Neutral Density Filters

[The AD]

I've never owned one, but seems like a useful tool. Who uses them? Recommendations? Is it something that stays in your camera bag or do you actually use it?

[smmokan]

I have a few, but I really only use them when shooting waterfalls... so I haven't taken them out of my desk drawer in two years since my Iceland trip.

Depending on what you shoot, it's likely a graduated ND filter makes more sense to own.

[Fuzz]

I have some and use them quite a lot for landscapes.

I have a 3-stop and and a 10-stop -- probably use the 3-stop about 90% of the time. The 10-stop is a bit too extreme (i.e. too long of exposure times -- I'm impatient!). Use them on my 16-35mm and 70-200mm mainly. It does take some getting used to -- because you have to get the filter out and attach it to the lens, take it off when you need to, etc. So extra hassle. But the results are worth it for me. YMMV.

In terms of usage, I don't use them much during sunrise or sunset -- it's already dark enough that I can get a slow shutter speed without the filters. It's usually during the day or a little bit after sunrise and before sunset when it's quite bright and I need slow shutter speed. Some examples...

This was shot on a cloudy day around 11am. I knew I wanted to contrast the chaotic waves against the calm starfishes -- only way to get the slow enough shutter speed for the waves was to use the 3-stop ND:

Are you sure we're safe here? by Fuzz Photography, on Flickr

I love using the 3-stop on cloudy/stormy days.

Incoming by Fuzz Photography, on Flickr

This was at sunset -- the sun was really bright through the clouds, so putting on the ND (I think the 10-stop) helped.

Timeless by Fuzz Photography, on Flickr

I sometimes use them with my 35L (f/1.4). That way I can use it really wide open (f/2 in this case) and still get smooth motion.

Tawhai Falls by Fuzz Photography, on Flickr

Very useful for smoothing out ripples on water and creating better reflections.

Waters of Wakatipu by Fuzz Photography, on Flickr

[From_the_NEK]

I just got a set of filters this winter. I'm starting out with a cheap set. I've only used them a few times but they are useful. Like Fuzz said they are useful for certain situations.
I used one here even though it was mid day. There was a lot of variation in the clouds and the area I was in was in cloud shadows. I used the GND filter to keep the distant hills and sky from getting blown out.

Northern Vermont in Spring by Tim_NEK, on Flickr

I also plan to use them for sunrise/sunset situations where I want to expose the foreground. I didn't have the filters when I took this shot. I had to use the digital graduated filter tool in Lightroom to expose the foreground but it ended up really grainy as a result.

Frosty October Sunrise by Tim_NEK, on Flickr

Same idea with this shot. I really wanted to capture the good sunset sky but I couldn't get my camera to handle the balance with a naked lens.
Panoramic Heifers by Tim_NEK, on Flickr

I plan on hitting the location with the cows again next fall to see if I can get a better result with a GND.

[Ted26]

I found that I never used my set of GND cause I could achieve the same result in Photoshop with an exposure blend or HDR merge

[Fuzz]

I found that I never used my set of GND cause I could achieve the same result in Photoshop with an exposure blend or HDR merge

Yes, I'm of the same mind. If I'm shooting a landscape with dark foreground and bright sky, I'll take multiple exposures and blend them. However, I can see certain situations where a GND would be useful -- for instance, where things are moving quite a lot in the scene between the multiple exposures (e.g. people, animals, etc.), making blending tricky.

Another use of ND filters is to remove people from daytime cityscapes. Used the 10-stop ND in the middle of the day in downtown Auckland for this -- with a 25-sec exposure, almost all the people got blurred out.

Auckland street by Fuzz Photography, on Flickr

[andrew]

If you already have an intervalometer, the long ND exposure can be replicated by taking a series of pictures and averaging them together.

[Fuzz]

If you already have an intervalometer, the long ND exposure can be replicated by taking a series of pictures and averaging them together.

Yes, I've heard this and seen some examples as well. The one big benefit of averaging is that if something goes wrong during the take, you can just throw out only those frames and still use the rest -- but with one long exposure, the whole thing may be unusable, meaning a waste of a long time.

I think I'm just too lazy to do extra work in post! Plus I'd have a hard time visualizing it when I'm shooting. At least when I use an ND, I can see the final result on the camera. This is especially true for when I'm shooting waves using the 3-stop ND. I wait for the right type of wave to come to just the right spot before triggering -- would be hard for me to recreate that with averaging (I'm guessing it could be done with practice and good visualization).

