is it useful to use an nd grad filter with a 10 stop nd filter?

[bnnrcn]

This afternoon I had my first 10 stop nd filter experiment and I saw that the longer exposure the brighter sky...so if there are some nice clouds I am not able to shoot them because of the long exposure.So,if I use an nd grad filter with 10 stop nd,does it help to solve the problem or what do I have to do?This afternoon there weren't many clouds anyway,but the sky went nearly white because of 2 minute exposure.

[Manfred M]

All the ND does is to reduce the amount of light getting through to your sensor. It does nothing for the ability of your camera sensor's ability to record the dynamic range of the scene.

There are a number of techniques that one can try to pull out the sky. Depending on the post-processing software you are using, adjusting the luminance channels; primarily blue and aqua might work (but that could cause some issues with the colour of the water).

Shooting the same scene and exposing to get the sky "right" and blending in post-production will work as well.

A third alternative would be to add a graduated neutral density filter (2 or 3-stop) to reduce the brightness of the sky will work as well.


Just as an aside; the horizon is not level in this image.

[Ken MT]

I assume that you are using the 10 stop nd filter to smooth out the water, so this is also smoothing out the clouds. The best alternative would be merging two shots, the first with the ND with a long shutter speed for the water, and the second at shorter shutter speed for the clouds.
Also I see that there are a number of sensor spots (dirt) on the image, so the sensor may require cleaning.

[Colin Southern]

Another technique where there's a clear horizon like this is to combine a long-exposure water portion with a normal exposure sky portion to get the best of both worlds.

It's what I did with this image (shot from a pitching boat) ...

[bnnrcn]

Thank you very much Ken,I will try your advice when I start processing images with computer programmes...I don't know how to use them and at first place I prefer not to use them because first of all I have to learn how to take photographs in the right way.

Do you think those spots on the image are because of dirty sensor.My camera is new and I have been taking photos just for three months.Isn't it a bit early for a dirty sensor?Is it possible that I was at the sea side and some water and dust came on to my lens or nd filter?

I assume that you are using the 10 stop nd filter to smooth out the water, so this is also smoothing out the clouds. The best alternative would be merging two shots, the first with the ND with a long shutter speed for the water, and the second at shorter shutter speed for the clouds.
Also I see that there are a number of sensor spots (dirt) on the image, so the sensor may require cleaning.

[bnnrcn]

Another technique where there's a clear horizon like this is to combine a long-exposure water portion with a normal exposure sky portion to get the best of both worlds.

It's what I did with this image (shot from a pitching boat) ...

Very nice photo Colin,after managing shooting pictures correctly,I will start some processing with computer as well..Are there any programs you can suggest to me and is there a section in this web site to learn how to use them?

[Colin Southern]

Very nice photo Colin,after managing shooting pictures correctly,I will start some processing with computer as well..Are there any programs you can suggest to me and is there a section in this web site to learn how to use them?

You're welcome.

There are many programs out there, but not all are "created equal". The gold standard for capability is Photoshop ("PS") (which is what I - and many others here - use). If you're interested, Adobe have recently changed the way they sell it from a "pay once - perpetual licence" (costing many hundreds of dollars + updates if required) to a monthly / yearly subscription model (like most anti-virus software) where you can have their very latest creations - constantly updated - for a monthly fee.

We have a post-processing forum, but it isn't oriented around any particular package.

I should add that some packages are free and very capable, but Photoshop has by far the most inertia (help materials available, user support etc).

[bnnrcn]

You're welcome.

There are many programs out there, but not all are "created equal". The gold standard for capability is Photoshop ("PS") (which is what I - and many others here - use). If you're interested, Adobe have recently changed the way they sell it from a "pay once - perpetual licence" (costing many hundreds of dollars + updates if required) to a monthly / yearly subscription model (like most anti-virus software) where you can have their very latest creations - constantly updated - for a monthly fee.

We have a post-processing forum, but it isn't oriented around any particular package.

I should add that some packages are free and very capable, but Photoshop has by far the most inertia (help materials available, user support etc).

There are some HDR programmes, can I use PS for combining pictures like HDR does?Do I need a HDR programme if I have PS? I think I'm in the right place to learn photograpy,everyone is very helpful and knowlegeable in this website..I really appreciate it.Thank you very much.

[Colin Southern]

There are some HDR programmes, can I use PS for combining pictures like HDR does?Do I need a HDR programme if I have PS? I think I'm in the right place to learn photograpy,everyone is very helpful and knowlegeable in this website..I really appreciate it.Thank you very much.

Photoshop has a feature called "Merge to HDR Pro", however a LOT of people confuse HDR with ultra tone-mapping, which is an effect you can achieve in Photoshop, but there are specialist programs like Photomatix that do that with greater ease.

Basically, an HDR image is one that is usually shot from several bracketed source images where the dynamic range of the scene is too great to be captured in a single exposure - it's not a particular "look" and it's not something you can achieve by creating several different "versions" of a single exposure and then combining it.

Case in point ... here's an HDR image of the house I grew up in -- it consists of 5 source images, and it's processed in Photoshop:



As a point of reference, here's just one of the shots in the 5 shot exposure bracket:



In contrast, this ISN'T an HDR shot:

[Manfred M]

Just to add a bit to the thread; here are two images; the original straight out of the camera shot and the second having undergone PP where I reworked the individual luminance channels to make the clouds stand out from the sky. This is one of the techniques I referred to in my previous post:

Original:





PP image:

[Ken MT]

Do you think those spots on the image are because of dirty sensor.My camera is new and I have been taking photos just for three months.Isn't it a bit early for a dirty sensor?Is it possible that I was at the sea side and some water and dust came on to my lens or nd filter?

