When it comes to using software to replace the need for a graduated neutral density filter, check out this announcement made a few days ago.
When it comes to using software to replace the need for a graduated neutral density filter, check out this announcement made a few days ago.
That depends on what the polarizer is being used to do. If it's being used only to affect the blue part of a sky, that can be done relatively easily using software. If it's being used for anything else, it's very difficult to use software to produce the same results.
Interesting Mike. As always, the devil is in the details and the actual implementation of this feature is what I would be most interested in.
If it is jpeg only, then its utility might be less useful to some photographers. On the other hand, if it actually reduces the exposure and prevents parts of the image from blowing out, then it will be a useful feature; if all it does is darken parts of the image with values of less than 255, then it will be a less useful.
Even if you are using it to darken the sky, the polarizer will also remove reflections from leaves and other non-metallic reflective surfaces in the image, so I would argue that the software emulation you suggest is only going to be a partial one.
On the other hand, software emulation doesn't create banding when you use it with wide angle lenses, so this approach will be better in those uses.
If using a Wide Angle and in some circumstances even a Normal to Short Telephoto Lens and there is a lot of sky across the whole frame: I often find it preferable to use Post Production, rather than a CPL Filter.
WW
The software apparently is the first of its kind. However good, bad or limited it is now, I would expect the capability to get much better in the future as not just Sony but also other companies develop better software.
It works on Sony's raw files.If it is jpeg only
Dunno how Nik Color Efex Pro Plugin allows a change of Shutter Speed to smooth water; or allows a change of Shutter Speed to make moving objects invisible; or allow a change of Aperture to allow Flash at X-Sync; or allow a change of Aperture to facilitate very shallow DoF.. . . it is very difficult for Post Production Software to mimic the effects of Neutral Density Filters.
WW
The question asked related specifically to use of B & W Filters as compared with PP. The ND, GND and polarizing filters you have ended up discussing are common to both B & W and colour photography so strictly speaking are beyond the initial scope of this thread......
Yeah but - these are the attractions, benefits and idiosyncratic ways of CiC: the meanderings . . .
The effect of a particular color filter is reasonably easy to predict so long as you have the positions of colors on a color wheel embedded in your brain (I don't) or have one handy (they're all over the Internet and in my primary post-processing software). The color of the filter renders that color bright in the monochrome version. The color that is opposite it on the color wheel is rendered dark. The closer the other colors are to the color of the filter on the wheel, the brighter those colors are rendered in the monochrome version; the farther away the other colors are from the color of the filter on the wheel, the darker they are rendered.
Marc - I see GND emulation in Nik, but not ND. As Bill has stated, much of what a ND does if affecting a shot cannot be emulated in software after the picture has been taken..
The GND is not as clear cut, as a gradient can do this (Nik or otherwise) so long as there are no blown out highlights in the affected part of the image. On the other hand, the main reason I shoot with a GND is to reduce / eliminate that risk, In those cases software emulation of a GND is not useful.