Graduated ND Filter or ND Filter

[Peeshan]

Exactly how far north are you planning to go? I you go during winter in scandinavia or finland, or even northern scotland you will want to take photos of the Aurora, wich means tripod. I n any case if you want to take landscape photos, a tripod seems to me more important than a filter. If I were you, I would definitely bring a tripod - if yours is too cumbersome, rent one or sell it and buy another. For the graduated ND filter, in your situation the technique explained by Wayland should work fine, and you can see later wether it's worth investing in a filter or not.
Just my opinion

[Brownbear]

Hi Erik,

Most recently I purchased some Lee graduated filters which were recommended to me by a member quite some time ago. I choose the soft grads because I'm on a quest to learn to photograph landscapes, and the majority of the scenes I photograph include natures, bright skies, forests and mountains. ie; to tone down bright skies

During this past year I've learned that I can compensate for a large dynamic range by bracketing images and combining by using LR enfuse or layers in Photoshop CC, and or to darken skies that haven't been clipped by lowering the highlights. And/or lighten shadows on dark foregrounds.

I'm truly delighted to have these filters because I expect that the filters will mean less time spent post processing and less time taking multiple exposures (fewer shots) Using graduated filters just seems simpler to me.

I tried these filters out for the very first time this weekend, and I was thrilled to be able to take just one shot of a scene. I'm not a mechanically inclined person but I figured out how to attach the filters to my camera quite easily. I like the Lee filters because one can rotate them on the lens to fit the brightness of the scene. I tried a couple of shots without using a tripod, a little awkward but do-able, and far easier to maneuver when using a tripod. If I had to choose between a tripod and filters I would choose the tripod, no contest.

The use of filters are totally new to me but I thought it might be helpful for you to hear the thoughts of a first time filter user. The greatest challenge I experienced grabbing focus a 1/3 of the way into the scene (dark, near the base of the mountains, low contrast) but I'm not sure if my challenges were due to the scene itself or improper use of the filters.

The filters and associated parts are compact and fit easily into my camera bag, and take less than a minute to place on ones camera.

I will post a few shots in the nature thread this weekend for learning purposes.

[Wayland]

Snip> So it is clear that using the GRAD ND filter for landscape is a must. <Snip

Really?

I've been a landscape photographer for thirty years, film and file. I've been awarded twice in the Landscape Photographer of the Year Awards and commended most other years.

Obviously my equipment isn't up to the job, because I've never felt the need to buy a set of graduated neutral density filters, even back in the days when I used film.

A tripod though... I have three of them and the decision is not whether I should use one or not, but which is the heaviest that I can afford to carry with me depending upon how much ground I have to cover.

Sounds like I've got it all wrong...

[pnodrog]

Really?

I've been a landscape photographer for thirty years, film and file. I've been awarded twice in the Landscape Photographer of the Year Awards and commended most other years.

Obviously my equipment isn't up to the job, because I've never felt the need to buy a set of graduated neutral density filters, even back in the days when I used film.

A tripod though... I have three of them and the decision is not whether I should use one or not, but which is the heaviest that I can afford to carry with me depending upon how much ground I have to cover.

Sounds like I've got it all wrong...

That is very sad - I will no longer be able to enjoy your wonderful photographs now that I know you do not have the right gear......

[lukaswerth]

Really?

I've been a landscape photographer for thirty years, film and file. I've been awarded twice in the Landscape Photographer of the Year Awards and commended most other years.

Obviously my equipment isn't up to the job, because I've never felt the need to buy a set of graduated neutral density filters, even back in the days when I used film.

A tripod though... I have three of them and the decision is not whether I should use one or not, but which is the heaviest that I can afford to carry with me depending upon how much ground I have to cover.

Sounds like I've got it all wrong...

Couldn't agree more; I was thinking whether to answer to the same original statement, as it seemed so lost in time and space.
I do think graduate filters made/make more sense with film when you want to print analogically on photographic paper, as it is difficult to transfer the full tonal range of the negative to the paper. A very dark sky in a negative needs a lot of burning in, and it is difficult to get a satisfying tonal range - but even with film there are other possibilities - like develop for low contrast, develop in pyro...
In digital photography they are mostly a waste of money.

Lukas

[TheBigE]

Hi Erik,

Most recently I purchased some Lee graduated filters which were recommended to me by a member quite some time ago. I choose the soft grads because I'm on a quest to learn to photograph landscapes, and the majority of the scenes I photograph include natures, bright skies, forests and mountains. ie; to tone down bright skies

During this past year I've learned that I can compensate for a large dynamic range by bracketing images and combining by using LR enfuse or layers in Photoshop CC, and or to darken skies that haven't been clipped by lowering the highlights. And/or lighten shadows on dark foregrounds.

