DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Why use a GND filter?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 19 of 19, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 08/13/2008 08:38:15 PM · #1
I think the photo on this page says it all...


08/13/2008 08:43:43 PM · #2
That is why I have at least one with me at all times.
 08/13/2008 08:45:09 PM · #3
Dramatic demo -- cool.

08/13/2008 08:52:51 PM · #4
I've often toyed with buying a GND... but I've always figured that I can get the same result, but more flexibly, by bracketing and combining in post. Aside from the action shots where bracketing is not possible, I can't offhand think of any reason to use a physical filter instead of this technique... thoughts?
 08/13/2008 08:58:13 PM · #5
I would use a gnd just to save me the trouble of blending afterwards. If it is a situation where a gnd can't be used (i.e. line between bright and dark is not straight within the scene) then bracketing and blending is the only option.


08/13/2008 09:00:00 PM · #6
You could consider a GND to be the lazy man's technique to a perfect exposure. Get it right in camera and you don't have to mess with bracketing and layering in post. Plus, with a GND you have the flexibility of NOT using a tripod. :-)
 08/13/2008 09:03:07 PM · #7
Originally posted by kirbic:
I've often toyed with buying a GND... but I've always figured that I can get the same result, but more flexibly, by bracketing and combining in post. Aside from the action shots where bracketing is not possible, I can't offhand think of any reason to use a physical filter instead of this technique... thoughts?


Shooting 2 frames and putting them together later requires a tripod when shooting. While it's true a tripod is a good idea with landscapes, they are generally a PITA to carry.

No to mention that your technique means significantly more time in front of the computer to get results that are questionably better than using the GND in the 1st place.
 08/13/2008 09:23:28 PM · #8
Nope dont need a tripod lol.... I have an xti that takes 3fps that I handhold for a lot of my HDR work as I hate having a tripod. Terry has a 1d which means 10fps lol I think he can do it.

of not I have really really steady hands. I can hand hold a 1/15th on a 1.6 crop body with my 50mm 1.4 to put it in perspective.
 08/13/2008 09:31:27 PM · #9
Originally posted by Patrick_R:
Nope dont need a tripod lol.... I have an xti that takes 3fps that I handhold for a lot of my HDR work as I hate having a tripod. Terry has a 1d which means 10fps lol I think he can do it.

of not I have really really steady hands. I can hand hold a 1/15th on a 1.6 crop body with my 50mm 1.4 to put it in perspective.


Seconded. A tripod is really not needed, and the "extra" work in post is perhaps a couple minutes; perhaps less than required to mount and fiddle with the filter.

Originally posted by dwterry:
You could consider a GND to be the lazy man's technique to a perfect exposure.


Not really, IMO. there are plenty of scenes where the DR is just too large for a single shot, or where the total DR is workable but properly exposing the sky will result in a too-dark landscape. Still, I've not heard anything that convinces me that a GND is a real benefit unless I simply *cannot* bracket.

Message edited by author 2008-08-13 21:33:54.
 08/13/2008 09:39:11 PM · #10
If I'm going for a special effect I rather create my own. Besides, if I'm gonna spend some money I rather save up for a filter that inserts beautiful women into the scene so I'll pass on this.
08/13/2008 09:41:22 PM · #11
After reading a couple of comments I have to ask, am I really that old school. It seems to me that getting the exposure right the first time with the filter would be more benificial than sitting in front of a computer trying like hell to get it right. Now thats not to say HDR doesn't have its place, I actually love most of the HDR work I see, but for those of us who don't have the time nor the money to get good HDR software, GND really is a godsend. I know that digital has opened new doors for photographic freedom and experimentation but the old stand by never goes out of style. Just like jeans and beer.
 08/13/2008 09:46:22 PM · #12
Originally posted by kirbic:

Not really, IMO. there are plenty of scenes where the DR is just too large for a single shot, or where the total DR is workable but properly exposing the sky will result in a too-dark landscape. Still, I've not heard anything that convinces me that a GND is a real benefit unless I simply *cannot* bracket.


