Filters. Which one?

[Alpha]

I can tell even when they are very gradual. It's obvious.

Can you see them here?
Nick Brandt : Photography
Why don't you put your money where your mouth is and show us.

Well as I said I can tell when the horizon is not perfectly straight. Here, it is.

So would it be fair to say that your problem lies with the photographer's alignment of the horizon and not with the ND filter, then?

 

[Petraio Prime]

Can you see them here?
Nick Brandt : Photography
Why don't you put your money where your mouth is and show us.

Well as I said I can tell when the horizon is not perfectly straight. Here, it is.

So would it be fair to say that your problem lies with the photographer's alignment of the horizon and not with the ND filter, then?

It has to do with the fact that you can't easily hide the transition when the mountain (or building) /horizon line is not close to straight. When the top of the mountain (or building) is darker than the part immediately below it, it becomes obvious. It's a crude approach, is what I am saying.

 

[mwcfarms]

I went with a CPF first, you can always fake a ND in post if you absolutely need to and I think the CPF is more versatile. Good luck, and I'm a huge face of landscapes, nature shots etc couldn't care less if others like them. I'm not at all interested in rusty buses but that doesn't mean I would look on those shots with utter contempt. Art is subjective to each person. Maybe some people should remember that.

 

[MohaimenK]

For daytime exposure shots you can get like 8 to 10 stop ND filters. There are some on Amazon for cheap you can try out but if you're going to use nicer lenses then spend the money and get the good ones for $70-$100 range

 

[Petraio Prime]

I went with a CPF first, you can always fake a ND in post if you absolutely need to and I think the CPF is more versatile. Good luck, and I'm a huge face of landscapes, nature shots etc couldn't care less if others like them. I'm not at all interested in rusty buses but that doesn't mean I would look on those shots with utter contempt. Art is subjective to each person. Maybe some people should remember that.

A fascination with landscapes is a relic, an artifact of, Romanticism, a culturally bankrupt artistic movement. Thousands upon thousands (if not millions) of 'landscape' photographs are taken every year, most possessing not the slightest shred of merit.

Landscape art - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Romanticism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contempt is the only possible emotional reaction to them.

 

[mwcfarms]

Saying contempt is the only possible emotional reaction is a hubristic attitude. Comments like that are easy to say when your sitting behind a monitor. That is what the OP is interested in. He didn't ask for a pompous comment regarding his interests just what filter he should purchase. Petraio I think your knowledgable and could contribute but blanket statements like this hurt your credibility.

 

[Petraio Prime]

Saying contempt is the only possible emotional reaction is a hubristic attitude. Comments like that are easy to say when your sitting behind a monitor. That is what the OP is interested in. He didn't ask for a pompous comment regarding his interests just what filter he should purchase. Petraio I think your knowledgeable and could contribute but blanket statements like this hurt your credibility.

How does it hurt my credibility? Anyway, I answered the question:

Buy a polarizer.

Why is it such a crime to question people's ideas? Have you never heard of the Enlightenment? Cultural and artistic movements come and go...Romanticism has had its day...time to move on. Enough with the landscapes, waterfalls, etc.

 

[mwcfarms]

And what you should lead the way? Whatever. It hurts your credibility by making you come across as arrogant and all knowing. That all landscape photographers should go and try shooting something else that according to you has merit.

 

[Petraio Prime]

And what you should lead the way? Whatever. It hurts your credibility by making you come across as arrogant and all knowing. That all landscape photographers should go and try shooting something else that according to you has merit.

Precisely.

 

[mwcfarms]

I can't even help but laugh.

 

[Petraio Prime]

I can't even help but laugh.

Well that's OK. Take a look at the work of Salgado sometime, to see what I am talking about:

salgado - Google Search

 

[mwcfarms]

Thanks I have never seen his work before. Stunning and very emotional.

 

[OrionsByte]

Why is it such a crime to question people's ideas?

Just an observation, but this goes both ways - if it is your opinion that it's okay to question people's ideas, then it should also be your opinion that it's okay for people to question yours. Especially in an artistic medium where different subjects can evoke such different thoughts and emotions from person to person, it's totally arrogant to declare - or even suggest - that your perspective is the only one that counts.

 

[mwcfarms]

I think Emily needs a coffee or beer. Strangely exiting to see her pissed I must admit. :hug::

 

[Overread]

Petraio you're insane - possibly mad - maybe cranky -- we'll never know

I went with a CPF first, you can always fake a ND in post if you absolutely need to and I think the CPF is more versatile.

Yes and no - you can't fake a blurry waterfall shot in editing nor can you always use multiple shots to make an HDR. There is a time and place for ND and ND grad filters - though you can work around some of the limitations at times.

That said I would also recomend considering a polarizer - its silghtly more versatile as they can both be used to reduce reflections on none-metalic surfaces as well as acting like a 2 stop ND filter (they block out two stops of light).
Always go for highgrade filters - cheap ones will degrade your image quality very noticably whilst good ones will only have a minimal effect.