- Messages
- 7
- Name
- Abraham
- Edit My Images
- No
Hi all,
What filters would you say are best for using with landscape photography?
What filters would you say are best for using with landscape photography?
A big stopper however is essential for long exposures in daylight, .
I'm intrigued, how do you replicate the unique blurring of a long exposure in Photoshop? For example, to produce an image like this:View attachment 301467
Yes, I've heard lots of people talk about the benefits of simulated long exposure. I'm put off by having all those raw files to a) process and b) store. Using a 10 stop and having one RAW file to edit and store seems better to me.Not if you have Photoshop its not, and a Lee one is about 3-4 years of the Adobe subscription and needs replacing every 3-4 years too as you'll drop it lol
Dave
I have a whole set of Lee filters - Hard, Medium and Soft grads, a Little (6) and Big (10) stopper and the new polarizer and filter.
While I fully understand that my camera (Canon 5d4) has pretty good dynamic range and I can easily bracket snd merge later, I like the process of using filters. I work in IT and spend all day on computers, so for me, landscape photography is my escape and I'd rather get as much right in the camera as I possibly can. I typically spend around a minute or two processing each image in lightroom, doing just very minor tweaks.
I haven't used a polariser in years - I am not that keen on the affect and if it is uneven (which happens often with short focal lengths) then it is even worse. For me the one filter I couldn't live without would be a 3 stop soft edged GND filter or 0.9 soft.
It's quite easy to remove the effect of uneven polarisation on a blue sky using simple PP techniques. I'm sure you could master it!
It's been a lot longer than that since I used a CPL for skies. I find them very useful for all sorts of other shots, including some that are totally impossible without them.I could..but why bother removing something by using something that puts it there in the first place. I haven't used a CPL in over two years and my photography hasn't suffered at all.
Not if you have Photoshop its not, and a Lee one is about 3-4 years of the Adobe subscription and needs replacing every 3-4 years too as you'll drop it lol
Dave
The Lee Big Stopper costs around 9 months of Adobe... unless you are paying a lot less than me
The only lens I'd have wanted one for was my (then) Nikon 14-24, which when I looked needed the bigger filter and holder and ring costing over £300, which is about 3 years worth of the Adobe monthly premium - case = rested
Dave
That's a bit different to the 'average' Lee filter that most people would be referring to and using then..... If you would have said that in your initial post it might not have been queried...... But then, that's not as much fun
I use a CPL a lot, I find it invaluable for cutting out glare from foliage in woodlands and it is brilliant for making the colours of rainbows pop
Generally (most times but not always) using LEE filters allows me to get the exposure right in camera and choose the shutter speed for the effect I want regardless of the light but each to their own, people commenting here seem happy with the results whether they are using filters or not.
It just needs to rotated right when the filter is ~90 degrees from the position that makes the rainbow disappear it will double the rainbows intensity.I find you have to be careful using a polariser on a rainbow. It is very easy to make it disappear completely, as i'm sure you know, but I have never really found it accentuates the colours.
It just needs to rotated right when the filter is ~90 degrees from the position that makes the rainbow disappear it will double the rainbows intensity.
I have never found that to be the case.......
I have never found that to be the case.......
The light is coming straight at you after being reflected 1 or more times. Each reflection increases the polarization.Nor me in my Pola days. I kinda assumed the light from the rainbow was coming straight at me so never expected it to make any difference, nor did it AFAIK
Dave
Nor me in my Pola days. I kinda assumed the light from the rainbow was coming straight at me so never expected it to make any difference, nor did it AFAIK
Dave
I've never really been lucky enough to catch many rainbows to test it out
There was a thread here some time ago about this and I believe the conclusion was that it changes them but doesn't enhance them. I don't remember the details or understand the physics but the route of the light through each raindrop is quite complex and polarisation does have some effect on it.