ND Filters of Software?

Just curious about what you guys prefer to increase dynamic range in an image: the use of graduated ND filters or blending images in Photoshop?

I have no real experience with either technique, but would like to be. Thanks for your input.

I prefer filters so long as they are not appreciably degrading the image, but I do sometimes blend as well.

I predict that you'll see a roughly 50/50 split on this topic.

When the filters work well, the result looks more natural to me.

As far as straight ND filters are concerned, if you need one for an effect no software features will compensate.

And I prefer using a simple blend of two (or more) images in postprocessing.
ND grad filters are awkward to use and, unless you have a 'straight line' type of land/sky break, can create their own problems that may take fixing up later in the 'darkroom'.

I've asked this question on here before, but what are some good tutorials for blending? I'm assuming CS2 is that makes a difference...thanks!

I prefer manual blending of multiple exposures. As John notes, there are many situations where a strong ND grad won't work. I'm just too lazy to carry the filters for the few opportunities where they would help me avoid additional post processing.

If the contrasts are not too extreme, a simple gradient in Lightroom or Photoshop works extremely well.

It depends on the image, but I still use both techniques about equally. I prefer to capture the image correctly, in camera, with filter if the scene and situation allow. But if the scene is more complex than a straight horizon, I'll take multiple exposures and blend them later.

If done right, combining images is certainly a more precise way of doing things, since the transition zone can be of any shape and size, stronger in some areas, weaker in others, etc. Like Scott, I still use both techniques, but in a perfect world, I wish I had multiple exposures of any shot for which I'd typically have used an ND grad on in the past, and the technical ability and patience to blend them successfully in post.

This has been discussed before as mentioned. I think I started this topic a while back about filters. Since then though, I have been using blending and I really like that option.

...what are some good tutorials for blending?

I've always thought that David Clapp's exposure blending tutorial was pretty straightforward.

Well David is certainly firm in his opinion on GND filters:

"Grads are responsible for shoddy substandard work by computer-phobic photographers..."

I doubt most of us here would go that far!

I prefer the filter route. When I do multiple shots and then blend them together, I feel the result needs to be designated as manipulated!! At least, that's what my stock agencies say! But when using filters, which is a holdover from film days, the issue never comes up.

Thanks, guys, for your honest feedback. The issue for me is becoming knowledgeable and skilled, whether using filters or blending. I just need more time...as we all do! Thanks again.

i prefer using filters. i have never found a technique in post processing where i was satisfied with HDR. i still take multiple exposures up and down in case i do find a proper technique in the future.

my current method is using the filters, and then in post processing i'll hide any sign of the GND.

I use whatever works out to be the easiest for the scene I'm shooting. If the scene's transition zone is fairly straight, I use a grad. If the scene isn't very static at the transition zone (e.g. trees swaying in a breeze against a sky), I use a grad. Otherwise, I'll usually shoot multiple exposures. There's no right or wrong answer, I just try use the method that requires the least amount of work later when post processing. If I have time, I will sometimes shoot both ways and figure out which I'll use later.