Thought the entire point of a GND was to tackle scenes exactly like you just described. Decreases the dynamic range between a bright sky and the landscape so you can get a proper exposure.
 08/13/2008 09:46:38 PM · #13
Originally posted by cryan:
After reading a couple of comments I have to ask, am I really that old school. It seems to me that getting the exposure right the first time with the filter would be more benificial than sitting in front of a computer trying like hell to get it right. Now thats not to say HDR doesn't have its place, I actually love most of the HDR work I see, but for those of us who don't have the time nor the money to get good HDR software, GND really is a godsend. I know that digital has opened new doors for photographic freedom and experimentation but the old stand by never goes out of style. Just like jeans and beer.


Yup, you're old school.
To me, "getting it right" means collecting the best data possible. I'd much rather have two exposures that that together will have *much* more data than any single exposure can have, and have the flexibility to combine as I see fit in post. The one *huge* benefit here is that non-straight horizons are not a problem at all.
Or perhaps I'm just a control freak (guilty!).
 08/13/2008 09:59:58 PM · #14
Yeah, I'm finally old school. LOL
 08/13/2008 11:27:43 PM · #15
I have yet to find HDR software that easily and quickly gives results that don't have that overdone, cartoony HDR/tonemapped look.

The last time I tried Photomatix, I spent about two hours to create something, following the recommendations, that just looked like crap. Using Photoshop to do the same thing took longer and looked even worse. My behind lacks the patience for sitting at computer for that long.

08/13/2008 11:31:19 PM · #16
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
I have yet to find HDR software that easily and quickly gives results that don't have that overdone, cartoony HDR/tonemapped look.

The last time I tried Photomatix, I spent about two hours to create something, following the recommendations, that just looked like crap. Using Photoshop to do the same thing took longer and looked even worse. My behind lacks the patience for sitting at computer for that long.


But you don't need HDR software or sophisticated Photoshop techniques to achieve what a GND can. All you need are two exposures on two layers in PS and a layer mask on one. Done. Five minutes work, max.
 08/13/2008 11:56:34 PM · #17
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
I have yet to find HDR software that easily and quickly gives results that don't have that overdone, cartoony HDR/tonemapped look.

The last time I tried Photomatix, I spent about two hours to create something, following the recommendations, that just looked like crap. Using Photoshop to do the same thing took longer and looked even worse. My behind lacks the patience for sitting at computer for that long.


But you don't need HDR software or sophisticated Photoshop techniques to achieve what a GND can. All you need are two exposures on two layers in PS and a layer mask on one. Done. Five minutes work, max.


Exactly. The GND is just like photoshop mask with a gradient applied to it. Takes but a second to do in photoshop and could be automated via an action.

Message edited by author 2008-08-13 23:58:23.
 08/14/2008 12:00:41 AM · #18
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
I have yet to find HDR software that easily and quickly gives results that don't have that overdone, cartoony HDR/tonemapped look.

The last time I tried Photomatix, I spent about two hours to create something, following the recommendations, that just looked like crap. Using Photoshop to do the same thing took longer and looked even worse. My behind lacks the patience for sitting at computer for that long.


But you don't need HDR software or sophisticated Photoshop techniques to achieve what a GND can. All you need are two exposures on two layers in PS and a layer mask on one. Done. Five minutes work, max.


Exactly. The GND is just like photoshop mask with a gradient applied to it. Takes but a second to do in photoshop and could be automated via an action.


Still need 2 exposures. Maybe I'm wobbly in my old age, but any 2 images aren't going to register without a tripod. There will be some details that are going to be off.
 08/14/2008 12:11:31 AM · #19
I use a GND with almost all my landscapes.

I have a P system and adapter rings for all my lenses.

I have the lens caps that fit over those, and they work better than the regular lens cap, because after you put the adapter ring on, all your lenses can use the same lens cap.

I did find the Cokin's scratch really easily. I have all the graduation types, and I've been through at least four of the more popular ones, and at least two of all of them.

In December I bought the more expensive HiTech grad which fits the P system, and not only is it longer (that's good, gives you more flexibility for placing the graduation), but it seems to be more scrarch resistant (though also a resin filter). I've toyed with buying the glass equivalent (Tiffin), but it's very expensive. Also, the Cokins are not truly color neutral, and the HiTech is.

I wouldn't shoot landscapes without one. The only downsides: I find the lens hood adapter for the Cokin system a pain in the rear, so I don't use a hood; and I don't use a polarizer most of the time, because I shoot wide (like 10mm on the Sigma 10-20), and that means using the wide angle cokin adapter, which only holds one filter.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/18/2025 06:14:01 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/18/2025 06:14:01 AM EDT.