Graduated ND filter vs Camera Raw?

Now that I have my new 18-200mm lens I'm contemplating filters for it since my 52mm filters are too small, I want a graduated ND filter, but does anyone know if there is a huge difference between using the filter, or just applying on digitally in Camera RAW? If someone has both could they do a test and compare?

I don't want to spend money on a nice filter if it can be replicated with software, and be more flexible, ex. I can apply the gradient on 1/3 of the image it instead of half and half, or I can adjust the strength to what ever I want etc.

It really depends on your photography. If you truly need true ND grad filter for your landscape images then you should purchase a physical filter and not attempt to reproduce one via computer. Software does a nice job but it pales in comparison to the actual thing. The square Cokin grad filter system a is far more general filter system than the round ND grad filters because you can move them up or down or sideways to suit your particular landscape scene. And in the long run it works out to be more cost effective than buying the individual circular filters.

Thanks, yeah I keep forgetting about the square ones, Ill have to check that out then

I was curious about the rectangular grad ND's also so I bought an inexpensive conkin without the holder. I just hold it up to the lens and it works. Just a suggestion to try it out before you spend a lot on a kit.

You'll never be able to do the movement related softening that you can get from a ND filter in post-processing. And if the sky is bright enough then you may not be able to recapture the detail due to washout. It's nice to have the tool, but it can only work with what you've captured.

Want some cheap ND filters? Go down to your local automotive window tinting shop and ask them for some scraps. There are many different levels of window tint that you can cut to suit, from light to dark tints.

fotojack said:

Want some cheap ND filters? Go down to your local automotive window tinting shop and ask them for some scraps. There are many different levels of window tint that you can cut to suit, from light to dark tints.

Click to expand...

Or do what I used to do and underexpose for the brightest part then bring the rest up but leaving a layered mask over the sky, you can even add in dodge and burning if you like and selective saturation / exposure but thats just PS.

Good idea, muzza. Reminds me of the poor-man's wide angle lens, aka - panorama.

fotojack said:

Want some cheap ND filters? Go down to your local automotive window tinting shop and ask them for some scraps. There are many different levels of window tint that you can cut to suit, from light to dark tints.

Click to expand...

Great Jack, seems you find these "not expensive" solutions for many things these days. So I don't know if it's because you want to save or if you don't want to spend… or both…

Marcel said:

Great Jack, seems you find these "not expensive" solutions for many things these days. So I don't know if it's because you want to save or if you don't want to spend… or both…

Click to expand...

Marcel...it's both. I have no choice, so I have to improvise when and where I can. I have to save, because I don't have it to spend.

From what I've heard, computer software doesn't do as well with polarizing (that doesn't mean it does it bad, just...not as good) as real polarizers. Are they worth it? Depends.