I am looking at experimenting with black glass.
Does anyone have experience with ND filters in the 10 stop range?
I am looking for techniques, applications, and perhaps examples.
Printable View
I am looking at experimenting with black glass.
Does anyone have experience with ND filters in the 10 stop range?
I am looking for techniques, applications, and perhaps examples.
At 10 stops you start to get issues from infrared, so you might consider a hot mirror to reflect the IR. They are more very expensive, but it will save you from increased fringing, flare, and inaccurate color due to infrared. (Normal ND filters only block regular light, not IR, so a 10-stop ND increases the I.R. by one thousand times.)
I've been doing this lately. You can get some very cool images. I stacked a 3-stop ND, a 6-stop ND, and a 2-stop CPL for a total of 11 stops. It turns a 1/60 shot into a 30 second shot. ISO 100, f22, 30 secs
http://bimmermail.com/april2012/bg01-sm.jpg
http://bimmermail.com/april2012/bg04-sm.jpg
Good input
Any ideas on how much you have to slow the shutter to remove moving people from a scene?
I usually aim for a 30s exposure to blur out pedestrians. Here's an example (apologies, I grabbed these from an old post on CR, and they were saved to my iPhone to post here, not sure what that'll do to them!). This is from my initial testing of the Schneider Optics' (parent company of B+W) 82mm 10-stop ND, which AFAIK is the only one available in that size as a round/threaded filter. These were shot on a 5DII with a TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II. The first is a 1/6 s exposure without the filter, the second is a 30 s exposure with the filter. During the second one, several pedestrians passed through the frame, and some cars as well. You can also see the warmer tone with the filter - could be corrected in post, but for this shot I think the warmer tone is preferable.
http://img.tapatalk.com/927319f8-5171-b101.jpg
http://img.tapatalk.com/927319f8-5195-e003.jpg
I've been playing around with a Hoya HMC ND400 ("Made by Tokina Co.") I got off ebay a while ago.
Focussing on Live-view isn't so hard, tripod is a must obviously, I haven't noticed any colour casting to speak of (I also have a Canon ND8, which makes everything a funky colour).
Here's a shot I took last weekend, about 100km NW of Melbourne. It's the -2/3EV shot of an HDR that I haven't processed yet, just batch-processed in DPP so pretty much the came as a camera JPG.
EFs 15-85 @ 15mm f/5.6, iso100, 10s exposure, ND400 stacked with a Heliopan CPL on top (love that 15-85 vignetting, even better with 2 filters, you can't see it because i've cropped it 3:1). The longer exposure really helped to blur out that damn duck that swam right through my shot (the trail it left behind isn't so bad). I'll re-process later on Landscape style and saturate the colours a bit more when i HDR it...
Attachment 944
The darkest filter I have is a 6-stop. But here are two shots I took with it last year:
http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6060/6...5f07cf48_b.jpg
Waterfall IMG_0382pp by kayaker72, on Flickr
http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6214/6...411363ed_b.jpg
Falls IMG_2704 by kayaker72, on Flickr
You can see the red hue others mentioned in both shots. This was still after adjust WB in post (DPP at the time). I probably could adjust reds only, but didn't.
OK Great discussion, This is why I keep coming back to TDP.
First Neuroanatomist:
So it looks like a 30 sec exposure was adequate for that shot to remove the objects moving though the scene.
Good info, and you used a 10 step filter.
I assume you checked your exposure, set your focus, then added the filter, then made a 10 stop adjustment to your speed.
I assume you can not focus through a 10stop filter.
Am I close on the technique?
Do you have any comment on a Singh-Ray variable ND (2-8) filter ($340) or the less expensive Genus brand (I believe they have a 1-4 stop and a 2-8 stop)?
Would the variable allow focus through a smaller ND then rotated up and avoid screwing on the ND filter and chance moving the focus ring?
Second Kayaker72:
Can you comment on your technique? Is it similar to how I described above?
What were your settings for each of your shots?
Why do you think you got no motion blurr on the people in the second shot, I assume they moved during the exposure.
Dr Crouble.
I really like your shot? I think it came out fantastic. Is this a panorama or a crop?
