ND filter for Dusk

  • Thread starter Thread starter A_S
  • Start date Start date
A

A_S

Messages
910
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,

I am wondering what stop filter people recommend for these conditions. I've recently got into my landscapes and purchased the lee starter kit with the 0.6nd, I then bought the 0.9nd and the big stopper so combined I can have 2 stop, 5 stop, 10 stop (My big stopper is closer to 11 stops), 12 stop or 15 by stacking.

I thought this would be a nice round catch all set but unfortunatly the multiples of stops just mean i'm usually at around 60 seconds at dusk with the 5 stop or somesthing stupid like 10 minutes with the big stopper and it is not giving me the scope I need.

What would you recomend I do? an 8 Stop Hi-tech maybe?
 
A_S said:
Hi all,

I am wondering what stop filter people recommend for these conditions. I've recently got into my landscapes and purchased the lee starter kit with the 0.6nd, I then bought the 0.9nd and the big stopper so combined I can have 2 stop, 5 stop, 10 stop (My big stopper is closer to 11 stops), 12 stop or 15 by stacking.

I thought this would be a nice round catch all set but unfortunatly the multiples of stops just mean i'm usually at around 60 seconds at dusk with the 5 stop or somesthing stupid like 10 minutes with the big stopper and it is not giving me the scope I need.

What would you recomend I do? an 8 Stop Hi-tech maybe?
Click to expand...

What scope do you need? Much easier to advise then...
 
The problem is that, as mentioned - 5 stops appears to give me a 10 second exposure where as my big stopper around 600 seconds or 11 minutes (as it is closer to 11 stops).

Ideally I want the flexibility to take a 2 minute or 3 minute exposure to get some good cloud movement and remove any wildlife etc without having to have such a long exposure that I get stupid noise levels as with a 10 minute exposure on the big stopper.

I appreciate that I can flex the ISO and increase the appature to do this but obviously I don't really want to change the appature and changing the ISO means I'll introduce noise that way..

Does that help?
 
just adjust your Aperture/ISO to reduce the exposure time, what are your current ISO/Aperture settings?

I know in the past when I have shot after sunset with a 10 stopper I can normally get my shot in the space of a 240-300 second exposure.

When you say dusk are you talking approx 30 mins after sunset?
 
Don't forget the differences changing your ISO will make, you don't have to go mad, if ISO 100 gives you 10 minutes then ISO200 will give you 5 minutes, ISO 400 will give you 2.5 minutes etc etc.

If you're worried about long exposure noise then leave long exposure noise reduction switched on, just be aware your camera will take a black frame the same length as your exposure, so if you've shot a 5 minute exposure the next 5 mins will be a dark frame.
 
Thanks for the advice - I was very wary of changing the ISO and this is why:


IMG_0666 as Smart Object-1 by Andrew_S84, on Flickr

Shot on a 7D with Canon 10-20, ISO 400, 164s F11 this evening at aprox 7.30. Shot raw and processed to reduce the exposure by 1.5 stops. no noise reduction. Even fairly aggressive settings in Camera raw don't really make a dent.

Can anyone advise why I seem to be getting so much? Even on ISO 100 I get a lot of colour noise.
 
Last edited:
Hmmmm.......When you dropped the exposure by 1.5 stops did you then increase the shadows/black slider to recover detail in the dark areas?

Reason for asking is the worst of the noise is confined to these areas.

Ultimately with a 7D, Canon 10-22mm at ISO 100 you should be able to get a virtually noise free image so I am wondering if this is a post processing induced noise.

Any chance of seeing the RAW file?
 
I would say post process as well nice shot but the tree line area is a bit dark needs your darks slider lifting a bit


You could if I recall set the camera for thirds of iso may be dreaming on that point

The in camera noise reduction is not that fantastic would maybe try in process assuming raw image
 
Thanks for the advice - Border - I would but the noise is just too much unfortunatly.


Stupar - I reduced the detail/shadows by -8.

I am not sure if I can post an unedited raw somewhere so ive attached a JPG version no processing through camera raw:


raw image no processing by Andrew_S84, on Flickr


its not massively under exposed and the noise is prevalent pretty much everywhere. I am sure this is not right for ISO 400?
 
Keep ISO at 100 no matter what for these shots, and turn on long exposure noise reduction in camera, then make sure to expose well, pretty much ignoring any tiny blown details. Use historgram, and is should run all the way to the right, otherwise you can delete and start again. You can afford to sit and wait for a few extra minutes, can't you?

Shots like the one above also need hard ND Grad to deal with much brighter sky (that causes bottom to be super dark --> your exact problem)
 
Thanks for the advice, it is much appreciated.

Unfortunately I only have soft Grads and one (maybe 2, I can't remember) were in use here. I tell a lie, I have a 0.6nd hard grad but that wasnt enough.

I dont think the exposure is too bad given the conditions - perhaps the histogram could have been further to the right/slightly less under exposed to reduce the build up on the water/foreground and trees.

Does long exposure noise reduction work on Raw images?

I'm still unsure about is the noise @ 400 - is that normal?
 
Last edited:
When you look at the second image the trees are better the rest is a little over exposed if you used a soft grad it was not powerful enough to get the sky dark enough

If you have Lightroom try your original shot but use the nd filter option on both sky and foreground, if you use it correctly twice over you can reduce fore and back ground while retaining the trees

You probably know in Lightroom you can angle the line and severity of the graduation

On a 7d noise is an issue more so in shadows
 
A_S said:
Thanks for the advice, it is much appreciated.

Unfortunately I only have soft Grads and one (maybe 2, I can't remember) were in use here. I tell a lie, I have a 0.6nd hard grad but that wasnt enough.

Don't forget black filter bag that you could wave in front of the upper part of the lens to add more grad effect on long exposures :)

I dont think the exposure is too bad given the conditions - perhaps the histogram could have been further to the right/slightly less under exposed to reduce the build up on the water/foreground and trees.

Does long exposure noise reduction work on Raw images?

yes, it works a treat but may take as long as the exposure itself. It doesn't sound like you have an alternative though.

I'm still unsure about is the noise @ 400 - is that normal?

believe me if I underexpose 5DIII by 2 stops in shadows at ISO400 and pull it back it will look quite terrible
Click to expand...
 
Just been re reading on a crop and so wide a lens why f11 you could have dropped f8 or even lower which would have dropped your iso or let you use a different nd filter

Have you read about hyper focal focusing while f5.6 may have not had depth of focus you required you did want sky foreground movement and if any wind at all the trees with such a long exposure would have motion blur

Just a thought
 
Thank you - I'll make sure I try and expose to the right and always use 100, and try not to blow out the sky, its hard to capture the full dynamic range though, i.e expose for the trees, keeping the sky not blown may have been impossible without stronger grads (IIRC I had 2 stop and 3 stop stacked here). - Its all useful advice though and I will put it into practice, hopefully this weekend. I can only aspire to the quality of your images daugirdas.

Border_all - I generally shoot my landscapes at 11 (or sometimes 16) using a hyperfocal distance chart. Perhaps I can go down to F8 with a hyperfocal distance calculated - its all a learning expereince :)

In terms of this image - I'm not going to play with it too much more as I could be messing with it forever. I know the trees are a little dark but i'm quite happy with the final image (except the noise, obviously).

Back to the original subject - I suppose the answer is that you can't really flex the ISO as shown, so I suppose I would need to do some calcs and choose a grad between 5 and 10 stops :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top