Are GND filters necessary w/digital?

Since one can expose one image for highlights, another for the dark areas and merge them in PS, are graduated neutral density filters still useful items to own? How would you handle an irregular horizon with GND filters?

Thanks in advance,
Marc

I know that when I bought a couple GND's and started using them , I like that I don't have to do much merging in Photoshop. Just a little cleaning up of the gradient line through dodging and burning.
I did read a year ago or so that in some instances, filters are superior because of the hue and luminance that is being captured on the sensor. Something to do with shades of red bringing out a lot of noise when darkened and lightened in photoshop, but not as much when they're exposed correctly at capture.
Sorry for the ambiguity, but a google search along those lines will find what I was talking about.

They are very useful items. Using them cuts down a tremendous time of post processing, and like Chris said, you don't have to worry about minute adjustments of color balance and white balance shifting. Plus I've found that using GNDs just yield more natural looking images than blending does. That said, there are times when using both methods is desirable (I rarely if ever shoot with intention of letting PS do all the work).

My general feeling about the perceived simplicity of digital blending is that people with the mindset of "I don't need to use GNDs because Photoshop can do it for me" are not willing to dedicate the time to using GNDs and teach themselves to understand how the filters interact with the lighting and influence the exposure and they end up using PS as a crutch.

Thank you for the replies. The logical next question(s): What GND's do you recommend, and which brands? B + W, Heliopan?

Thanks again!

I use GSND's as much with digital as I did with film.....the main reason being, as Chris and Bryan have already stated, to cut down the amount of time spent in front of the computer. The better the in-camera capture the better the end results.

You can very likely get by without them depending on your PS skills, but I still prefer to use them over blending where possible for the reasons that Bryan and Chris mentioned. When there's an irregular horizon (or large trees broaching the horizon) I'm more likely to blend in PS to avoid noticeable grad lines. In extreme cases, I'll use both approaches on a single image. I think having them gives you more options.

I have Singh-Ray 2- and 3-stop soft grads; the soft grads are useful for mountains and other irregular horizons. I'll probably add a hard grad now that I live somewhere with beaches and flat horizons. You can get reverse grads for scenes where the horizon is the brightest (e.g., an ocean scene with a dark foreground, dark sky and bright horizon). In those situations, I usually overlap my 2 and 3 from opposite directions to create more filtering in the middle, and less at the top and bottom.

I don't know much about B+W or Heliopan. I can tell you that the cheaper Cokin grads have a noticeable cast, so I would avoid those. If you shoot a lot of wide-angle stuff, you might want to consider the larger grads. My Singh-Ray's don't quite cover my 12-24mm Nikor below 15mm. Also, if you shoot wide, consider the low-profile holders to avoid vignetting.

Singh Rays if you have the money. HiTech's if you don't (1/3 the cost, about as good and scratch in 30 min either way).

There is another important factor that strongly favors GND filters over combining high- and low-exposures in Photoshop, at least in certain situations. When shooting directly into a bright sky (e.g. sun or bright clouds), but exposing for a dark foreground, lens flare and poor contrast become and issue when no filter is used. On the other hand, the dark portion of the GND will definitely reduce this problem. Clearly, this is one issue that can not be 'fixed' during PP in Photoshop.

Another question I've been asking is why there don't appear to be any GND's that have anti-reflective (AR) coating (and maybe anti-scratch, too!). Correct me if I'm wrong - but even the high-end Singh-ray GND's have no AR coating. While usually minor, I have had some images where the GND created flare, especially shooting into the sun.

Bob Cubit
Orange County, CA

Good camera craft always trumps time spent in front of the puter!!!

I rarely go out shooting without them. I used to be a PS only person. Then a couple emails with Marc Adamus about a year and a half ago changed that for me. I personally use the Singh-Ray GND's and I think a good start would be the 2 stop soft, 3 stop hard, and 3 stop soft. At least that is what I primarly use. Everyone has already stated all the reasons to use them. Becareful that if you do not use a holder that you avoid scratching them on the front of your lens like I did. It's easy to do. Use a Cokin-P holder if you can and if you can't or don't want to a wide rubber band on the edge of your lens helps to avoid scratching.

I think one thing to remember is that don't we all photograph nature because we like to spend time out IN nature? For me that is clearly a yes answer. If I have the time when I am on an outing I would rather be fiddling with my filters in nature than fiddiling with more PS work. I like PS too but nature more!

I use the 4x6" Lee series. They scratch about as easily as the Hitechs, cost about twice as much but they're also twice as big and allow you a whole lot more leeway if you wanna hand hold them. I've been able to do some things with my Lees that I could never do with my former Hitechs because they were too small.

Thank you very much for your replies.
Marc