[The AD]

Yeah, I think the best advice is to try to get the best exposure(s) possible when you're in the field. Post-processing has certainly made getting everything perfect less critical, but I'm sure all of us have gotten back home and realized we could have gotten better shots if we'd done something differently.

Great examples so far!

[summit]

A polizer is a light ND.

2 Polarizers stacked are an expensive variable ND...

What are you all using for GND?

[Supermoon]

I have a 3-stop GND that I've been using lately. It definitely saves a lot of time to be able to capture it all in camera. I got a rectangle one that I hand hold over the lens. I saw some pro do that and he convinced me it's the best way. Maybe a holder is better? Who knows.

[Fuzz]

What are you all using for GND?

I take multiple exposures and blend them. Most of my shots where I could even consider a GND, do not have a straight horizon -- there's always something breaking it, so not sure a GND would work well (I dislike the dark shadow on a tree, stick, rock, or mountain that's sticking up off the horizon in such shots). Instead I shoot three or more shots at different exposures and blend them in Photoshop. In fact, my images 2, 3, and 4 above are HDR's made like that.

I have a 3-stop GND that I've been using lately. It definitely saves a lot of time to be able to capture it all in camera. I got a rectangle one that I hand hold over the lens. I saw some pro do that and he convinced me it's the best way. Maybe a holder is better? Who knows.

I've handheld filters on occasion, but my arms get tired holding it exactly in place for 15-60 seconds at a time for so many shots. Plus, you have to hold it very close to the lens (in order to minimize the possibility of reflections), so there's little margin for error if your hand starts shaking.

[Supermoon]

What are you using for HDR? I can never get the results I want with Photoshop.

[summit]

Most of my shots where I could even consider a GND, do not have a straight horizon -- there's always something breaking it, so not sure a GND would work well (I dislike the dark shadow on a tree, stick, rock, or mountain that's sticking up off the horizon in such shots).

That's been my objection to gnd as well

[GrantN]

I don't have any nd filters but I am interested in using them for my film photography too. I've read it's worth it to buy the more expensive glass vs & the mrc option too.

I came across a photographer's set of photos which intrigued me for their simplicity. He is named Markus Renner, & has some neat photos. His site is markusrenner.com . I read somewhere, for his work, he uses one or two 10 stop filters for about 10minutes-2hrs. He's won some awards & might be shed some light on effects possible with nd filters.

[Fuzz]

What are you using for HDR? I can never get the results I want with Photoshop.

Luminosity masks -- basically a way to create a series of masks based on the brightness values, and then masking them appropriately. I use Jimmy McIntyre's actions to create all the luminosity masks, and then manually brush int/out the masks as needed. Takes more effort than an automatic HDR creation, but produces much better results IMO.

I've also tried Nik's HDR engine (free from Google) -- works pretty well, but seems to degrade the overall quality a bit.

So for images that I really care about and want to get the best (e.g. want to sell or print large), I use luminosity masks. For ones that I don't care as much, I use the Nik HDR Pro action.

[Ted26]

What are you using for HDR? I can never get the results I want with Photoshop.

I save the HDR blend as a 32 bit tiff file and then edit that file in Lightroom, using that method generally yields a pretty natural looking result




These are both HDR's from the other day

[Fuzz]

I save the HDR blend as a 32 bit tiff file and then edit that file in Lightroom, using that method generally yields a pretty natural looking result

These are both HDR's from the other day

Pretty nice results. I'm still on LR 4.4, which does not do HDR. That is probably the biggest reason that's making me look at upgrading -- kind of a pain to always go into PS for HDR.

[SUPERIOR]

I use Variable ND filters all the time for high-end video. However, the same basic principles apply to stills.

The idea in video is to shoot with a constant shutter speed of 1/50, or 1/60 to achieve a 180 degree shutter rule, depending on how many FPS you shoot.

I typically shoot in 24P, for a filmic look, so use a shutter speed of 1/50.

I also try to shoot with the "sweet spot" in the lens, using an aperture range from F4 - F6 for most situations except for low depth of field interview shots or long distance landscapes.

So, using these numbers, I dial in my variable ND to achieve correct exposure and eyeball the resulting image.

This ND filter technique creates a smooth, uniform look to footage, but conversely can contribute unwanted ghosting or lens flare if using a lower quality filter.

For the highest quality ND filters, use a matte box and rectangular filters manufactured by a company like Chroziel.

You can get graduated ND filters that allow better sky/ground landscape images, color filters, polarizers, and many others.

ND filters allow you to control shutter speed and F stop - letting you be more creative.