Opinions Wanted: Filter or Photoshop

[bp4life71]

Im looking at buying a polarized filter for use in taking some landscape/sky shots. Do you think its worth buying a filter, or should I just do the post-editing of picture which still gets you the same thing? Or does the filter add more pop?

What would you guys do? Photoshop or filter?

Thanks.

 

[ann]

editing is not going to help with the issues that a polarizing filter corrects.

other filters, i.e. those used with black and white are best done with post processing.

 

[Big Mike]

A polarizing filter is one of the few filters that is difficult or impossible to fully duplicate with digital editing. That's why it's the only filter I use on a regular basis. Definitely worth getting.

 

[icassell]

I have yet to see a post-processing technique which will duplicate the appearance of a Circular Polarizer. I personally feel that this filter is a required part of the outdoor photographer's kit.

 

[benhasajeep]

I am no expert in photoshop but I dont think you can truely replicate a polarizer in PS. The effect of a CPL is not just darker blue skies. But also with water features, window glass, or reflections off shiney objects. The CPL helps you control the effect one way or the other (want the reflection or don't want the reflection).

I would suggest you grab a CPL (at least a multicoated version). I have learned by actual use the good ones are better than the el cheapo ones. The el cheapo ones will give you some good use. But you can definately tell the difference between them and a good Hoya or B+W.

I would even think a el cheapo CPL is better than trying to replicate in PS.

 

[bp4life71]

Hey..thanks for the quick responses guys/gals. I'll be picking one up at my local walmart. Once I see how it plays out for the photography i'll be doing, i'll pick up the Hoya or bh quality filter.

Walmart brand one is like 9.00....if I even like the look a little bit, then the quality filters will be just that much better.

Thanks.

 

[iflynething]

Walmart brand one is like 9.00....

Thanks.

If you're going to go Wal-Mart, just don't get one. Save for a nicer, higher quality glass. You will be able to see the effect with a $9 one from Wal-Mart, but the quality of glass sucks.

~Michael~

 

[Derrel]

Walmart brand one is like 9.00....

Thanks.

If you're going to go Wal-Mart, just don't get one. Save for a nicer, higher quality glass. You will be able to see the effect with a $9 one from Wal-Mart, but the quality of glass sucks.

~Michael~

I would be to disagree with Michael; I think it's unfair to say that, "the quality of glass sucks". That's not being fair to the makers of higher quality filters. A more appropriate and more accurate statement would be, "the quality (snicker) of the glass SUCKS!!!!!!!!!"

 

[bp4life71]

Thats exactly what I want...i want to see if the effect is what i'm looking for....so the 9.00 walmart brand one is PERFECT.

Then go buy the good stuff. Money isnt the issue at all. I'm just checking to see that I like the effect, as opposed to what I can do in Photoshop.

If I like the effect, i'll then by the higher quality filter. No need in spending money on a high priced filter only to find out that I dont like the effect.

Thanks.

 

[skieur]

What is beig commonly used by pro landscape photographers at the moment is the warming polarizer which reduces the blue haze in many scenic shots.

skieur

 

[Derrel]

Here's what a $14-$25 cheap Brand-X circular polarizing filter can do....

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...oto-gallery/181815-cant-focus-cpl-200-mm.html

I understand the idea behind wanting to spend $9 to see if the effect is what you want, I truly do. It's just that a circular polarizer (often abbreviated as CPL or CircPol or CPol) needs fairly high precision manufacture and frame mounting, or it can cause a tremendous loss of sharpness. The first cheap polarizer I bought was a $40 "second-tier brand" one back in 1985. I shot some photos with it, and noticed that the images were,well, not very good. I had good lenses. Surely it wasn't that hard to make a good polarizer!!

I took a few slides down to my local photo shop where a man well over twice my age said, and I'll never forget this. "The bitterness of low quality is remembered long after the sweetness of low price has been forgotten." [Thank you, Walt B.! for that lesson]. He sold me a used "oversized" Nikon polarizer,and the quality difference was in a word, astounding.

 

[icassell]

Money isnt the issue at all. .

Hmmmm ... in that case .... there's this 600mm f4 I've had my eye on ...

 

[PatrickHMS]

Money isnt the issue at all.

Then why waste your time with a $9.00 piece of junk that you already know
isn't any good? At least if anyone here knows what they are talking about. If your mind was already made up, why even ask for opinions?

You can return the CPl to Wal-mart to get your $9.00 back once you realize that buying it in the first place was a waste of time.

Why even go to the expense of buying a DSLR and decent glass, then attach the bottom of a pop bottle to the front of the lens...

 

[benhasajeep]

The problem is with the $9 Walmart Job is it may be so poor in quality you may not get a good representation of what a good CPL can do! Could be supprised, it may be as good as a $45 one. But even at that, I would highly doubt it would be as good as a multi-coated one from a good manufacturer. I would be very skeptical of a $9 clear filter.

 

[PatrickHMS]

Wait until you try to screw a cheap filter into the threads of your nice lens, and something sticks or a thread strips. All of a sudden you just cannot get the el-cheapo filter out of your lens (without using a vise or something similiar) no matter what you try.

A camera repair service will cost you a LOT more than $9.00 to have it fixed.

But, like you posted before, money isn't the issue at all...