Why did you choose f5.6 for such a deep scene?
Thanks for the discussion
FYI
Nice discussion on strobist on this topic
http://strobist.blogspot.com/2010/06...-of-field.html
Spot on about technique. FWIW, I use an iPhone app called Longtime Exposure Calculator to determine exposure adjustment.Quote:
Originally Posted by iND
A variable ND could be used like that - focus first then darken. I've avoided them for two reasons: not quite dark enough, and more importantly the 'Maltese cross' artifact seen at ~24mm and wider angles (related to the uneven polarization you get with a CPL on an ultrawide lens, since a variable ND is basically stacked polarizers).
Another good (and long) guide on ND filters in general here.
This is just a crop from a single shot, EFs 15-85 @ 15mm, and cropped. I did take a panorama with my Samyang 35, shot in vertical, i 14-shots to get around the lake, but I haven't stitched it yet. With stitching the Samyang I couldn't use a CPL obviously, so I chucked the 15-85 on so I'd at least have 1 CPLed shot (i love CPL effects on water and deep blue skies like that).Quote:
Originally Posted by iND
I normally put it on iso100, 3-shot bracket 1-stop apart, set the middle bracket to 16 seconds, so I get 8/15/30 second shots, then adjust the aperture until 15-seconds is at 0EV, in this case it ended up at f/5.6. Then I take 3x3 brackets, -4/3|-1/3|2/3 + -1|0|1 + -2/3|1/3|4/3 (and for those paying attention, yes I know that if +1EV is 30-seconds, +4/3EV will also only get to 30 seconds. Meh.) Sometimes I take 9 shots at 2-stop bracketing so I get 2/3-stop intervals which I seem to have done here. I don't know what happened, I must have gotten told to hurry up by the missus, but i've only got -8/3|-2/3|4/3 brackets for this shot.
Anyway, seeing as the Hyperfocal for 15mm/5.6 on crop is something like 2 meters, I just live-view MFed on something closeish.
I could have gone to longer speeds and deeper DOF with higher f/ stop, I did have my TC-80N3 in my pocket, but i've never tried bracketing with it (i'm sure I could, just adjust the time between each shot, but I prefer to HSC my shots so clouds don't move too much between shots).
iND. My 7D is able to meter fairly accurately with the 6-stop ND filter on a lens. I hear that is a little hit or miss and that some cameras have issues metering with a 6 stop filter on. It works with my 7D. So, I didn't follow the technique above. Really, my technique was pretty standard in that I metered in camera with the filter on.Quote:
Originally Posted by iND
The first waterfall I shot with the camera resting on my hand which was resting on a rock ledge. I shot it at 1/4 sec, f/5.6 at ISO 100 at 24 mm. With the 4 stop IS on the 15-85, that was sufficiently stabilized. The shot at Niagara, I shot at 1 sec f/20, ISO 100 mounted on a tripod. The f/20 is more narrow than I would typically want to go, but without a 10-stop ND filter, it was necessary.
As for the people in the second shot, they really didn't move much within the 1 sec exposure. I think it would be pretty hard to "vanish" people at Niagara. They tend to stand there for long periods of time watching the falls and someone usually takes their place by the rail the second they move.
Hi mate,
I use the B+W 10 stop ND filter on my 5D2. You will struggle to meter accurately and will definitely not be able to use autofocus. BUT - you get 30s + exposures in bright daylight so it's a tradeoff I'm willing to make. You'll get a warmer colour temperature as well but if you shoot in RAW then it's easy to fix in post. Here's a couple of examples for you:
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5218/5...ef4e1d1c_z.jpg
Downstream East Leichardt by Ben__Taylor, on Flickr
http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4113/4...b37798ef_z.jpg
Simpson Desert Series # 2 by Ben__Taylor, on Flickr
Cheers,
Ben
Someone with some more optics or physics experience may be able to answer this questions.
What would be the effect of stacking a CPL filter (circular polarizer) under a linear polarizer filter: Could this serve as a poor mans Varible ND filter?
