Filters, do you use them?

[Lost Canadian]

I see a lot of mention of HDR, and other computer photo manipulation but very few people ever talk filters, which has this self proclaimed filter freak wondering, does anyone here still use them? Refering mainly to ND filters obviously, but others as well.

 

[taco2go]

Frequent Filter user here.
All I use are 2 Singh-Ray ND grads- 2 stop soft, and 3 stop hard step.

 

[Michael Slade]

I use red through yellow filters shooting B&W film.

I don't use any filters for dig. UV? Yes.

 

[Lost Canadian]

I use red through yellow filters shooting B&W film.

I don't use any filters for dig. UV? Yes.

Why no to digi, just curious?

 

[Michael Slade]

Why no to digi, just curious?

I can do more shooting RAW and in Lightroom than I could ever do with a filter. IMO filters get lost, get confusing and get in the way and make your decision making process more cloudy. Personal preference really...I never used them with film, so I don't with dig.

 

[Lost Canadian]

Thanks, makes sense. I guess shooting style and subjects play a roll in the use of filters. Filters for colour landscape is the area I'm most currious about I suppose.

 

[Michael Slade]

Thanks, makes sense. I guess shooting style and subjects play a roll in the use of filters. Filters for colour landscape is the area I'm most currious about I suppose.

As I thought about it I realized that perhaps the biggest reason NOT to shoot with filters and digital, is that you can't unscramble an egg...that is, once you have shot with the filter, it's hard to have the shot *not* with the filter. Sure you can go through some gyrations here and there to 'undo' the filter, but that's more difficult than adding the filter later on.

I think you should try the filters you are considering if you already own them, but I wouldn't go out spending any of your hard-earned cash on filters that you may decide you don't like.

Find a 'filter-buddy' and borrow theirs. I have a 'lens-buddy' that I borrow lenses for my 8x20 before I commit to plunking down 2000 bucks on something I might not like.

 

[sinuhexavier]

An ND filter on digi has proven very useful during those mid day, harsh light shoots when you still want to shoot at 5.6 or less for depth...

 

[Desert Dan]

I use a UV filter but mostly to protect the lens for dust etc.

 

[Lost Canadian]

As I thought about it I realized that perhaps the biggest reason NOT to shoot with filters and digital, is that you can't unscramble an egg...that is, once you have shot with the filter, it's hard to have the shot *not* with the filter. Sure you can go through some gyrations here and there to 'undo' the filter, but that's more difficult than adding the filter later on.

I think you should try the filters you are considering if you already own them, but I wouldn't go out spending any of your hard-earned cash on filters that you may decide you don't like.

Find a 'filter-buddy' and borrow theirs. I have a 'lens-buddy' that I borrow lenses for my 8x20 before I commit to plunking down 2000 bucks on something I might not like.

I think we're coming at this from different angles. See I already have filters, a run of ND's and a polarizer, although I don't use colour filters for reasons you expressed. My curiosity, as I poorly expressed in the original post, is aimed at increased dynamic range and perhaps the over reliance on multi exposure blending. And just so you know where my head is, I'm speaking about filter use, specifically ND filters use, looking at it from the Galen Rowell camp/style of landscape shooting.

You're points are great points however.

 

[Michael Slade]

An ND filter on digi has proven very useful during those mid day, harsh light shoots when you still want to shoot at 5.6 or less for depth...

I like this reason quite frankly. IMO we should listen to Sinuhe...he has skillz.

 

[taco2go]

I think we're coming at this from different angles. See I already have filters, a run of ND's and a polarizer, although I don't use colour filters for reasons you expressed. My curiosity, as I poorly expressed in the original post, is aimed at increased dynamic range and perhaps the over reliance on multi exposure blending. And just so you know where my head is, I'm speaking about filter use, specifically ND filters use, looking at it from the Galen Rowell camp/style of landscape shooting.

You're points are great points however.

As you've mentioned (and continue to demonstrate so well in your awesome shots) graduated filters are certainly a great tool for capturing dynamic range. You can see the immediate effect directly on most camers that have DOF preview or better yet, live view. I definitely feel that their use harkens to a more visceral, dare I say, 'pure' use of the camera capturing images out in the field. My main reason for using them is to decrease time spent on the computer.

However, the incredible power of pixel-level editing that even a mediocre desktop can unleash on a RAW file is truly game-changing. The ability to capture a simply mind-boggling spectrum, (7-10 EVs or more ?) even with 3 bracketed exposures, does makes filter work seem quite unecessary. For those that spend the time learning the technique- it is def. the new darkroom.

For me, the learning curve on levels and curves, and layer work in CS3 (is still pretty steep. So I keep procrastinating....and keep using filters....for now.....

 

[Photog]

I have seen some of Marc Adamus' work. He uses ND filters (not split), to allow extended shutter times, and fair depth of field. He uses this technique to eliminate details in moving water. Very interesting work.

I did use split-ND filters when I shot film, and occasionally with digital. Film gives you one frame to do the job, and that frame can not be manipulated easily without darkroom equip. My lanscape film work was always with slide film. If the light was not within the latitude of the film, I was forced to use a Split ND filter.

With digital, I can shoot to the middle of the exposure range (in RAW) and create the image I wanted, in the computer. Worst case, I can use multiple shots and use HDR techniques.

If the image will be a sunset or moon (something moving or changing fast), I am still forced to use a Split ND filter on occasion (if the light is too dynamic).

 

[bigreen505]

I see a lot of mention of HDR, and other computer photo manipulation but very few people ever talk filters, which has this self proclaimed filter freak wondering, does anyone here still use them? Refering mainly to ND filters obviously, but others as well.

It is always easier to get it right at the time of exposure. Also, Sinuhe has a great point. My current camera has a native ISO of 320, going lower only crushes shadow detail. There have been a few times recently where I wanted to shoot and a reasonably low shutter speed, reasonably open aperture and just couldn't.

 

[Scott Brady]

I use an ND and polarizer with digital. All lenses have a simple protection/UV filter.

With film, I had a full Cokin system.

As an interesting and somewhat humorous note, I just used Photoshop for the first time ever today. . . To stitch a few images together. Worked great.