Graduated filter or not?

redmonkee

redmonkee

Messages
2,653
Name
PHILIP
Edit My Images
No
Hi guys i'm going to the Scottish Highlands in April and have been thinking of the gear I want to take.

The last couple of years i've been mainly shooting sports but see this as a great chance to get back into landscapes and also to really test my fairly new D700:)

Now I have a 24mm 1.4G and 85mm 1.4G as my two lenses. Also I have a B+W 10 stop filter and circular polariser and of course a sturdy tripod.

Now the question I have is do I need to take a graduated filter to be able to maximise the dynamic range of my landscape shots?

I understand what they do and how they work but the seem a bit fiddly and I was wondering if I could get the same by bracketing and combining my exposures.

Or if there is movement in my image, just shoot the one RAW file and develop in LR to get a file at -4 -2 0 +2 +4 EV file and then combine these.

What would you guys recommend and what do you think are the pros and cons of each method.

Thanks in advance :thumbs:
 
My own view is take an ND Grad. You have a 10 stop anyway so all youll be taking extra is the actual ND Grad filter.

Ive used all 3 techniques (ie filter, combining exposures and bracketing). My own view is that the filter method works best. In addition, you either fiddle at the time of taking the picture or, you fiddle my combining shots in post processing.

From my experiences (in the Scottish Highlands) there are few days where the contrast between sky and foreground is sufficient to warrant any of these methods. But, when it is you'll be glad you took the filter as some of the scenery is breathtaking.

Oh and I usually ind the 0.6 Grad is the most used (followed by the 0.9 and lastly the 0.3 which doesnt really get taken out of the bag).
 
Take the grad. Making a HDR from one raw will give you the same result as just shooting 1 shot and being good with curves. (Like I do when I shoot digital these days). It looks ok, but the differenece is clear when you compare to the same shot with a grad filter. Using the grad will enable you to give more exposure and thus have to boost the shadows less later.
 
You'll be fine with P series for the lenses you've described, but I would suggest getting a CPL that slots into the square holder rather than trying to fiddle with square system on the end of a CPL. If the 10 stopper is slim fit too you should get away with the square holder stacked on top of it without too much vignetting.

I can just get away with using a standard CPL and standard red filter on 49mm thread of a 24mm lens full frame, there is some corner fall off at low exposure but with digital you can easily correct that at the raw stage. I'm stuck with it!
 
redmonkee said:
Cheers guys

I figured it's be better getting it right in camera. One question though what filter system should I use.

and how easy is it to attach a graduated nd to a circular polariser or 10 stopper bearing in mind these are filters with thin mounts.
Click to expand...

Sorry, my bad. I thought you had a filter system already as you have a 10 stop. Am I right in thinking your 10 stop is a screw in?

If so then you will have problems attaching any filter system to a screw in filter. Most filter systems require an adapter ring (screws into the end of the lens) filter slider (attaches to the adapter rink) and then you slide filters in and out as you please.

You could of course just hold the ND grad against the 10 stop but the pitfalls of that are movement of the camera.

There are quite a few filter systems out there. Lee is probably the best known and probably gets the best results but, cost is an issue with Lee. That, pls the filters are glass based so if you drop it, its allover. I personally use the Hitech system which is a reasonable price and produces decent results.

Cokin is another manufacturer.

My advise would be buy the adapter ring, filter holder and a 0.6 ND Grad. probably Cokin would be easiest and cheapest if this is the first time and you want to experiment. Bear in kind though you wont be able to use that with your 10 stop so youd need to buy a 10 stop slide in filter (or a normal 3 stop ND and slow the shutter speed down with a high aperture etc).

I'm sure others will have different advice and I will of course bow to the superior understanding of the filter system many on here will have.
 
boccers_2000 said:
There are quite a few filter systems out there. Lee is probably the best known and probably gets the best results but, cost is an issue with Lee. That, pls the filters are glass based so if you drop it, its allover. I personally use the Hitech system which is a reasonable price and produces decent results.
Click to expand...

Only the Lee ProGlass are glass filters, the standard grads are resin.
 
It tends to be a heated subject, but I prefer HDR. Grads can't cut around trees, buildings and hills that break the skyline.

You just have to be careful not to overdo HDR, but it's so easy on auto-bracketing and then sort it out at leasure on the PC. It has to be said though, seeing the result with a grad immediately on the LCD is rather more satisfying at the time, but it's so much faffing around and my mrs doesn't have the patience.

