I am thinking about getting a graduated or split neutral density filter. Of course, there are all kinds of types/combos so choosing one seems tough. Instead of all that, what about 'just' using photoshop? Take a foreground (dark) picture, a background (light) picture for example, and then use PS to stack them and simulate the effect of the filter?
I say 'just' because my PS skills are uh, not very advanced in the least. If it works better, I would think this might be the way of choice vs the hassles of dealing with the filter(s).
Using photoshop to stack images doesn't work well when your subject isn't stationary. It will be next to impossible with people or animals. Scenery or landscapes can also be a problem when even a slight wind can ruin the final output of a multi-shot image.
Latest versions of PS make stacking images very easy as the process is automated. All you do is show it which files to use in creating the final image.
There is a time and place for using filters vs. post production work. I use either depending on the situation.
I have never had a movement related problem with stacking images in hundreds of exposure blended landscape shots. Of couse it could be a problem in certain extreme circumstances but it has not to date been an issue for me. Exposure blending in photoshop is very easy to learn, particularly if all you with do do is copy the grad ND effect. PS blending allows much more complex blend that would be impossible with a filter. The obvious answer is learn exposure blending in PS and see how you like it. ronbigelow.com is excellent to show you how.
Alex Nail wrote:
I have never had a movement related problem with stacking images in hundreds of exposure blended landscape shots. Of couse it could be a problem in certain extreme circumstances but it has not to date been an issue for me.
Depends on your style of capturing landscape images, but I wouldn't consider it because of extreme circumstances.
If you're taking pictures of grand vistas with everything focused at infinity and very little subject detail, or where the landscape doesn't include easily disturbed objects such as plants or water spray, you won't notice movement.
I use stacking techniques when it's appropriate. But I also like to capture images where the image includes subject matter that is close to the camera along with distant vista's, which means small apertures to keep everything in focus. For some images I will also use a perspective control lens to achieve the desired effect, which also means slow shutter speeds. This translates into long exposures where even a slight breeze will render stacked images unusable. Same applies to freezing the instant of crashing waves in a rugged coastline.
Again, use which ever tool is appropriate for the situation.
"Same applies to freezing the instant of crashing waves in a rugged coastline."
Love dem crashing waves. Many times, in my case, it's several takes in order to grab that critical moment of wave action at it's highest movement and NDs, CirPl and GND's are, for me, the "only" solution. Also, beach shots are a one shot deal as the ocean is in constants flux.
"Again, use which ever tool is appropriate for the situation."
What he said as my style of imaging doesn't lend itself to stacking images in PS.
Need another road trip as my shutter finger's getting a bit itchy.
Using the PS blending method forces you to use a tripod. Using GND filters allows you the option of hand holding. Personally, I use the filters as I shoot both film and digital so I need the filters along for the ride.
I find a B+W MRC three stop GND to be a good starting point. Pricey in the least but the quality of build, anti-reflection coatings and ease of cleaning make this a first choice.
chez wrote:
Using the PS blending method forces you to use a tripod. Using GND filters allows you the option of hand holding.
I usually end up using a tripod even when not using PS blending. So that's not even a plus or minus for me. But the mobility offered by using filters is definitely useful, specially on long hikes or through rugged trails where you don't want to carry a tripod.
One very nice benefit of PS blending is that images can be enlarged to very large sizes with absolutely no noise and very vivid detail.
One very nice benefit of PS blending is that images can be enlarged to very large sizes with absolutely no noise and very vivid detail.
Don't understand what this has to do with blending. If you use a good quality GND filter with the same camera / lens, you will get the same image quality as you would from blending.
chez wrote:
Don't understand what this has to do with blending. If you use a good quality GND filter with the same camera / lens, you will get the same image quality as you would from blending.
I'm on my way out the door so won't get into detailed explanation, but when you stack images the multiple layers fill in - for lack of better terms - "voids" and pixel artifacts. The resulting image is much cleaner.
There are several online sites that provide very good examples of the process.
BeeMan458 wrote:
"(most commonly used by you folks)"
I find a B+W MRC three stop GND to be a good starting point. Pricey in the least but the quality of build, anti-reflection coatings and ease of cleaning make this a first choice.
And how to you put the transition line at anyplace else other than dead center of the frame?
I believe the OP was asking about true grads and the most common are 2-stop soft and 3-stop hard.
If you are going to buy one to try, I would recommend the Cokin P series holder with either their 2 stop or a hi-tech 2 stop GND as a starting point unless you use an ultrawide lens. In that case, you should look at the Cokin Z-Pro or Lee 100mm/4 inch holders.
If you live in areas with lots of mountains and are using the GND with a wide angle lens, you'll want soft transitions. If using the GND with a telephoto, you will usually want the hard transition. If you live in areas with mostly flat horizons, you'll most likely want the hard transition regardless of lens used. The most commonly useful kit is a 2 and 3 stop kit. You can usually correct a one stop difference with a very quick adjustment in Photoshop.
I would strongly caution against purchasing any GND that is not designed for use with a rectangular holder (any that use a screw on mount). You can change the direction of the grad line, but cannot change its grad position or distance from the lens. Distance from the lens affects how hard the transition is.
Personally, I prefer spending 2 seconds placing the grad filter in the field over 2 minutes (or more) of PS post processing. For my personal tastes, I usually like the results better as well. There are times when GNDs don't work well and in these cases I'll usually bracket the shot or bracket from raw.
In Colorado we tend to get a fair amount of wind. It isn't extreme, but it is there. I've found that HDR or layering tends to be difficult in almost all situations because there is almost always some amount of movement. Grass and trees are both affected and trees can even cause problems in the mid ground. Water in lakes, tarns can be affected by wind and streams are always moving.
Hmmm, my thoughts on use are with my 24L wide angle. So in best case scenario, nothing is in foreground. Of course, I expect in probably half of my shots that is not the case. I have a hunch that doesn't make the graduated or hard edge choice and easy decision.
yellowducky wrote:
Hmmm, my thoughts on use are with my 24L wide angle. So in best case scenario, nothing is in foreground. Of course, I expect in probably half of my shots that is not the case. I have a hunch that doesn't make the graduated or hard edge choice and easy decision.
I'm not sure why nothing would be in the foreground when using your 24L, but that's no problem.
2 stop soft grad is always a safe starting point. If you don't know what you want, that is the filter I would recommend. Other than Sigh-Ray, GND filters aren't too expensive, so as you learn what is working or isn't you can buy different filters.
