 Posted 2/27/2008 6:28:05 AM
|
|
|
|
I've noticed that Richard uses neutral density filters quite frequently. When do you decide to use one, and what strength is required for use? I have some from an old film camera but never had much experience with them. Are they a good investment?
My Profile
|
|
|
Posted 2/27/2008 6:54:31 AM
|
|
|
|
| ND filters are different from graduated nd filters. ND filters are just gray filters that essentially slows down the shutter speed of the shot by reducing the amount of light that comes in. This comes in handy when you want to shoot waterfalls and want that silky look. GND filters are gray filters that go from darker to lighter. It is used to even out the exposure when shooting in dramatic light, like a sunset or sunrise. Camera sensors do not have the ability to capture as much dynamic range as human eyes can so in most cases you will end up with a properly exposed sky and underexposed foreground or a properly exposed foreground and a completely blown out sky. One way to compensate for this is to use GND filters. Shooters like Galen Rowell pioneered this technique and there are some great shooters today that still use GND filters. It comes in handy when there is not a complex scene, but if there are a lot of elements in the scene that extend from top to bottom (trees) than a better way might be exposure blending and layer masking. So, to answer your question Barb, YES they are worth it. 
|
|
|
Posted 2/27/2008 7:10:13 AM
|
|
|
|
Will said it well.
I use 2 stop and a 3 stop soft graduated neutral density filters. These are clear on the upper half and grey shaded on the lower half with a soft transition in the middle.
My system is Lee. Consists of a lens adapter, a filter holder (which can be rotated) and the filters themselves (which can be shifted up or down to match the scene). 0.6 = 2 stops 0.9 = 3 stops My front page Signature Daily win from today utilized the full 5 stops of filter on the portion above the middle of the image. Otherwise, the image would have had a seriously blown out sky and detail lost in the foreground shadows.
I have used Photomatix to blend images. It has potential. HDR techniques in conjunction with neutral density filters could be very effective.
 My Top 24
|
|
|
Posted 2/27/2008 7:11:23 AM
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the info, Will. I'm thinking I'll put those on my wish list. I'd like to experiment with them.
My Profile
|
|
|
Posted 2/27/2008 7:16:19 AM
|
|
|
|
Yes, that is one spectacular photograph, Richard. I'm realizing every day how much I DON'T know about photography. The science is as important as the art of it. If you don't know the science, you can't create the art. I've got so much to learn.....
My Profile
|
|
|
Posted 2/27/2008 7:16:28 AM
|
|
|
|
These are clear on the upper half and grey shaded on the lower half with a soft transition in the middle.
Isn't that upside down Richard?
|
|
|
Posted 2/27/2008 7:28:34 AM
|
|
|
|
wilrobking (2/27/2008)
These are clear on the upper half and grey shaded on the lower half with a soft transition in the middle.
Isn't that upside down Richard?
Yes, quite right. In use, the greyed portion filters the bright sky. I haven't had my full ration of coffee yet this morning.
My Top 24
|
|
|
Posted 2/27/2008 7:32:03 AM
|
|
|
|
| Come on Richard. Get with it. I'm on my third gallon. 
|
|
|
Posted 2/27/2008 7:34:08 AM
|
|
|
|
But, you can turn them around if you need to, can't you and have the filtered part at the bottom?
My Profile
|
|
|
| | |
