Trying a gnd filter

[armando_m]

I got a set of cheap neutral density filters, nd 2,4,8 and the kit came with a graduated one, I think it is a 2 stops gnd

On Saturday afternoon I went to try it, here is one image I liked , pretty much sooc, PP done to fix lens distortion, resizing , some sharpening

I found it very hard to see in the viewfinder where I had the border of clear vs dark, as you can see in the image it is a bit to low. I would have liked to have the ground a bit lighter, nothing that can not be fixed in PP, but i think it defeats the purpose of using the gnd filter



Coments on the image or recommendations about using a gnd filter ?

Thanks for looking !

[daq7]

Yeah I think it works well. I still thinks it is a lot of work to haul a filter around, but this looks good and if it saves some time in the PP flow I guess it works out.

[n8]

It looks like there's some vignetting on the top corners, but good overall.

[Anbesol]

I think the vignette is good.

But why use all of the nd filters? Why not just the GND?

[n8]

Oh, I also wanted to suggest that you make sure not to stack too much glass. I learned that the hard way when I stacked my CP on my uv filter on several occasions during my Az trip.

Anbesol, regarding your question, consider a couple scenarios/scenes. Armando shot a scene that would have been tricky to expose for both the foreground and background at the same time. The idea of the GND is to tame the brighter background (or foreground, side, or whatever) so that he gets an even exposure. Now, lets say you're out shooting in bright light and you want to get some nice motion blur on a waterfall, or maybe you want to shoot with a larger aperture for less dof. A GND filter would kinda botch these shots...you wouldn't have a uniform reduction in the light, you'd have a gradient...not what you want. Along with that, the variety of densities sets you up to be prepared for more situations.

[Greg McCary]

I have used this set for a few years. You can buy the set of three with holder less than the price of just one.
http://www.adorama.com/CKNDKA.html

[armando_m]

sorry for misleading you guys, i only used the GND filter , not the whole stack

Thanks for the comments

[LeeIs]

I find it amazing. the vastness of the sky, the great rays and beautiful colours all work for me. one of my favorite shots of the week! no nitpicks. everything works well.

[armando_m]

Thanks Liban !

[Anbesol]

Oh, I also wanted to suggest that you make sure not to stack too much glass. I learned that the hard way when I stacked my CP on my uv filter on several occasions during my Az trip.

Anbesol, regarding your question, consider a couple scenarios/scenes. Armando shot a scene that would have been tricky to expose for both the foreground and background at the same time. The idea of the GND is to tame the brighter background (or foreground, side, or whatever) so that he gets an even exposure. Now, lets say you're out shooting in bright light and you want to get some nice motion blur on a waterfall, or maybe you want to shoot with a larger aperture for less dof. A GND filter would kinda botch these shots...you wouldn't have a uniform reduction in the light, you'd have a gradient...not what you want. Along with that, the variety of densities sets you up to be prepared for more situations.

Well aware of what a neutral density is used for, as a GND, I was merely commenting on the specific shot in the post - which would have no benefit for a neutral density, and as armando stated, he used none, only the GND, which is the only one which would be useful in this specific exposure.

Anyway - I personally would like a slightly longer exposure here, but cut that up to personal preference, as it really is great as is. I would also like to see a little more detail in the foreground, sky detail is excellent!

[Grandpaw]

Very nice shot! You wouldn't, by some slim chance, Have another shot of this without the use of the filter? I am getting more interested in getting a set of these myself, Jeff

[armando_m]

Jeff, sorry I didn't shoot one without the filter

I can do it the next time I use the filter

[GB1]

Not bad, I think it successfully neutralizes the extremes, Armando. My only complaint is that it does seem a tad bland, where lack of contrast hurts it. I've been through this too. In the end I think you're better off using the NDF though, and adding contrast in PP if you want it. I attach an edit here as an example.

On a side note, I finally visited the galley of the fellow who apparently invented the graduated NDF, Galen Rowell, in Sept 09. It's in Bishop, California, in the eastern Sierras.

ps - I also did a slight bit of cleanup on the water.

[armando_m]

Thanks Greg

It does look better with the added bit of contrast,
this is a dry lake bed, the stuff you cleaned up are most likely rocks