Posted by Jim Zablotny on December 31, 2016 at 1:21 PM
My wife bought me a lens for Xmas that can be used for landscape photography, which is subject that is quite new to me. What filters do you recommend for a basic landscape setup. I'm not sure about the use of ND filters for artistic effects such as swirling water and clouds, or for reducing blown areas in the composition. What is the accepted norm in using filters for landscape photography? I have been looking at ND filters and circular polarizers for my setup. Also, what are the boundaries of an acceptable portrayal of a scene regarding dynamic range? Landscape photography is by no means going to be a specialty of mine, but as a way for me to learn about how to capture the essence of a scene. Thanks for any info. Happy New Year.................................Jim
Jim,
I only use multicoated UV filters, chiefly as protection. The multi-coated spec is simply to reduce reflections to a minimum. Ideally I would use no filter, but I am sort of careless and would much rather scratch a 50 dollar filter than a 1000 dollar lens. Polarizers and ND's never worked for me, I ended up giving them away. As to reducing blown areas, the histogram is the best solution, in my view. If you can't get a good histogram, move on to a different composition. If the light is not there, no amount of processing will fix it. The essence of the scene (I like your phrase!) is out there, in nature. It is not something that you make up in Photoshop by tweaking the light beyond recognition and adding or subtracting composition elements. I have never owned nor used Photoshop, and am put off by the Photoshop-invented landscapes that are all the rage, read 500px or 1x. Lightroom and, ocassionally, NIK Viveza and NIK Define are all I really need.
Posted by Jim Zablotny on December 31, 2016 at 2:26 PM
Interesting. So you are of the minimal post processing school or methodology. I do a lot of histogram peeking in my macro work, but I do love post-processing. " If you can't get a good histogram, move on to a different composition."--something that rarely comes to mind in my photography. As I get older, I am finding myself abandoning some photo attempts because they just won't work. Good advice for sure! I may have to develop a landscape technique based on compromise and prudent use of post processing. I like to take chances when I do photography--its like life on the edge. I am going to do some tide-pool photography and general landscape photography in April and a good polarizer is perhaps all that I might need for those situations. I do like Hdr imagery if it is not over the top. I find that a lot of HDR images lack a feel of reality. Thank you for the post. I expect that I'll receive some additional comments and different POV's which is perfectly fine for this type of instructional forum posting.............................Jim
Jim, as a long time landscape shooter with "film" only, I find filters invaluable for my work. However, saying that I first try to find scenes that do not require the usage, but do not entirely pass up good scenes if the filters are required either.
One might think that the filters are mostly for film photography as it's support for exposure latitude is so small. But, if you go to Youtube and type in photography filter uses or ND grads, Polarizers and such you'd be hard pressed to find many posted by film users. Most are posted by long time digital shooters. Youtube may also help you decide on what might work best for your needs with such a vast variety of filters made and used these days.
Posted by Keith Bauer on December 31, 2016 at 3:51 PM
Jim:
For landscape work, I consider a Polarizing filter a requirement. The effect of a polarizer can not be reproduced in any post processing program. Yes, NIK, has a filter called that in Color Efex Pro 4, but it simply doesn't work. A polarizer is designed to cut reflections. Get a good one, and you'll never regret it. You must learn how to use it effectively.
I used to carry graduated ND filters, but no longer do as it is easier and more accurate for me to solve that problem in post processing using LR or PS, or take more than one exposure in the field to deal with the expanded dynamic range that graduated ND filters help solve.
I also carry a straight ND filter for those times when I want to slow the shutter down and the lighting conditions won't allow it without the ND filter.
As I mentioned in Anil's thread in General Discussion, I rarely use any filtration in my digital work, nor did I use it much when I did 4x5 color.
In the main, I use a polarizer to sometimes darken a blue sky, or reduce unwanted reflections. Careful use is called for, and as Keith says, you will need to learn how to use one effectively. Pixels are cheap--experiment and see what works best.
On occasion I use a high quality UV filter strictly for protection from blowing dust or water.
I still have, and sometimes use Graduated ND filters. Mine are Singh-Ray, and cost a bundle, so I keep them in my pack. I used one upside down for this reflection image from Yosemite. btw: Singh-Ray does make polarizers and Variable ND filters (along ith ND Grads). They are of the highest quality, but they are extremely expensive.
I am pretty much a 'make a single exposure' guy, and try to get it right in the camera. I suppose this is a holdover from my LF film days where every exposure had to count. If the light is not right, I will try again when it is better, or move on to another setup. I do make an effort to keep post processing to a minimum.
