Exposing to the Right & PP

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tiffen-Block.../dp/B00LI37FGK

Well they can be bought.

I found the link to a demonstration of what IR does. Shown pretty clearly at the end of the video :confused: Manfred seems to have read the posts. I feel that the colours that the problem may cause are also likely to vary according to the camera. The video suggests a manual white balance but as it's a long exposure problem I am not inclined feel that this will work all that well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvPqsvT0T8s

I decided to buy a UV/IR block filter. 2 in fact. One by B&W and another by MRC from a German seller on Ebay. Looking at the red reflections at certain angles I would say that they are very very similar.

John
-

Binnur, thank you for taking the time to wade through the technical posts in this thread to offer some advice. I have started to take a few different exposures of complex scenes like this so I can do just as you suggest.

I currently do not own a GND or any ND filter and am trying to push the limits of mt camera. So, I either need to purchase a filter or two or get really good at combining multiple exposures in PP which is currently not the case. :rolleyes:

It is easy to mimic a GND filter in photo editors with layer mask capabilities by taking two different exposures and then using a very simple to make graduated mask. The mask can either be a soft graduation or abrupt and unlike a GND filter can be edited and modified as required.

I actually find it easier and it offers more control than mucking around with a GND filter. I own a number of graduated filters with a mix of gradients, colours and densities sitting in a draw full of neglected photographic bits and pieces mostly leftover from the days of film.

Thanks L.Paul. I have tried this technique before with limited success but will continue to work on perfecting it. I have also seen similar scenes processed with luminosity masks which is another PP technique that I want to explore further.

Luminosity masks tend to work well in demo's Shane but not so precisely on most shots. With some subsequent hand work they can be useful.

I often find that the easiest way to generate a mask are the selection tools. This can even include just straight line rough selection within some area with a blend width. It depends what needs to be done to the area. Various colour selection tools are often useful as are the variants of the free hand ones. I'm assuming Adobe products have a selection --> mask facility and the usual add to selection, subtract from and the usual union operations which are probably less useful. I'd be surprised if they didn't. If a selection is inverted it can pay to see what the shrink/grow selection setting do to the results at the one or two pixel level.

I feel it's also worth looking at a mask before using it especially if colour is used as tiny bits might be missed but they can usually be easy to correct with a brush

John
-

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pnodrog

It is easy to mimic a GND filter in photo editors with layer mask capabilities by taking two different exposures and then using a very simple to make graduated mask. The mask can either be a soft graduation or abrupt and unlike a GND filter can be edited and modified as required.

I actually find it easier and it offers more control than mucking around with a GND filter. I own a number of graduated filters with a mix of gradients, colours and densities sitting in a draw full of neglected photographic bits and pieces mostly leftover from the days of film.

---

True only if you are not using the GND to prevent blowing out highlights (in the sky); so as always, the correct answer depends, at least in part, on the specific conditions of your shot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pnodrog

It is easy to mimic a GND filter in photo editors with layer mask capabilities by taking two different exposures and then using a very simple to make graduated mask...

---

I mostly agree. Though the two exposure method pretty much dictates either using a tripod or some tedious PP. So it depends on what is easier for a given individual, lugging a tripod around or carrying a GND in a pocket and shooting handheld. In my own case it is situational :)

Assuming you already are aware of this Shane so just a reminder you already have a software based GND filter in your ACR. Masking is not necessarily required always.

It is one of the greatest things since sliced bread! You can use multiple filters, fully controllable in its scope, and you can adjust a whole list of parameters in the filtered area of the image all before you even send it to PS.

This adjustable list of parameters includes:
Temperature
Tint
Exposure
Highlights
Shadows
Clarity
Saturation
Sharpness
Noise Reduction
Moire Reduction
Defringe
Color

If you haven’t already I would highly recommend you giving it a test drive! :)

The need for a GND filter also depends on the cameras real dynamic range and just how "high" highlights are.

This sort of relates to ETTR as well after a fashion. Just how reliably a camera metering system can make use of raw head room as metering systems aim at jpg exposures not using up all raw head room. They do this for good reason - if some one wants jpg's - the metering systems generally do not examine the view pixel by pixel so in real terms raw head room is there to minimise the risk of blown highlights in jpg's. Despite this most cameras are perfectly capable of clipping highlights in jpg's as they are averaging areas of a shot even before software has got at the results and done various mysterious things to the readings that are often based around areas in the shot.

John
-

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ajohnw

...This sort of relates to ETTR as well after a fashion. Just how reliably a camera metering system can make use of raw head room...

---

I've got one for a bumper sticker... "my meter is a histogram" :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NorthernFocus

I've got one for a bumper sticker... "my meter is a histogram" :D

---

;) Mine changes colour at each end if clipped so I can see it has - still has it's problems. The usual ones.

John
-