C&C of sorts - new toy: ND filter

Hugh_C

OK so I hope I don't bore the pants of y'all with endless streams (pardon the pun) of smeary water and traffic shots, but here's the outcome of the first outing with this little codger. It's a Neutral Density (ND) 1.8 106 Glass Filter, which I think means about 6 stops. Anyway, a 20 second exposure for your perusal.

Huge

PaulieC

I had a look at this set on Flickr earlier - composition-wise they're fine, but the colours are very muted. Is that down to using the ND filter (shouldn't be) or were they not processed or was it just a bit dark?

I got a filter set myself a few months ago, but haven't used it in anger yet, hoping to get down to Glendalough in the next few weeks for a bit of autumn colour

Hugh_C

cambo_gueno wrote:

I had a look at this set on Flickr earlier - composition-wise they're fine, but the colours are very muted. Is that down to using the ND filter (shouldn't be) or were they not processed or was it just a bit dark?

Yeah they look muter here too for me, but at source they were nice and saturated. I'm using Mac and LightRoom / CS3 combo, maybe I need to futz round with the colour profile a bit. Thought I used sRGB though ...

Hmm, will revisit.

Thanks Cambo

rymus

I [heart] ND filters. Currently have two and use them stacked at any and every given opportunity. I'd echo the comment about muted colours but wouldn't shy away from it completely. It works for me with the shot you posted. I think if it was boldly colourful and vibrant it'd kill some of the atmosphere of the shot.

PaulieC

rymus wrote:

I think if it was boldly colourful and vibrant it'd kill some of the atmosphere of the shot.

I didn't mean it should be day-glo green or anything!

Borderfox

I think it looks great, looking at it on a sony vaio and I just calibrated the screen. I think it will look even better when you print it out large!!

Hugh_C

reworked:



Thanks Cambo, must've screwed up witht he profile.

PaulieC

Nice, looks a lot warmer now. Hope you're not supposed to be working?

Hugh_C

cambo_gueno wrote:

Nice, looks a lot warmer now. Hope you're not supposed to be working?

I'm in the middle of rendering something which will take anouther 13 minutes!

PaulieC

just enough time for a smoke (in the old days , cup of coffee and a bit of photoshopping! Ah, I miss the smokes

AnCatDubh

i think it looks great and you've managed to get that 'candy floss' effect with the longer exposure/delay. Just one curiosity - was the scene particularly bright to begin with?

Hugh_C

AnCatDubh wrote:

i think it looks great and you've managed to get that 'candy floss' effect with the longer exposure/delay. Just one curiosity - was the scene particularly bright to begin with?

No Cat, reasonably well shaded by oak trees, it's a magical place.

Hugh

AnCatDubh

hughchal wrote:

No Cat, reasonably well shaded by oak trees, it's a magical place.

Hugh

You are one step ahead of me here as you actually have the neutral density filter in your paws so bear with me while i ask a question out of ignorance - what did your neutral density filter do/what was its purpose for your composition? Don't get me wrong, I do think the image is great as stated earlier but could you not have achieved the same result using manual / shutter priority mode at 20 seconds shutter speed - this achieving the wonderful fuzz on the water.

From what i've read on the ND filter (i could be completely wrong in my understanding!) but the ND filter takes down the harsh light / extremities of light (just like sun glasses for your lens) and if you intend it, to enable your camera expose for longer periods in such conditions creating that wonderful fuzz?

I'm just wondering is there something else to it?

Thanks.

PS - hope this is a half intelligent question -

Hugh_C

AnCatDubh wrote:

what did your neutral density filter do/what was its purpose for your composition? Don't get me wrong, I do think the image is great as stated earlier but could you not have achieved the same result using manual / shutter priority mode at 20 seconds shutter speed - this achieving the wonderful fuzz on the water.

Don't think so Cat, it would have been wildly over-exposed, I wouldn't have been able to stop down the lens enough (i.e. a large f number). My max on that lens is f/22 I think and even at low ISO, the max shutter speed without overexposing would have been less than a second, or thereabouts.