Acceptable Filter Colour Cast?

Haldir

Haldir

Messages
300
Name
Pete
Edit My Images
Yes
I was about to buy a few Cokin P Series filters, but read a few comments about colour cast with ND and GND filters. Seemed a bit daft paying £47.00 for a plastic holder and three filters that have a colour cast, so I looked for an alternative. I came across the SIOTI 100 Holder, lovely bit of kit without comparing it to Cokin. I bought the 58 mm version, and love the fact it'll take a 62 mm screw in Circular Polarizer plus filters, and on my 18-55 kit lens, there's no Vignetting even with all three slots attached, perfect...Anyway:giggle: Filters, I've bought one Graduated Grey/Natural Density or GRND8 100 x 150 mm for £5.99 on Amazon, and it's even supplied in a very nice padded case. As mentioned, it seems daft paying good money for Cokin if they have a colour cast, so before I buy any more at £5.99, is this an acceptable colur
cast for a budget filter?

18 mm ISO 400 F16 @ 320

GND8 Test Without.jpg

18 mm ISO 400 F16 @ 320

GND8 Test With.jpg

Elements Auto Colour Correction...

GND8 Test With F CC.jpg
 
A colour cast isn't a problem that I can see and appears to be common. When using my Lee ND filters I just adjust the WB to suit - I do mine before, but after is OK too.
 
Last edited:
Sky said:
A colour cast isn't a problem that I can see and appears to be common. When using my Lee ND filters I just adjust the WB to suit - I do mine before, but after is OK too.
Click to expand...

Appreciated Trevor :giggle: I always forget about adjusting White Balance, which makes sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sky
Haldir said:
So, all those stunning landscape images in your link LongLensPhotography.co.uk, and you haven't used one filter? :giggle:
Click to expand...

Filters are a bit of a throwback to the days of film most people HAD to do it in camera, not being able to process afterward. Many still love their filters, and that's fine, but they can cause more problems than they solve (like when using a grad against an uneven horizon, or taking pictures into the sun) and there's no need for them anymore. For me there's just 2 exceptions: the polariser and the 10-stop ND (although that can be replaced using multiple exposures).
 
Haldir said:
So, all those stunning landscape images in your link LongLensPhotography.co.uk, and you haven't used one filter? :giggle:
Click to expand...
A lot of filters (of course not all - looking at you polariser and even to some extend nd) can be replaced by digital imaging techniques which can even result in better iq as you aren’t placing additional glass/plastic in front of the lens.

There is an argument about ‘getting it right in camera’ which is fine if your shooting film but I just don’t think stands up for digital photography.
 
ancient_mariner said:
Filters are a bit of a throwback to the days of film most people HAD to do it in camera, not being able to process afterward. Many still love their filters, and that's fine, but they can cause more problems than they solve (like when using a grad against an uneven horizon, or taking pictures into the sun) and there's no need for them anymore. For me there's just 2 exceptions: the polariser and the 10-stop ND (although that can be replaced using multiple exposures).
Click to expand...

Brazo said:
A lot of filters (of course not all - looking at you polariser and even to some extend nd) can be replaced by digital imaging techniques which can even result in better iq as you aren’t placing additional glass/plastic in front of the lens.

There is an argument about ‘getting it right in camera’ which is fine if your shooting film but I just don’t think stands up for digital photography.
Click to expand...

I took this a couple of days ago using a Polarizer and a Graduated ND2, shot in RAW which I'm really enjoying at the moment. Not saying I know what I'm doing with filters or post processing, but it might take me quite a lot longer on the PC to get the same effect.
Top Billy 2 Blackley.jpg
 
Haldir said:
I took this a couple of days ago using a Polarizer and a Graduated ND2, shot in RAW which I'm really enjoying at the moment. Not saying I know what I'm doing with filters or post processing, but it might take me quite a lot longer on the PC to get the same effect.
View attachment 280958
Click to expand...
There is something nice about using filters and coming away with a file that needs very little tweaking. It’s quite simple on pc though you can either take two different exposures of the same image and blend them or if you’re cameras raw files are up to it just use the grad filter in Lightroom.
 
Brazo said:
There is something nice about using filters and coming away with a file that needs very little tweaking. It’s quite simple on pc though you can either take two different exposures of the same image and blend them or if you’re cameras raw files are up to it just use the grad filter in Lightroom.
Click to expand...

Appreciated Mark:giggle: I don't have Lightroom but I have recently purchased Affinity Photo, and I also use Elements 2008. But yes, I do like using filters. Besides the Hoya Polarizer
I know the others are pretty low down on the quality list, but better tan expected at £6.00 each.
 
Haldir said:
I took this a couple of days ago using a Polarizer and a Graduated ND2, shot in RAW which I'm really enjoying at the moment. Not saying I know what I'm doing with filters or post processing, but it might take me quite a lot longer on the PC to get the same effect.
View attachment 280958
Click to expand...

1. It can be pushed at least another 1/2 stop. Check the histogram
2. It has a slightly magenta cast all over.
3. Top of the image is certainly too dark. It can't be possibly darker than the reflection in this Universe. That's physics. In other terms you shouldn't have used the grad.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
1. It can be pushed at least another 1/2 stop. Check the histogram
2. It has a slightly magenta cast all over.
3. Top of the image is certainly too dark. It can't be possibly darker than the reflection in this Universe. That's physics. In other terms you shouldn't have used the grad.
Click to expand...

Appreciates the comments Wuhan.

1...The Histogram isn't something I've ever used I'm afraid, but I'll look in to it.
2...Below is the result from Auto colour correction removal in Elements
3...That makes a lot of sense!

Top Billy 2 CC Blackley.jpg
 
Haldir said:
1...The Histogram isn't something I've ever used I'm afraid, but I'll look in to it.
2...Below is the result from Auto colour correction removal in Elements
3...That makes a lot of sense!
Click to expand...

That does look a lot better. (y)

Regarding lightness or otherwise of skies vs water, one has to make choices about whether the image is to appear natural or otherwise & what the purpose of it is. If the idea is to make a super-striking image that will blow the socks off a jaded Facebook viewer then all sorts of horrors are justified, but if one wants to make a natural, pleasing landscape then care and thought is needed when applying darkening etc, whether with filters on the lens or in software.

In your reworked image I'd probably lift shadows a touch, darken the water and reduce clarity to smooth the image and make the shiny bits of leaves etc sit more comfortably with the rest of the tones. Others might take a different approach to extract the maximum 'pop'.
 
ancient_mariner said:
but if one wants to make a natural, pleasing landscape then care and thought is needed when applying darkening etc, whether with filters on the lens or in software.
Click to expand...

I think the main point is that you regardless if you use physical filter you still need to do it again in post to make it just right. The filters only come in full stops, and your best bet is to under-correct it "in camera". Reversing a filter, and particularly one with issues becomes increasingly harder.
Here you have a choice between darkening the bottom or lightening the top. Probably a tiny bit of both I would say.

ancient_mariner said:
In your reworked image I'd probably lift shadows a touch, darken the water and reduce clarity to smooth the image and make the shiny bits of leaves etc sit more comfortably with the rest of the tones.
Click to expand...

I find tree scenes don't like extra clarity. Rocks, mountains and buildings are the opposite.

If we go all the way the chemtrails need to be cloned out. They break and divide the image.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top