ND Filters

[shaner21]

I want to buy a ND filter for use in landscape photography.  Opinions seem to be fairly widespread on the Internet and I was hoping for some guidance.   Thank you.

[Alan Klein]

You might consider graduated neutral density filters to address the wide difference in exposure between bright skies and the darker  ground portion.  These type filters help you catche the wide number of stops.  Google "graduated neutral density filters" and look for explanations of what to buy and how to use.

[Some Guy]

If you want to do water blur, I'd go with something on the order of 10 stops to get your speed down low enough to blur it while holding a reasonable depth of focus of f/8-f/16.

Review: http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/round-ups/539760/best-9-and-10-stop-nd-filters

SG

[stamper]

You might consider graduated neutral density filters to address the wide difference in exposure between bright skies and the darker  ground portion.  These type filters help you catche the wide number of stops.  Google "graduated neutral density filters" and look for explanations of what to buy and how to use.

In my experience this type of filter has "only" two stops of difference which means they aren't really useful. They are less popular than they used to be because the effect can be replicated in software. I think that film shooters probably still use them. As to the ND 9 & 10 stops they are definitely useful if you like the soft flowing effect. I would concentrate on reading more about them.

[Alan Klein]

Graduated Neutral Density filters ("grads") come in 1,2,3, and 4 and etc stops of difference, not only two stops.  In addition, I shoot film; maybe the OP does too. 

Even if you're shooting digital, multiple pictures have to be taken and combined and then edited requiring more knowledge of computer programs that many people do not want to bother with.  I don't use these methods so I can't speak from first hand experience. However, for most of the photos that I've seen posted that used HDR or tone control methods, so many are poorly executed and the skies appear very unnatural.   So there appears to be a large learning curve with software.  Or it doesn't work very easily or consistently.  So now the OP has two methods of overcoming the wide range of stops you often are faced with in landscape photos. 

[PhotoEcosse]

Graduated Neutral Density filters ("grads") come in 1,2,3, and 4 and etc stops of difference, not only two stops. 

Correct - and in hard or soft transitions.

I rarely use 1 or 2 stop (0.3, 0.6) ND Grads nowadays as I can replicate the effect much more precisely in Lightroom by pulling down a negative exposure compensation graduated filter over the sky. If the scene requires more than that, however, I may still use a 3 or 4 stop (0.9, 1.2) ND Grad and then do the finer adjustment in Lightroom afterwards.

A case of using the best combination of tools for the job in hand.

[Lee Roberts]

I bought into the Lee system and haven't used it once. But that's due to severe lack of time and not a lack of quality from the filter system.

The square filter system (Lee, Cokin, others?) is really the way to go if you can afford it IMHO. You can stack multiple ND on top with ease and interesting results. You can also hold the large square filters in front of your lens if you don't want to screw on the adapter.

To each his own. The HDR or digital technique described in this thread can be done but is not preferable to many -- including myself. The blended exposure almost always appears....digitally altered. Not a fan, am I, but again -- to each his/her own. My suggestion: read Kenrockwell's advice about ND (if you can stomach his site, that is) because it's very helpful. Perhaps start out with a cheap, cheap screw-on (round, threaded) ND filter and experiment before spending $200 or more. I wish I'd done that personally. Or maybe the HDR/blending technique described by others on this thread. You may fall in love.

[robdickinson]

HDR works, but not always.

Filters work, but not always.

Manually blending works, but not always.

I'm prepared to use any of them.

[PhotoEcosse]

HDR works, but not always.

Filters work, but not always.

Manually blending works, but not always.

I'm prepared to use any of them.

...but you miss out the option that probably works more often than any of those you mention. Simple processing of a single image file in Lightroom. (As the BBC would add: "Other software is available").

Yes, HDR or manual blending is required in extreme cases. In those cases, nothing else will work.

Filters can help in some cases. No doubt about that.

But, much of the time, neither of those solutions is required.

