ND Grads vs exposure blending/HDR

  • Thread starter Thread starter stupar
  • Start date Start date
S

stupar

Guest
Can exposure blending (or whatever else you wish to call it) really make ND Grads redundant?
I mentioned to a friend just earlier that I was planning on buying an ND Grad.
He said "don't waste your money, just blend a couple of exposures instead"
Surely blending isn't always a the best way to do it.

What are others thoughts on ND grad filters?

I am fully aware of blending techniques but I don't always want that HDR look that exposure blending can give you.
 
Exposure for the background/sky - take a shot. Exposure for the foreground - take a shot. Combine in Photoshop. Simples.
 
stupar said:
Can exposure blending (or whatever else you wish to call it) really make ND Grads redundant?
I mentioned to a friend just earlier that I was planning on buying an ND Grad.
He said "don't waste your money, just blend a couple of exposures instead"
Surely blending isn't always a the best way to do it.

What are others thoughts on ND grad filters?

I am fully aware of blending techniques but I don't always want that HDR look that exposure blending can give you.
Click to expand...

There will be arguments, but IMHO there's is no doubt that merging different exposures is the better method, though it has to be done carefully. It's also very easy - set the camera to auto-bracket and it will fire off three shots in half a second.

Big disadvantage with grads is that they only work well with a flat horizon - basically a seascape. With everything else, trees/buildings/hills get darkened along with everything else and it looks really obvious and naff.

On the other hand, blending exposures can be problematic with moving subjects, though it's rare and good software helps, like Photomatix http://www.hdrsoft.com/

There is another factor though, and that is a lot of folks just like using grads. They like setting up on a triopd, selecting the best filter, adjusting exposure and waiting for the light. The reward is the pleasure of seeing the finished result there and then. It's not for me, but I can see the point.
 
I shoot long exposure a lot and the use of a grad is the only way for me, especially when used with a 10 stop filter. Shooting 2 long exposures and blending them is pretty crap imo.

In normal circumstances I think I prefer to use grad filters because you can gauge instantly with what you have and if you are dealing with reflections then blending exposures may cause the reflection to mismatch, especially where clouds are concerned.

Saying that I also blend multiple exposures, but I just don't get the same reward and satisfaction of capturing an image on one file. It is though using what you have to get what you want at the end of the day - even if that means a little tonemapping!
 
HoppyUK said:
Big disadvantage with grads is that they only work well with a flat horizon - basically a seascape. With everything else, trees/buildings/hills get darkened along with everything else and it looks really obvious and naff.
Click to expand...

This is spot on. I've just been on a photo trip to the Faroe Islands and used ND grads a lot. When the terrain is mountainous and you're trying to darken the sky it gets tricky. However, I'm not a fan of blending images in Photoshop as it takes a bit of time, so instead I just shoot with the grads on and then tweak the darker bits in Lightroom.
 
Tobers said:
This is spot on. I've just been on a photo trip to the Faroe Islands and used ND grads a lot. When the terrain is mountainous and you're trying to darken the sky it gets tricky. However, I'm not a fan of blending images in Photoshop as it takes a bit of time, so instead I just shoot with the grads on and then tweak the darker bits in Lightroom.
Click to expand...

That sounds like a good solution, a bit of both. There are some times when a grad it better, but if you're going to the trouble of setting up with grads, why not just hammer out a few extra bracketed exposures and have the best of both worlds?
 
I prefer grads tbh especialy when stacking ND filters and a polariser as for darking trees/buildings that sort of thing, Soft grads are a little more subtle.
 
I tend to use grads, but I can see the appeal of blending, particularly when you want to freeze the motion of a particular part (e.g. trees) while blur the sky or so on, or when grads are simply not enough. Although blending can be a bit of a pain to do properly. And I am very anti HDR as it just looks totally wrong.
 
Interesting reading guys.

My dilemma is I do a lot of 10 stop setups thus the ND grad seems ideal. Most of my shots are also seascapes which give a pretty solid horizon minus the odd bridge structure etc.

But I do also do a lot of normal exposures where blending would give me the result quicker.

Think this is one to ponder before I commit to buying an ND grad.
 
stupar said:
Interesting reading guys.

My dilemma is I do a lot of 10 stop setups thus the ND grad seems ideal. Most of my shots are also seascapes which give a pretty solid horizon minus the odd bridge structure etc.

But I do also do a lot of normal exposures where blending would give me the result quicker.

Think this is one to ponder before I commit to buying an ND grad.
Click to expand...

Give it a go :thumbs: 0.6 hard is probably my most used, then 0.9 hard and 0.9 soft to complement it. Grads are great on the move without a tripod, where blending just wouldn't deliver. Hitech is actually quite OK if you fancy saving a little over Lee.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top