HDR/Filters?

russellsnr

russellsnr

Messages
2,686
Name
Russell
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi, Just curious to no the thoughts of others on this.
With the progress in HDR software do you feel the necessity for NDG filters now in Land/seascape photography?
I no with the filter it's one shot but with SD & Cf cards being so cheap as well as storage on computers does HDR or is HDR taking the place of the GND'S?
Russ
 
It is down to personal preference, I prefer to use filters, and get as much done in the camera, some people prefer to blend exposures. For me filters make the job a lot easier when shooting moving things, seascapes with waves, clouds moving across the land etc. There are some things which can't be done in PP, very long exposures with a Big Stopper etc, and of course it is impossible to replicate a CPL for cutting through reflections.

Used well either technique will give good results, used badly either technique is capable of ruining a shot!

I keep fancying a 17mm TS-E and if so I might have to learn to blend exposures better as that lens isn't suited to the use of filters.
 
I keep looking at filters and thinking that they're very expensive and rather awkward to use considering I can get a much more flexible and controllable result in the computer.

More often than not I can do the same thing with a single exposure just using the DR of the sensor and in extreme situations I can shoot extra frames off faster than I could set up a filter holder.

I have yet to be convinced that I would find them useful.
 
Wayland said:
I keep looking at filters and thinking that they're very expensive and rather awkward to use considering I can get a much more flexible and controllable result in the computer.

More often than not I can do the same thing with a single exposure just using the DR of the sensor and in extreme situations I can shoot extra frames off faster than I could set up a filter holder.

I have yet to be convinced that I would find them useful.
Click to expand...

Even a 10 stop or a cpl?

I am still unsure about spending money an grad nd's, but see cpl's and 10 stops as not being replaceable with pp.
 
I was referring to Grads as the OP was enquiring about.

I carry a 6 stop ND, Infra-red filter and CPL but apart from clear protection. that's it.
 
Grads all the time, apart from the fact I have yet to see a HDR landscape that I like, grads are so much easier to use, it takes seconds to pop a grad in a holder for a shot, it takes a lot longer to either produce a HDR image, and blending images takes some time, is quite fiddly and usually less than satisfactory outcomes.

Most recognised/published landscape photographers use grads and tend to run a mile from HDR processing.
 
Les McLean said:
Grads all the time, apart from the fact I have yet to see a HDR landscape that I like, grads are so much easier to use, it takes seconds to pop a grad in a holder for a shot, it takes a lot longer to either produce a HDR image, and blending images takes some time, is quite fiddly and usually less than satisfactory outcomes.

Most recognised/published landscape photographers use grads and tend to run a mile from HDR processing.
Click to expand...


I had an interesting chat with Joe Cornish (you may have heard of him ???) about Grads a few years ago where he conceded they were often in the wrong place, requiring dodging especially to lighten the areas they had darkened, and that this can obviously introduce a hint of degradation/noise that wouldn't otherwise have been there

Blending/HDR is only difficult if you're 'old' Les ;)

:LOL:

Seriously though - this is a bit like the 'What Auto or Manual mode do you use???' question; where the answer is simply... Who cares - all that matters is the result, how you get there is personal choice/style :)

Dave
 
Having done both, I think it's probably down to how much time you want to spend in PP. A proper HDR (metering for shadows & highlights, then splitting it up into exposures) takes a while both in camera and in PP. Using Grads is much more straightforward. As mentioned though - the straight line grads can darken areas you don't want darkening.

Personally - I find filters to be the better option for me. They're quicker, and if I take a few different landscapes, I only have one shot per location rather than 5+ with HDR in mind.

You'll probably find that personal taste is all!

Ian.
 
DG Phototraining said:
I had an interesting chat with Joe Cornish (you may have heard of him ???) about Grads a few years ago where he conceded they were often in the wrong place, requiring dodging especially to lighten the areas they had darkened, and that this can obviously introduce a hint of degradation/noise that wouldn't otherwise have been there
Click to expand...

Yes, and yet Joe still uses filters, teaches their use on his workshops and in fact is sponsored by Lee.
 
I went on a days workshop with Joe late last year...the first thing he emphasised was how useful filters are and he readily produced his set of Lee's.

Interesting guy to listen to and I really like his ethos, it's not based on computer editing but spending time in our wonderful outdoors capturing the best image we can at the time. I'm definitely with him (y)

Simon
 
So you're happy with the advice from someone sponsored by a supplier that using the supplier's products is a good idea ???

Look up the word 'impartial' :LOL:

And I can't believe that using filters can be quicker for anyone than a blended 3-9 shots. What with needing a tripod, sliding it in and trying to figure out if its in the right place, then later dodging it back off the bits you don't want it on - added to the hundreds of £s of expense for the Lee system :shake:

Dave
 
DG Phototraining said:
So you're happy with the advice from someone sponsored by a supplier that using the supplier's products is a good idea ???

Look up the word 'impartial' :LOL:
Click to expand...

I don't worry unduly about the impartiality or otherwise of his advice, I admire his work greatly, that'll do for me.

DG Phototraining said:
And I can't believe that using filters can be quicker for anyone than a blended 3-9 shots. What with needing a tripod, sliding it in and trying to figure out if its in the right place, then later dodging it back off the bits you don't want it on - added to the hundreds of £s of expense for the Lee system :shake:

Dave
Click to expand...

In that case you might need some phototraining..... ;)
 
Actually - one important difference that I thought about today would be that multiple exposures for HDR become more complicated when you have movement in the scene. Cars, people, clouds, swaying trees etc all mean extra work in pp as different HDR software tools have (in my experience) limited capability to deal with this without micro-management.

I'm not saying that one is better than the other! They're just different.

Ian.
 
Different strokes for different folks!

If HDR blending works for you then do it. If filters feel better, use filters. I sound like my mum but it wouldn't do if we were all the same and there's more than one way to egg a cat.

etc
 
chuckles2k3 said:
Different strokes for different folks!

If HDR blending works for you then do it. If filters feel better, use filters. I sound like my mum but it wouldn't do if we were all the same and there's more than one way to egg a cat.

etc
Click to expand...

Absolutely, I find filters quick and easy, 99% of my shots are taken off a tripod, on a dedicated trip, so a few seconds to align them means more time sat in beautiful surroundings than sat working on my MacBook. Each to their own, although I don't agree it is an outdated way of working.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top