 1 HDR image. I think its actually the conversion to 16 or 8 bit that actually takes the time.
C)tone mapping can easily be overdone.....very easily. maybe I'm a bit obsessive, but I don't want any halos floating around my HDR images.
D) If you've got your exposure right, RAW conversion takes virtually no time.
E)'hacking 2 images together to fake a foveon sensor output'.....and this is essentially different from HDR how?!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Which freeware photoshop alternative can apply photoshop plugins in batch	raider	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	1	01-28-2010 10:54 PM
Opening Photoshop-saved RAW in Photoshop	jzietman	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	4	12-09-2009 10:49 PM
Mediflight Photoshop filter fun - Topaz	mwcfire	Post Your Photos!	3	05-08-2009 07:51 AM
neutral density filter in Photoshop?	canadave	Photographic Technique	3	05-26-2008 07:27 PM

03-11-2008, 10:21 AM	#16
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	producing HDR's and post processing is still much faster and less messy then developing film in a darkroom. whether you get HDR right or wrong depends entirely on your skill set as eye for colour and balance. letting the camera do all the work for you is a step backwards if you ask me.

03-11-2008, 10:40 AM	#17
Buddha Jones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,587 Original Poster	I read that article that aegisphan posted and it looks like a lot of work, but man the results are stunning. Now I am really confused....

03-11-2008, 10:42 AM	#18
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	Originally posted by Buddha Jones I read that article that aegisphan posted and it looks like a lot of work, but man the results are stunning. Now I am really confused.... creating art is never easy

03-11-2008, 11:28 AM	#19
jshurak Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: philadelphia Posts: 626	just practice, practice, practice! I've personally never liked the results I've gotten with PS's HDR plugin. Photomatix on the other hand...

03-11-2008, 11:40 AM	#20
TaoMaas Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: Oklahoma City Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,574	I'd go with a couple of graduated filters because if you go the HDR route, you pretty much have to use a tripod. Plus, by getting the filters, you keep all your shooting options open. You can use them or not, depending on the situation.

03-11-2008, 11:46 AM	#21
jmax Inactive Account Join Date: May 2007 Location: Texas Posts: 42	Buddha, it has been a long time since I was at the Grand Canyon and perhaps there is now less air pollution. However, the filter I used the most was a polarizing filter. It did a great job of reducing the haze caused by light reflecting off of particles in the air. People were often amazed at the difference between what they saw when viewing with the unaided eye and looking through my viewfinder. (So yes, there are things that a filter can do that photoshop can't.) The choice between using a ND Grad and HDR may boil down to which one will work under the circumstances. It's not like both are always an option. If there is enough breeze to move foliage--the ususal case where I photograph most of the time--then HDR is very difficult. On the other hand, using a grad is difficult if the light/dark separation isn't a fairly straight line. If I remember correctly, the canyon rim is usually flat enough so that a ND Grad can usually be used if you are including both sky and canyon. On the other hand, moving foliage won't be a problem on distance shots. Hey, it's the GRAND CANYON, I'd want the entire tool box at my disposal.

03-11-2008, 12:41 PM	#22
JohnV3 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Phoenix, AZ USA Posts: 165	Buddha: I live in Arizona and I take most, if not all, of my photos outdoors. I have never had a problem getting blue skies using a CP or UV filter unless the sky is heavily overcast which is very seldom. On clear days, pictures can have such deep blue skies that it almost doesn't look natural or looks like it has been enhanced. The CP reduces glare and will darken the sky even more. At times, it seems like an overkill. You won't have to worry about not getting blue skies unless you run into unusually bad weather. AFAIK, there is no haze around the canyon or or other parts of northern AZ. It's too remote. When taking photos from the south rim of the canyon, you will be looking down because the land is flat around the rim and you will probably have little or no sky in the frame. If you hike down into the canyon, you will probably be shooting straight ahead or up the canyon walls and will have little sky in the frame. There are only so many views that you can get from the canyon rim in the National Park and you have seen them in photos millions of times. If you have the time and the means (transportation), for truly amazing landscapes and the bluest of skies, Monument Valley is around 200 miles or so to the northeast. You can drive into the Valley and get different views of all of the rock formations and arches. Bring a lot of memory cards. This area is very remote and lodging can be scarce. Kayenta (20 miles south of the Valley) has some motels but plan ahead and they are not cheap. Now, having said all of that, it is just my take on things and I am not an accomplished photographer. Have a great trip. John

03-11-2008, 01:38 PM	#23
Buddha Jones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,587 Original Poster	I am afraid that I am going to end up packing more camera gear than clothes. Well the good news it that the GC isnt going any where, and God willing I will have many other chances to go out there. I think I am going to take the minimalist approach this time around as to not confuse myself when I get out there. I will take a UV and a CP and be done with it. Thanks again for the replies everyone. Most appreciated.