Yes. That is how the Singh-Ray Vari-ND works.Quote:
Originally Posted by iND
I've got one of those reversal adapters, 72mm male to 77mm male thread, intended for macro work revering a lens and mounting another lens on the front (which i've never actually tried, I should one day).Quote:
Originally Posted by iND
Instead, I tried mounting two CPLs front-to-front (so Circular Pol faces the sky and faces the sensor, Linear Pols face each other), to try emulating a Vari-ND. It didn't work too badly (I never used it too much because soon after that I got my ND400), but at the darkest settings it went a bit (a lot) purple.
So using a Linear Pol facing the sky (in either direction) and CPL facing the sensor (in the normal direction) should work just the same, but seeing as it wasn't designed as such you'd probably get some weird colours. Worth a test though...
Does anyone have experience with the 4x6 handheld ND graduated filters by LEE and SINGH-RAY?
Not for extended exposures but for lanscapes to bring out detail in the sky?
If you do 'for most purposes' how many stops would you recommend on this type of filter.
They are about $100 each (Lee has a soft ND grad filter kit .3 .6 .9, 1-2-3 stops) for about 240.
The Lee are not glass (some type of resin) but that means they are less likely to break.
I like the 4x6 so you can adjust the soft area to the scene and not the scene to the filter.
Other recommendations?
I bought the 1 stop and 2 stop ND Graduated from Singh-Ray last year. The 1 stop didn’t get much work; the 2 stop was the work horse. But I did stack the 1 stop on top of the 2 stop occasionally. If I were buying just one it would be the 2 stop, but be warned once you buy one you can see a use for many more.
They don’t have to be hand held you can get a holder, but hand held works fine.
This is the one I have;
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...l_Density.html
For sunsets/sunrises the DR (dynamic range) is large and you will need the 3 stops to get decent results, and at times it does not seem enough. I have 0.3, 0.6, & 0.9 and use them mainly early morning or evening (low light / high DR situations), so I use the 3 stop 99% of the time. The only time I have used a 2 stop was mid-day to get a little more detail in the sky, to get more of the blue in the sky, and yet get the blue water refection. I am not sure I would buy the 1 stop again if I had to do it over unless it was part of a kit and it was basically free (which was the case when I bought them).Quote:
Originally Posted by iND
By the way, Grad ND's really make a big difference in the quality of a sunset/sunrise shot. There is a lot of talk about being able to do the same thing in PP, but with the filters you can do it without the noise associated with pushing your DR in PP... so the results are much cleaner.
I do not have Lee, but would like to some day.
I have to say +1 for conropl's advice for sunsets. Most of what I do falls in the area that he referred to as "mid-day" so +2 is seems to be the most used. Ideally a person would have all three filters, and then you could stack the 1, 2 or 3 and have combinations up to 6 stops.
The 2 and the 3 stop Grad NDs will be the most used. The 1 can find use when the ground is light, sand or snow, and you are wanting to hold the sky/cloud highlights back just a little bit to allow keeping contrast with the ground and still get a decent exposure.
I've been playing with square filters. If I were to limit myself to two, I'd probably go with a 2-stop hard edge graduated filter and a 3-stop reverse ND filter.
I don't find myself using the soft edge graduated filters as much.
I have three Cokin filters and two singh ray.
I also prefer square filters because you can use them as pure ND, gradual or both. This picture is taken with a ND2 and a ND8 (Cokin Z-Pro), 1,6" f/32 on a bright day.
Attachment 1131
Received my new Hoya ND filter in the mail today and off I went to my local park and lake and took around 20 shots. All the settings were set by the seed of me old pants, (did ask me mate Steve for some advise though...thanks mate): 5D MK2, 24-105 IS, F14, ISO 50, SS 30, FL 35mm LR3.3, Lillydale Lake 24/072012 4PM.
Thanks for viewing.
Attachment 1270
Attachment 1271
Great shot Wally!
I especially love the contrasting and muted colors of the sky vs. water in the 1st shot!
I'm no expert at landscapes, but are you sure that the first shot is 30sec? I would expect the clouds and water movement to be greater at 30sec?
Also keep in mind that 50% sky and 50% water can sometimes compete with each other for the viewers attention, however I feel that it really works here to help get the Suns reflection in the water, while still leaving some room in the frame for the image to breathe!