--P
Posted by Jim Zablotny on January 1, 2017 at 7:34 AM
Hi,
Thank you for the advice and suggestions. I was thinking about going to a 4 by 4" filter system, but bulky and fragile are not words that I care to think about when setting up a shot. I have an old and cheap Tiffen circular polarizer that I rarely use because it degrades image quality. However, it worked for some cross polarized macro work on tiny, but shiny orchid flowers. I will order an excellent circular polarizer, a protective filter, and an ND filter which will go with my 18-35 f1.8 and 180mm f3.5 macro. I may find landscape photography more soothing than bird photography which tends to raise my blood pressure significantly! Happy New Year...............................Jim
Posted by Jim Zablotny on January 8, 2017 at 10:02 AM
I just received a 6-stop X2 ND filter made by Breakthrough Photography. Quality is excellent and will try it out fairly soon on the 18-35mm. There's minimal color shifting with this brand of filter. Because I'll be spending a lot of time on the Oregon coast this April, I am purchasing some protective filters for my most frequently used lenses to keep the ocean off of my lens glass.........Jim
Discussion
7 repliesI only use multicoated UV filters, chiefly as protection. The multi-coated spec is simply to reduce reflections to a minimum. Ideally I would use no filter, but I am sort of careless and would much rather scratch a 50 dollar filter than a 1000 dollar lens. Polarizers and ND's never worked for me, I ended up giving them away. As to reducing blown areas, the histogram is the best solution, in my view. If you can't get a good histogram, move on to a different composition. If the light is not there, no amount of processing will fix it. The essence of the scene (I like your phrase!) is out there, in nature. It is not something that you make up in Photoshop by tweaking the light beyond recognition and adding or subtracting composition elements. I have never owned nor used Photoshop, and am put off by the Photoshop-invented landscapes that are all the rage, read 500px or 1x. Lightroom and, ocassionally, NIK Viveza and NIK Define are all I really need.
One might think that the filters are mostly for film photography as it's support for exposure latitude is so small. But, if you go to Youtube and type in photography filter uses or ND grads, Polarizers and such you'd be hard pressed to find many posted by film users. Most are posted by long time digital shooters. Youtube may also help you decide on what might work best for your needs with such a vast variety of filters made and used these days.
For landscape work, I consider a Polarizing filter a requirement. The effect of a polarizer can not be reproduced in any post processing program. Yes, NIK, has a filter called that in Color Efex Pro 4, but it simply doesn't work. A polarizer is designed to cut reflections. Get a good one, and you'll never regret it. You must learn how to use it effectively.
I used to carry graduated ND filters, but no longer do as it is easier and more accurate for me to solve that problem in post processing using LR or PS, or take more than one exposure in the field to deal with the expanded dynamic range that graduated ND filters help solve.
I also carry a straight ND filter for those times when I want to slow the shutter down and the lighting conditions won't allow it without the ND filter.
As I mentioned in Anil's thread in General Discussion, I rarely use any filtration in my digital work, nor did I use it much when I did 4x5 color.
In the main, I use a polarizer to sometimes darken a blue sky, or reduce unwanted reflections. Careful use is called for, and as Keith says, you will need to learn how to use one effectively. Pixels are cheap--experiment and see what works best.
On occasion I use a high quality UV filter strictly for protection from blowing dust or water.
I still have, and sometimes use Graduated ND filters. Mine are Singh-Ray, and cost a bundle, so I keep them in my pack. I used one upside down for this reflection image from Yosemite. btw: Singh-Ray does make polarizers and Variable ND filters (along ith ND Grads). They are of the highest quality, but they are extremely expensive.
I am pretty much a 'make a single exposure' guy, and try to get it right in the camera. I suppose this is a holdover from my LF film days where every exposure had to count. If the light is not right, I will try again when it is better, or move on to another setup. I do make an effort to keep post processing to a minimum.
--P
Thank you for the advice and suggestions. I was thinking about going to a 4 by 4" filter system, but bulky and fragile are not words that I care to think about when setting up a shot. I have an old and cheap Tiffen circular polarizer that I rarely use because it degrades image quality. However, it worked for some cross polarized macro work on tiny, but shiny orchid flowers. I will order an excellent circular polarizer, a protective filter, and an ND filter which will go with my 18-35 f1.8 and 180mm f3.5 macro. I may find landscape photography more soothing than bird photography which tends to raise my blood pressure significantly