03-11-2008, 01:51 PM	#24
emalvick Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Davis, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,642	I think you'll find the CP adequate. I went to the canyon about 10 years ago with a manual 35mm SLR. At the time, I knew very little about photography when it came to the little details like polarizers, etc. My knowledge was really just with regard to exposure. Anyway, I had a polarizer, and while the days I was there were extremely hazy, the photos came out fantastic. The polarizer completely wiped out the haze and gave the canyon a nice color that seemed wiped out to the naked eye. At the time the UV and Polarizer were the only filters I knew about (besides a couple of color filters for BW photography). That being said, when shots involved the sky, they tended to have a very linear boundary that could have been fine for a standard ND filter. Now I didn't get to monument valley like suggested, although photos look beautiful, other places that give great photo opportunities include the Sedona area and Montezuma's Castle. Both are south of Flagstaff and a little less remote than Monument Valley although admittedly not quite as breath taking as Monument Valley. Erik

03-11-2008, 02:26 PM	#25
calicojack Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Long Island, N.Y. Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,124	Originally posted by Buddha Jones I am afraid that I am going to end up packing more camera gear than clothes. <snip> I will take a UV and a CP and be done with it. <snip> While the CP will certainly deliver blue skies, the GC is one place where a ND Grad will work wonderfully. I would suggest a 4'X5" and hand hold it. One piece of glass in a case takes almost no room. Watch out for those cliche shots that every one takes. A few are unavoidable, but go for details instead. If you have the time and the mobility, I would suggest you go to the North Rim for at least a day. 95% of the visitors don't bother going there. (at least it used to be 95% the last time I was there (years ago!)). Bring lots and lots of memory cards. You could probably fit about 90 sd cards in the same space as 1 pair of under shorts! Have a wonderful trip. I'm Jealous! Brian

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-11-2008, 03:02 PM	#26
rzarbo Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Connecticut Photos: Albums Posts: 92	I do not very often find myself in a position to offer advice to anyone when it comes to photography as I am a real beginner but I happen to have been experimenting with these techniques lately. If I were just a better photographer some of them might actually have been successful. I would second the advice about either going with just a CP (the easiest) of a ND being the next best choice because they do take a little practice. Here are the steps that were outlined to me and what I was doing BEFORE ordering a ND and holder... 1. A tripod is a must! 2. Meter off the sky and write down (or if you're young, remember) the F stop and ss. 3. Meter off the ground and do the same. 4. Now set your camera up with the view you want in the VF and, in manual, adjust to sky settings and take the shot. Without moving the camera at all do the same with the ground settings. You now have two images perfectly aligned with one exposed for the sky and one exposed for the ground. 5. Back at the computer, paint the underexposed foreground white which makes it transparent then sandwich that image with the other one. There are people who swear by this method and prefer it to using an actual filter but having tried both I prefer the filter with the only drawback being I have not found a camera bag suitable for both camera gear and these somewhat fragile filters. Enjoy the Grand Canyon!

03-11-2008, 03:49 PM	#27
attack11 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Ottawa, ON - Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 658	that's a lot of work for not much gain in the dynamic range. auto bracketing 3 or 5 shots and an hdr merge takes much less time.

03-13-2008, 05:36 AM	#28
jshurak Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: philadelphia Posts: 626	Originally posted by attack11 that's a lot of work for not much gain in the dynamic range. auto bracketing 3 or 5 shots and an hdr merge takes much less time. I beg to differ. depending on the size of each image, creating an HDR can take a good while. then you've got to spend time tweaking so the tone mapping doesn't look horrid. Unless you're shooting right into the sun, I think the method stated above is all the dynamic range you'd need. Buddha, it looks like you've made up your mind. But for the sake of discussion I'd like to post the following link. It's simply great usage of a grad nd filter. Now, mind you, the photographer shot this with Fuji Velvia slide film, so the dynamic range is fairly high as it is. But this still shows a great example.

03-13-2008, 12:53 PM	#29
attack11 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Ottawa, ON - Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 658	Originally posted by jshurak I beg to differ. depending on the size of each image, creating an HDR can take a good while. then you've got to spend time tweaking so the tone mapping doesn't look horrid. Unless you're shooting right into the sun, I think the method stated above is all the dynamic range you'd need. Buddha, it looks like you've made up your mind. But for the sake of discussion I'd like to post the following link. It's simply great usage of a grad nd filter. Now, mind you, the photographer shot this with Fuji Velvia slide film, so the dynamic range is fairly high as it is. But this still shows a great example. this dumbfounds me. merging 5 raws into an hdr takes about 5 seconds on my opteron (amd64x2). tone mapping, takes as much effort as processing a raw? this rates up there with "don't use sdhc cards, because they might fail!" hacking 2 images together to fake a foveon sensor output is silly.

03-13-2008, 01:09 PM	#30
jshurak Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: philadelphia Posts: 626	Originally posted by attack11 this dumbfounds me. merging 5 raws into an hdr takes about 5 seconds on my opteron (amd64x2). tone mapping, takes as much effort as processing a raw? this rates up there with "don't use sdhc cards, because they might fail!" hacking 2 images together to fake a foveon sensor output is silly. A) not everyone has a 64 bit dual core processor. B) I do, with 4 gigs of RAM and it still takes way longer than 5 seconds to process 5 fine full size jpegs into 1 HDR image. I think its actually the conversion to 16 or 8 bit that actually takes the time. C)tone mapping can easily be overdone.....very easily. maybe I'm a bit obsessive, but I don't want any halos floating around my HDR images. D) If you've got your exposure right, RAW conversion takes virtually no time. E)'hacking 2 images together to fake a foveon sensor output'.....and this is essentially different from HDR how?!