My landscape kit is one super-wide zoom, polariser, 10-stop ND filter, and HDR technique. Never wanted for anything else.
 
Last edited:
HoppyUK said:
It tends to be a heated subject, but I prefer HDR. Grads can't cut around trees, buildings and hills that break the skyline.

You just have to be careful not to overdo HDR, but it's so easy on auto-bracketing and then sort it out at leasure on the PC. It has to be said though, seeing the result with a grad immediately on the LCD is rather more satisfying at the time, but it's so much faffing around and my mrs doesn't have the patience.

My landscape kit is one super-wide zoom, polariser, 10-stop ND filter, and HDR technique. Never wanted for anything else.
Click to expand...

Hi Richard

I'd love to have a little more info on your PP technique and some examples. That is my concern about the Grad nd that i'll have a visible line cutting across the image.

I'll be going with my girlfriend and one of my concerns is having her waiting round for me to set up a shot and messing about with filters. I'd much rather get the cam on the tripod and bracket and spend as much time as I need when home on the computer :)
 
Personally I have a 0.6 hard, 0.9 hard and 0.9 soft and that does everything I need. I prefer a 0.9 soft over a 0.6 soft for the stronger nd effect in the lower part of the grad but it's horses for courses really.

Saves alot of time faffing in photoshop (other photo editing software is available).
 
I'd also go with the Grad option. I've tried both options and personally cant stand the HDR look. Very subtle HDR can be achieved with just playing with curves, so I don't see the point. Besides, you could spend the same amount of time fiddling with shadows when you use a grad for the previously mentioned (only) issue with grads as you would with HDR'ing in the first place. Get the exposure right in camera is my personal opinion.
 
redmonkee said:
Hi Richard

I'd love to have a little more info on your PP technique and some examples. That is my concern about the Grad nd that i'll have a visible line cutting across the image.

I'll be going with my girlfriend and one of my concerns is having her waiting round for me to set up a shot and messing about with filters. I'd much rather get the cam on the tripod and bracket and spend as much time as I need when home on the computer :)
Click to expand...

My technique is quick and dirty I'm afraid Philip. No doubt frowned upon by serious landscapers. I'd like more time to spend on it, because it's actually an enjoyable process when you're out on your own. I find a lot of serious photography is quite anti-social, and means walking way off the beaten track, setting up a tripod and grads, waiting for the clouds to behave, that sort of thing.

Anyway, quickest and dirtiest is to be very careful with exposure, pushing it to the right as far as you dare, shoot Raw and just apply a vignette and grad effect in Lightroom, and pull up the shadows. Kind of a very mild faux HDR, but it works okay if you shoot at low ISO (I have a 5D2 which helps) and don't go mad lifting the shadows or they get noisy.

Rather better is to shoot three exposures at +/- 2 stops on auto-bracket, which extends dynamic range by 4 stops, say from 7 to 11. Push the exposure to the right to maximise it, but make sure the sky just doesn't quite blow*. Then just bung them into Photomatix software http://www.hdrsoft.com/ I can't be bothered to shoot a dozen exposures at half stop increments or whatever some people seem to do - makes b****r all difference and the limitation of +/- 2 stops auto-bracket (on the 5D2) is a good discipline.

If you go too far with HDR, or with grads too sometimes, it just looks artificial, like a bad nuclear dawn, and you start to get a brighter outline around dark/light transitions that looks terrible. My judgement for success is when non-photographer friends just think it looks nice without saying 'what have you done to that?!'.

BTW, I also carry one basic grad - a cheapy Kood ND2 that is simply glued directly to the adapter ring (no holder) and screws straight on to the lens, total cost £17. It's no bigger than a normal screw-in filter. You can rotate it of course, but can't shift the grad line so if that doesn't suit, you have to adjust the composition in camera and crop in post. You can do quite a lot with just one grad, and vary the effect a bit with focal length and aperture - shorter focal length, stronger effect; higher f/number, stronger effect.

* Get to know your camera, with careful attention to the histogram, and know exactly when blinkies start to flash. That point varies according to the contrast level set in picture styles. Turn that down to min for the closest match to the Raw, but I find I've still got about one stop above that on the actual Raw file, which is a lot. Be careful though ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top