ND grads v Photoshop?

Ross_Curtis

Ross_Curtis

Messages
537
Edit My Images
No
I'm off to the lake district in a few weeks hoping to try my hand a little landscape photography.

The title says it all really.
What are the advantages of using ND grads over multiple shots blended in photoshop.

Thanks.
 
I don't do a lot of landscapes, but I have to say I thought a nd grad was well worth the money (I didn't get the holder etc). Still, if you forget it or don't have one, there is the PS route. I've done both. Its worth noting that if your horizon isn't level (hills, cliffs etc) an ND grad can prove more tricky.
 
Last edited:
The results are far better (and quicker!) using the real thing. Absolutely no contest.

My rule is, if I can do it in camera, always do it in camera! The results are always better.
 
Last edited:
ND Grad much better as it allows more dynamic range from the offset. If you're working in PS you are limited to what the camera captured, so can only go so far - whereas by inducing ND before the shot is captured, it allows you to do further editing in PS to get more/less effect as required, whereas if you hadn't used an ND in the first place you'd be worse off
 
I think the honest answer is that you will almost always get a better result with HDR blending. Apart from seascapes, how many shots have a clean flat skyline? Good technique with good software and shooting on AEB (cows don't move far in a quarter of a second).

However, the result with grads usually looks pretty good and it's just so much more enjoyable, and somehow more legitimate, doing stuff in-camera rather than messing about on the computer.

Talking to the guys at Lee filters recently, there business has trebled in recent years and it's mainly grads to DSLR users. Almost everything is on back order and they're as surprised as anyone in this digital age.

Edit: HDR in-camera is just around the corner - point and press, three exposures automatically blended, done. I wonder what impact that will have.
 
Last edited:
HoppyUK said:
I think the honest answer is that you will almost always get a better result with HDR blending. Apart from seascapes, how many shots have a clean flat skyline? Good technique with good software and shooting on AEB (cows don't move far in a quarter of a second).

However, the result with grads usually looks pretty good and it's just so much more enjoyable, and somehow more legitimate, doing stuff in-camera rather than messing about on the computer.

Talking to the guys at Lee filters recently, there business has trebled in recent years and it's mainly grads to DSLR users. Almost everything is on back order and they're as surprised as anyone in this digital age.

Edit: HDR in-camera is just around the corner - point and press, three exposures automatically blended, done. I wonder what impact that will have.
Click to expand...

Totally disagree with HDR getting better results than a real grad!

I love the effect an nd grad gives, and I find any HDR blend, no matter how well done, looks very artificial.

If the horizon isn't straight, go for a softer grad, it's that easy!

But I do agree with the rest!
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
Totally disagree with HDR getting better results than a real grad!

I love the effect an nd grad gives, and I find any HDR blend, no matter how well done, looks very artificial.

If the horizon isn't straight, go for a softer grad, it's that easy!

But I do agree with the rest!
Click to expand...

I agree with Hoppy that when the horizon isnt level - or when there are protrusions into the horizon (ie, tops of mountains, trees etc) that even the soft grad can cause unwanted darkening of these items.
In such a situation I think Photoshop is the only option, where you can draw around these obstacles and darken only the sky behind them - however if you have already blown out the sky, this isnt really an option!

Going about things from the opposite approach is even more tricky, ie, using an ND grad and accepting that the obstacles will be darker where they cross into the graduating area.. and then trying to brighten these areas in Photoshop afterwards is in some ways more difficult as you have to get the brightening amount perfect, to avoid getting a "line" where you have increased its brightness.

There isnt really an ideal solution, or at least not one that I have yet found!

Personally I try to take 2 exposures, and then blend them together carefully as to not create a blown out HDR (although I must admit to quite liking the results SOMETIMES) but creating a very subtle blend of a properly exposed foreground, and a properly exposed sky - without the typical HDR looking results from Photomatix etc.

p.s. - if you want to see examples of where ND Grads have been excellently used, see these threads (NOT my own work - although I wish it was!!)

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=302466

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=300510
 
Thanks for all your input.

I will certainly be going down the filter route, but I'm not sure I'm going to have the spare money before we go away, plus if I'm going to do it, I'd rather buy the best I can, which means Lee, and we all know they always on back order, so it's unlikely I'll get it all in time.

I'm a bit of a purest so I do like to do as much as possible from the outset, plus there is something satisfying about setting up a shot and getting it right to start with.

I'd like to try both routes, so I will use this trip as a test for blending before I order a filter holder/kit.
 
It's a matter of chosing the right tool for the job. A wiggly skyline wont handle a grad well and you'll get a better result with blended bracketed exposures.

As you've probably already got bracketing and blending capabilities, you just need to consider packing a small filter set in your bag.

The decision is therefore whether you want to spend money on a decent filter set (Lee for example) and just taking one shot, or filddling with getting the bracketing right and taking several shots and fixing later.

Personally, for a flat-ish skyline, I always prefer using a grad filter as it saves time later as I dislike fiddling with multiple exposures.
 
My thinking was....buy the filters.

After spending 'x' on fuel and time getting to the location, you might be lugging a upwards of 10kgs on your back for miles, just hoping to catch the light - having filters was a useful addition to the bag.:cool:

Shoot with them, without them and bracket shots. When home you'll have a selection of images and exposures - some might just be perfect straight out of camera, you might want to blend, mask or HDR others, but you'll know you have done all you can at the location.


Andy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top