Guest Posted September 18, 2008 Share Posted September 18, 2008 This started with Clive's thread at http://www.thenorfolkbroads.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=3352&start=20 I posted a red herring question about ND grads, followed by this explanation: As to ND grads, it means neutral density graduated filters. Have a look at http://www.leefilters.com/camera/products/finder/ref:C475674155E58E/ They are needed because if you were to take separate meter readings for the sky and the foreground in a landscape, you would usually (unless the sky is blue) need different exposures. If you expose for the foreground the sky will often be washed out, or even pure white. If you were to expose for the sky the foreground (the land) would be too dark. Modern matrix metering and wider dynamic range sensors do a good job of averaging everything out, but ultimately they can't overcome the laws of physics - either the foreground or the sky will have a less than optimum exposure. By using a neutral density graduated filter, you hold back the exposure for the sky by the correct number of stops to make the image look the way you saw it. Some people think they are used to darken the sky and make it more dramatic, but that is not the case - they are to take account of the fact that although the human eye makes the sky and foreground balance, the film or CCD ruthlessly records the difference, which is often 2, 3 or more stops. The main exception is when you have blue skies - which you have in quite a few of your pictures. A blue sky will often balance with the foreground (and in fact a short cut way to get a good overall reading for a landscape image is to meter directly from a blue sky). That's why a lot of your images have nicely balanced exposures without the use of grads, whereas the W. Somerton one shows blown highlights in the sky. It probably needed 3 stops less exposure for the sky than for the land. The quick way to do it is with a grad. The longer way is to make 2 or 3 exposures of the same scene, on a tripod (so that you get exactly the same image in the frame), with the exposure a few stops apart, and then merge them in Photoshop, or create what is called an HDR (high dynamic range) image. Plesbit then posted this question: Question for Bruce though, would an ND grad work well in the above compositions? I had assumed they were best suited to a fairly level horizon. In most of Clive's pics the horizons are far from level with many masts and uneven tree formations - indeed many of the masts actually go clear out of the top of the frame. Would it be possible to use ND grads in these circumstances without impacting the colour and shades of the masts etc? This is my reply, having taken it off Clive's original thread (which is for his photos). Good question. You have to use a certain amount of care, but it is surprising how rarely you can see evidence on the finished image of having used a grad. First, I wouldn't normally use a grad with a blue sky, which Clive has in a lot of his compositions, including the "above" ones that you referred to. In those cases if I filtered the sky at all it would be with a polariser rather than a grad. Second, you can usually position the transition area so that it falls in the right place - e.g if you've got uneven mountains on the skyline. This is an example: http://www.brucecairns.com/photo1297768.html In this case I used a hard grad on the top of the image (in fact I also had another grad coming up from the bottom at an angle to control the highlights in the loch, but that is another story). You can see a shadow on the left hand hill, but I can't tell whether that is a cloud shadow or evidence of the grad - frankly it's more likely to be the former. I could have used a soft grad (i.e one with a soft transition between the darkened area and the clear part of the filter), in which case the transition line would have been perhaps too subtle, leaving a brighter area where the transition occurred. My original question to Clive about grads arose from his West Somerton image with a very unusual sky, which has a very bright patch of apparently pure white (i.e what look like blown highlights). As an appropriate example, therefore, here is one of mine of West Somerton, shot using a 2 stop soft grad for the sky. http://www.brucecairns.com/photo135050.html. In this case the grad was positioned so that the transition area came down over the buildings on the left, but sufficiently subtly so that they were not darkened significantly. Of course your basic premise is absolutely right - there are situations in which the grad will darken an object which cuts into the sky area. Here is an example: http://www.brucecairns.com/photo228454.html - as you can see, the tree is darkened from the horizon line upwards. Interestingly the folly, which was also covered by the grad, does not appear dark. In this case I had 5 stops of grad (a 3 stop and a 2 stop) down to the horizon, because there were some very bright patches in the sky which would have been blown otherwise. I suspect I used one hard grad and one soft to achieve the 5 stops, and positioned the soft grad to even out the transition line as bet as I could. If you had a light coloured mast cutting into the sky and you gradded the sky heavily, then yes it would darken the mast by however many stops of grad you are using. The question is, would it show unless someone was looking for it? Here's a final one, gradded at an angle across the sky area, and cutting into the tree. Can you tell? http://www.brucecairns.com/photo134715.html Bruce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.