Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Nikonites
New Member Introductions
Newbie to Nikon
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Clovishound" data-source="post: 798040" data-attributes="member: 50197"><p>A lot depends on what you shoot and how you shoot it. I have seldom seen a need for an ND. I have always been able to get what I want by using smaller F stops. Of course, the limitation of that is that you are stuck with a wider depth of field, which for most pictures I want a long shutter speed, that works well. I would advise to get equipment based on a recognized need, rather than because you just want more tools in your box, or feel you "ought" to have one. </p><p></p><p>I'm old school, so the graduated ND would be the first thing I would have thought of. After working with some sunrise on a beach photos where I didn't have that filter available, I found that I could obtain the same results without resorting to another piece of glass between the subject and sensor.</p><p></p><p>For example, a graduated ND is often used to balance sky and foreground. Before buying an expensive piece of kit and spending the time installing, uninstalling, and adjusting it for each use, try either post processing using a mask, adjusting shadow and highlight levels, or alternately bracketing several photos and merging them into an HDR. Digital photos often have a great deal of latitude in their original files.</p><p></p><p>This is a picture that had an overexposed sky, and very little detail in the underexposed trees, and root balls. I created several masks and increased saturation and decreased exposure in the sky and then brought out detail in the shadows of the tree and root balls. A graduated ND filter would have done the same thing in camera, but would have resulted in the section of the tree that was above the horizon being underexposed. Leaving me with similar problems. Perhaps the issues using a graduated filter would have been less than the straight photo, but I suspect the end result would have been very similar.</p><p></p><p>[ATTACH=full]384387[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Bottom line is that everyone must find their own style of taking pictures. It is not, and should not be the same for everyone. If it were there would be little diversity in the photos you see. The trick is to find the techniques and tools that will allow you to take the pictures you want. These tools and techniques will be different from photographer to photographer.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Clovishound, post: 798040, member: 50197"] A lot depends on what you shoot and how you shoot it. I have seldom seen a need for an ND. I have always been able to get what I want by using smaller F stops. Of course, the limitation of that is that you are stuck with a wider depth of field, which for most pictures I want a long shutter speed, that works well. I would advise to get equipment based on a recognized need, rather than because you just want more tools in your box, or feel you "ought" to have one. I'm old school, so the graduated ND would be the first thing I would have thought of. After working with some sunrise on a beach photos where I didn't have that filter available, I found that I could obtain the same results without resorting to another piece of glass between the subject and sensor. For example, a graduated ND is often used to balance sky and foreground. Before buying an expensive piece of kit and spending the time installing, uninstalling, and adjusting it for each use, try either post processing using a mask, adjusting shadow and highlight levels, or alternately bracketing several photos and merging them into an HDR. Digital photos often have a great deal of latitude in their original files. This is a picture that had an overexposed sky, and very little detail in the underexposed trees, and root balls. I created several masks and increased saturation and decreased exposure in the sky and then brought out detail in the shadows of the tree and root balls. A graduated ND filter would have done the same thing in camera, but would have resulted in the section of the tree that was above the horizon being underexposed. Leaving me with similar problems. Perhaps the issues using a graduated filter would have been less than the straight photo, but I suspect the end result would have been very similar. [ATTACH type="full"]384387[/ATTACH] Bottom line is that everyone must find their own style of taking pictures. It is not, and should not be the same for everyone. If it were there would be little diversity in the photos you see. The trick is to find the techniques and tools that will allow you to take the pictures you want. These tools and techniques will be different from photographer to photographer. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Nikonites
New Member Introductions
Newbie to Nikon
Top