However, let's acknowledge that some photographers enjoy playing with filters out in the field. Equally, let's acknowledge that some photographers enjoy post-exposure processing on their PC. Doesn't make one source of enjoyment universally "better" than any other.

[Greg D]

Well, that sure clears things up for the OP......   

So what sort of landscape shooting do you do primarily (i.e. woodlands, desert, snow)?  What is it you're looking to accomplish with NDs?

[Lee Roberts]

...but you miss out the option that probably works more often than any of those you mention. Simple processing of a single image file in Lightroom. (As the BBC would add: "Other software is available").

Yes, HDR or manual blending is required in extreme cases. In those cases, nothing else will work.

Filters can help in some cases. No doubt about that.

But, much of the time, neither of those solutions is required.

However, let's acknowledge that some photographers enjoy playing with filters out in the field. Equally, let's acknowledge that some photographers enjoy post-exposure processing on their PC. Doesn't make one source of enjoyment universally "better" than any other.

If I came across as implying HDR is inferior, I apologize. And that goes for any other point I tried to make. Good, sound, natural exposure -- using physical filters to compensate for natural light sources (the sun) is usually the easiest image to work with in post. That was my point.

Here's a little help from your friends (on this site). Cokin filter set for $50!!

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1272897

[robdickinson]

Cokin, making skies purple since ages ago...

I may have said this already , and certainly not be the first, but dont buy cheap filters with nasty colour cast. Get Lee or Hitech, it saves money and more importantly files.


And yes I do shoot single unfiltered frames a good chunk of the time but I do prefer filters as a first practical way of controlling dynamic range (canon shooter lol). I also use filters and blending/HDR if I feel the need.

[Lee Roberts]

Cokin, making skies purple since ages ago...

I may have said this already , and certainly not be the first, but dont buy cheap filters with nasty colour cast. Get Lee or Hitech, it saves money and more importantly files.


And yes I do shoot single unfiltered frames a good chunk of the time but I do prefer filters as a first practical way of controlling dynamic range (canon shooter lol). I also use filters and blending/HDR if I feel the need.

Rob, you are one funny man!! You have me laughing here at work. Damn you! Cokin is compatible with Singh-Ray also, right? I thought it was a good deal for someone starting out...you can always upgrade to better filters (using same filter holder).

Anyway, I had a 5d2 so I know all about DR. Perhaps the problem is a little over-exposed -- pardon the corny pun. I've always heard "expose to the right". DSLRs have come a long way in terms of DR compared to early technology (ex: Canon D60 -- not the 60d or the Nikon D70  -- not the D700/D7000)

[robdickinson]

I'd say get 100mm filter holder.

also remember lee filters are 4mm thick, hitech are 2mm so you need different rails. Lee holders and gear are very well made.

As for Singh-Ray I wont buy their products because they dont support photographers. Sadly.

[AndrewKulin]

As for Singh-Ray I wont buy their products because they dont support photographers. Sadly.

I am curious, why do you say that?

[robdickinson]

I am curious, why do you say that?

They had appropriated one of Kah Kits images for a brochure , when he asked them about it and wanted payment they refused, ditched the image and told him they would find someone who would be happy to supply the image for free.

This from a photographic supplies company. :/

[shaner21]

Thank you all for your feedback.  I am quite new at landscapes but am looking for something to help slow down the shutter speed to blur water; something to help with capturing the sky and foreground - something magical   I am visiting Scotland in a few months and trying to be prepared.  I will continue to read prior to any commitment.  Thanks again.

[Alan Klein]

Don't wait until the last minute to buy filters.  Practice before you go so you're ready when you get there.  Good luck and have fun.  I haven't been to Scotland.  But the photos I've seen do seem magical.

[robdickinson]

If you just want to slow shutter speeds then you want plain ND filters, these can be square or screw on round no worries.

3 stop is fine for shady bush/forest or early morning/evening.

For other times you will need 6-10 stops.

Good advice to get them early they can take some getting used too especially the 6-10 stop ones.