Enjoy the new filter,
Rich
Thanks for your kind comments. I'm definitely no expert in landscape photography let alone using ND filters, but I'm learning fast...LOL. The 30 sec is of my exif date...? :confused: ...I will keep an eye on my exif info on my next ND photos, to make sure that I give the right info.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Lane
Nice to see you posting Wally, looks like that first one you were playing with white balance a little and I would have to agree with Rich, it doesn't have the smoothness of a 30 sec exposure.
I spotted the B&W version of the second on Flikr, that is a first class shot, keep them coming mate.
Thanks Guys for your comments...Will keep an eye on my exposures.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve U
Thanks for viewing.
Attachment 1272
Nice one Wally, I really like the detail in the rocks and the boardwalk. The greens and the lavender colour of the ornamental grasses really contrast with the eerie sky. The blown out patch of sky adds an arty balance to the whole shot.
Nice work.
Wow, Wally ...that last shot is fantastic!!
Thanks for your comments guys.:)
I am on the quest for ND and was thinking about this very item.I found an industrial optics company that appeared to do the very high end filters, etc though the pricing actually seemed pretty reasonable. They had two types of ND, absorption vs. reflecting. I was going to give them a call and discuss if the reflecting would be Visible and near infra red to address this very issue. Then I got to wondering - why aren't any of the of the NDs in the photo world mirrored - they all appear to be absorption i.e. non mirror/reflectingQuote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Browning
Any of the high science guys have thoughts on this? I "demo'd" an inexpensive variable and found even at its least setting to reduce sharpness and warm color cast - sent it back. I am thinking a 3 or 4 stop and then a 10 stop set should do the trick. Many comments that a 1 or 2 stop is largely a waste of glass.
Also any comments on brand? other than you get what you pay for.
Hey guys,
I've noticed a few people mentioning adding a CPL in front of an ND filter. Is this a standard practice? I'm just curious because I'm still learning but have been told "never ever ever" to do it, but if you guys are doing it it can't be that bad? What are the benefits of stacking the CPL on an ND?
I suppose one negative is you loose a little IQ with every filter you stack.Quote:
Originally Posted by Squidy
I have done it with graduated ND's.
I suppose an advantage would be if you needed to add another stop or so and don't have another ND to stack. I have done this.
Maybe there is an effect I haven't heard of, maybe someone will weigh in with it.
Ahhhh ok, I guess that would make sense. I'm probably using the filters wrong as the pictures I take with ND filters end up looking too contrasty... Maybe it's a problem that I forgot to take off the UV or something.
how may stops is the filter and what camera settings?
I would think that you need to be shooting RAW and in Manual - don't let the camera do anything automatically.
Yeah I shoot in raw and usually in manual... but I just realised I may have had auto iso on... that could be a part of it
The filter I was using was a Hoya ND4, and the other one was a Fotar (which was way, way worse than the Hoya)
Oh I use a polarizer with a solid ND filter all the time... it works brilliantly, especially when you're trying to shoot a waterfall and there's too much light to get adequate blur. The polarizer takes out the glare in the water and the bright spots on the rocks, so the two filters together are indispensable. Here's an example... it also happens to be a 3-shot HDR, but I used the dual-filter setup.Quote:
Originally Posted by Squidy
http://www.huyerperspectives.com/Lan...42_3_4-2-L.jpg
I am not a big fan of stacking filters, but there are times when you have to (or should).
For example, shooting water falls... the wet rocks tend to have a lot of glare as well as glare from the water; so you need the CP to cut that glare, and the CP also helps enhance the colors in the surrounding leaves. You would also need the ND to get a better motion blur out of the moving water. This combination also works to blur water (waves) at the beach, and yet cuts the glare from the water.
There are other times when you want to use the CP to get the blue in the sky to show up better or to get the clouds to be more defined. If this is around sunset, then a Grad ND mat be in order as well to keep your foreground from being nothing but a silhouette.
Stacking two filters is not too big of a hit to IQ.
Edit: It looks like Jonathan already answered while I was typing.
That has got to be one of THE best shots I've ever seen, it's also EXACTLY what I want to do... and unfortunately exactly what I can't acheive