With digital I have never use graduated ND filters, you can always do it
digitally. I only shot RAW, depends on the scene, just expose for the
highlight or -1 stop. Generate two images from the same RAW file, one
develops for the foreground and the other for the background, use graduated
selection mask from PS and merges the two images.
It is for the case where you cannot control the subject and background,
using any filter on the field is slow and time consuming. Any improper use
may damage the image and not easy to correct it back in PS later.
Generally it may be better to expose it "right" during shooting but I will
not rely on in-camera histogram to expose it right, the best way is always
an incident meter, it will not fool by the background.
I will not intentionally over expose an image to get better noise but when
you run out of f-stops this is an option. Stop down too much will surely
affect the resolution of an image. Of course the best way is to us a ND
filter.
Talking about noise, I have gradually changed my default exposure setting,
with -1 on 10D to -1/3 on E-1 and +/-0 with E-300. A nosier camera does
require more attention on exposure.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "AG Schnozz" <agschnozz@xxxxxxxxx>
> Joel wrote:
>> Has anyone used graduated ND (split) filters with their
>> E-system camera and lenses?
>
> I'm finding that filters in front of the lens messes up the WB
> as well as the metering system. The camera is definitely doing
> some matrix-metering utilizing color-temperature as well as true
> EV values. (my Minolta A1 takes it to another level, though).
>
> However, I'm also finding that I have to do less post-processing
> with the filtered shots. I really don't like doing image
> stacking and am trying to get my shots correct before pressing
> the shutter release.
>
> Part of that is an increased use of the handheld meter. As
> useful as the histogram is, it's not totally accurate and is
> calculated on the "thumbnail" image stored with the file. The
> incident light meter is taking a lot of second guessing out of
> my image capture. It's actually refreshing to shoot in MANUAL
> exposure mode and not chimp. When I'm steering based on the
> histogram, I'm finding that my images just don't have the same
> snap crackle and pop that they do when I manually meter the
> scene. Reminds me of the dark ages of film when everybody
> customized the ISO settings of their film in order to gain some
> superiority attitude over the scientists at Kodak and Fuji.
> Isn't that exactly what histogram metering is? Overriding
> common sense? Why do we overexpose the scene by two stops in
> some worthless hope of reducing "noise"? Shoot it right to
> begin with and don't worry about the noise as the overall image
> quality will be a little higher and you have more freedom with
> saturation adjustments without blowing gamma.
>
> There is nothing wrong with hauling split filters around when
> you are doing serious work. Some old tools still have their
> place. You won't always be able to do multiple exposures. In
> fact, most scenes where you really wish you could stack images
> you can't because of subject or camera motion.
>
> AG
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|