Any time that you change lenses there is a possibility that some dust etc gets on the sensor. You should minimise the time that the lens is off the camera, and have the camera facing down when you change lenses.
I feel that it is sensor dust not lens or filter dust. Your camera may have a dust removal option, but it may be necessary also to remove dust manually by either a blower, arctic butterfly, or wet swabbing if really stuck on. Alternatively remove spots with software, but that will be for every image.

[Colin Southern]

Do you think those spots on the image are because of dirty sensor.My camera is new and I have been taking photos just for three months.Isn't it a bit early for a dirty sensor?Is it possible that I was at the sea side and some water and dust came on to my lens or nd filter?

Dust on the front elements won't show. On the rear element is a different story, but normally they stay pretty clean.

To check for dust spots, tale a shot of something bland and out of focus at your narrowest aperture (eg sky at F22), and have a look at the image at 100% magnification.

Sensor cleaning is a fact of life with DSLRs - you may as well learn to do it yourself - it's not hard. Also, you're not cleaning the sensor - you're cleaning a pretty tough filter that sits in front of it.

[bnnrcn]

Hi Colin ,I think I solved the problem by cleaning my lens and filter.I was at the sea side having my first long exposure experiment with a 10 stop ND filter.I think a few water drops caused the problem.Anyway I will buy an injection syringe to blow air to the sensor from time to time.I think it is quite a practical way of cleaning.

Dust on the front elements won't show. On the rear element is a different story, but normally they stay pretty clean.

To check for dust spots, tale a shot of something bland and out of focus at your narrowest aperture (eg sky at F22), and have a look at the image at 100% magnification.

Sensor cleaning is a fact of life with DSLRs - you may as well learn to do it yourself - it's not hard. Also, you're not cleaning the sensor - you're cleaning a pretty tough filter that sits in front of it.

[bnnrcn]

Hi Colin ,I think I solved the problem by cleaning my lens and filter.I was at the sea side having my first long exposure experiment with a 10 stop ND filter.I think a few water drops caused the problem.Anyway I will buy an injection syringe to blow air to the sensor from time to time.I think it is quite a practical way of cleaning.

Dust on the front elements won't show. On the rear element is a different story, but normally they stay pretty clean.

To check for dust spots, tale a shot of something bland and out of focus at your narrowest aperture (eg sky at F22), and have a look at the image at 100% magnification.

Sensor cleaning is a fact of life with DSLRs - you may as well learn to do it yourself - it's not hard. Also, you're not cleaning the sensor - you're cleaning a pretty tough filter that sits in front of it.

[Colin Southern]

Hi Colin ,I think I solved the problem by cleaning my lens and filter.

Could be - anything that's in front of the front element can definitely have an impact. Just keep in mind though that you'll only see sensor dust at narrow apertures.

Anyway I will buy an injection syringe to blow air to the sensor from time to time.I think it is quite a practical way of cleaning.

Noooooooo. That'll just blast more dust-carrying air at it; you need a rocket blower that has a one-way valve and filters the air that's being sucked in. In practice blowers usually don't do a lot anyway; Arctic Butterfly, Sensor Stamp, and sensor pen are far more effective if used in combination.

[dubaiphil]

I'll post a walk through:

1/60th, f22, 24mm





Same settings, 3 stop soft ND grad dropped in:




30 seconds with the 10 stop added:

[bnnrcn]

Thank you Colin,fortunately you are there for us:-)What I understand from the photos,3 stop grad nd works fine with 10 stop nd...But I made a mistake and bought a screw-in 10 stop B+W,now I will have to buy a screw-in 3 stop nd grad or I will send my screw-in 10 stop to the rubbish like you did before and I will go and buy square and rectengular filtres.This is gonna cost a lot:-(

I'll post a walk through:

1/60th, f22, 24mm




Same settings, 3 stop soft ND grad dropped in:




30 seconds with the 10 stop added:

[bnnrcn]

I'm so sorry,thank you Phil,you commented just after Colin,so I thought ıt was fron Colin:-)

Thank you Colin,fortunately you are there for us:-)What I understand from the photos,3 stop grad nd works fine with 10 stop nd...But I made a mistake and bought a screw-in 10 stop B+W,now I will have to buy a screw-in 3 stop nd grad or I will send my screw-in 10 stop to the rubbish like you did before and I will go and buy square and rectengular filtres.This is gonna cost a lot:-(

[Manfred M]

You are confusing two differnt types of ND filters Binnur - the standard ND and the grad. Standard ND, it does not matter if if is a screw in or not (I use them). Where things are different is the grad; where a rectangular one has significant advantages over a screw in.

The ND lengthens the exposure across the board, so it will freeze water shots; the grad will let you darken the sky.

[bnnrcn]

No I'm not confusing Manfred,grad nd is half grey,halt transparent but if I want to use them together it will be better to have a square filter holder and use square 10 stop and rectangular 3 stop nd grad filters both..I'm planning to have long exposures with a 3 stop nd grad and a 10 stop nd together.This is why I started this thread.If you go to the beginnig of thread you will see my first long exposure experiment which was with a 10 stop nd.I wasn't very happy with sky ,so I thought it might be a good idea to add a 3 stop nd grad.

You are confusing two differnt types of ND filters Binnur - the standard ND and the grad. Standard ND, it does not matter if if is a screw in or not (I use them). Where things are different is the grad; where a rectangular one has significant advantages over a screw in.

The ND lengthens the exposure across the board, so it will freeze water shots; the grad will let you darken the sky.