I'm truly delighted to have these filters because I expect that the filters will mean less time spent post processing and less time taking multiple exposures (fewer shots) Using graduated filters just seems simpler to me.

I tried these filters out for the very first time this weekend, and I was thrilled to be able to take just one shot of a scene. I'm not a mechanically inclined person but I figured out how to attach the filters to my camera quite easily. I like the Lee filters because one can rotate them on the lens to fit the brightness of the scene. I tried a couple of shots without using a tripod, a little awkward but do-able, and far easier to maneuver when using a tripod. If I had to choose between a tripod and filters I would choose the tripod, no contest.

The use of filters are totally new to me but I thought it might be helpful for you to hear the thoughts of a first time filter user. The greatest challenge I experienced grabbing focus a 1/3 of the way into the scene (dark, near the base of the mountains, low contrast) but I'm not sure if my challenges were due to the scene itself or improper use of the filters.

The filters and associated parts are compact and fit easily into my camera bag, and take less than a minute to place on ones camera.

I will post a few shots in the nature thread this weekend for learning purposes.

Christiana - Thanks for the great feedback, that is exactly what I look for with regards to my question. While new to Photography, I like the idea of capturing it right in the camera and not spending the time in PP to blend several exposures to get the image I desire. Perhaps this a bit of me just trying to learn the basics - of course the Basics are a relative term in this situation.

It is good to hear they are portable and offer some ability to pull out of the bag and use while hand holding. It seems in these cases a simple ND Filter would be most applicable. The more I think and research, i think the Grad Filters seems to require the use of tripod, as you stated it is possible to use without, but a bit awkward.

So I guess the question for me is as I go forward how often will I be taking a tripod with me and using for photography. Given the answer to this question, will define how I proceed regarding filters. Maybe I should start looking at lightweight travel tripods...

I look forward to see the results of your work with the Filters!!

[TheBigE]

Really?

I've been a landscape photographer for thirty years, film and file. I've been awarded twice in the Landscape Photographer of the Year Awards and commended most other years.

Obviously my equipment isn't up to the job, because I've never felt the need to buy a set of graduated neutral density filters, even back in the days when I used film.

A tripod though... I have three of them and the decision is not whether I should use one or not, but which is the heaviest that I can afford to carry with me depending upon how much ground I have to cover.

Sounds like I've got it all wrong...

Couldn't agree more; I was thinking whether to answer to the same original statement, as it seemed so lost in time and space.
I do think graduate filters made/make more sense with film when you want to print analogically on photographic paper, as it is difficult to transfer the full tonal range of the negative to the paper. A very dark sky in a negative needs a lot of burning in, and it is difficult to get a satisfying tonal range - but even with film there are other possibilities - like develop for low contrast, develop in pyro...
In digital photography they are mostly a waste of money.

Lukas

My aplogizes for dealing in abosultes, certainly there are other ways to obtain variable exposures in a given images - Magic Glove, Multiple Exposures with blending in PP, Graduated ND Filters, ND Filters. While there is no definitive way of doing variable exposures, certainly the method chosen is a subjective in nature and each has its own set of limitations. In the end, the goal is still the same - how you achieve that can be different.

For me, I find the simplicity of the ND Filter to be a good starting point, and then build to the graduated ND filter. Perhaps over time maybe migrating to Multiple Exposures will be an option.

[TheBigE]

Exactly how far north are you planning to go? I you go during winter in scandinavia or finland, or even northern scotland you will want to take photos of the Aurora, wich means tripod. I n any case if you want to take landscape photos, a tripod seems to me more important than a filter. If I were you, I would definitely bring a tripod - if yours is too cumbersome, rent one or sell it and buy another. For the graduated ND filter, in your situation the technique explained by Wayland should work fine, and you can see later wether it's worth investing in a filter or not.
Just my opinion

Thanks for the feedback. The farthest North we will be is Helsinki, I am not sure with the lights of the city I would get a good photo of Aurora.

Mine is not overly cumbersome - Manfrotto M294A3, but I am not sure I would want to carry it around for a day. I know there are several other options for Travel Tripods and may have to evaluate those more and see if I can find a good one for the future.

I guess I will tack that onto my - Things I need to Learn More about List....

[Brownbear]

Hi Erik,

Just to say that I posted my photos in nature under continuing to learn to photograph mountains... Unfortunately even though my skies are not over exposed my pics didn't turn out great. However no doubt I will be out and about photographing similiar outdoor scenes and I will share as always.