Graduated ND filter questions

[Ozarker]

I'm looking at getting a B+W 82mm ND graduated filter. It will either be a 1 stop or two stop.

My question is this: How does one keep the effect of the darker part of the filter from spilling onto the rest of the photo? In other words, if i am using the filter for a darker sky, how do I also keep from getting darker trees or mountains, etc., in the frame if the horizon is not perfectly level?

Honestly, this has puzzled me and is the reason I have not gotten a filter yet.

I could always go the Lee route for more flexibility on where the transition starts and ends, but there is still the question in my mind about what happens if the horizon is not perfectly level... which only really happens with oceans or huge lakes. Well, Kansas comes to mind also.

Thanks for your insight in advance.

 

[Zeidora]

The ND grad line is straight, and the effect is straight. You have to make a decision of whether you want some sky a bit too light, or some trees a bit too dark. You can't have it both ways, sorry. You can decide what strength of the transition you want using different types of filters (hard vs. soft edge), and that can have a pronounced effect on how it looks. For finer adjustments, that is done in post-processing.

The B+W filter have the transition line fixed in one position, so further limits the flexibility. I used the Lee system and am reasonably happy with it. My biggest complaint is that stacking two ND grads leads to pronounced color shifts. Not easy to fix in post. Haven't used the B+W ND grads.

Alternatively, you can look into HDR, not what you asked, but an alternative option to deal with high dynamic range with irregularly distributed highlight and shadow areas.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Skip the round filter – that forces you to put even a straight horizon in the middle of the frame, and that's generally not where you want it. As for uneven horizons (trees, mountains), you'd use a soft grad for those. Hard grad for straight horizons (oceans, Kansas).

 

[lion rock]

I don't think you'll notice the distinction of the dark and bright regions using a grad-ND to darken and area of a scene. I use them, (sometimes stacked) without too much issues.
Do use rectangular grad-ND with their holder to adjust for best results before shooting.
As Neuro states, avoid direct lens mounted ND. They lack flexibilities to adjust for scenery.
-r
PS. I never used reversed or hard grad-ND.

 

[Ozarker]

Well, that answers my question and saves me some money in the long run.

The Lee system seems to be the best answer.

Thanks!

 

[serendipidy]

Skip the round filter – that forces you to put even a straight horizon in the middle of the frame, and that's generally not where you want it. As for uneven horizons (trees, mountains), you'd use a soft grad for those. Hard grad for straight horizons (oceans, Kansas).

You might also need the hard grad for these states:
The state with the most land in the flat, flatter and flattest categories is, perhaps surprisingly, Florida. Illinois, North Dakota, Louisiana, Minnesota, Delaware, Kansas, Texas, Nevada and Indiana round out the top ten. (From mentalfloss.com/article/58976/kansas-really-flatter-pancake) ;D

 

[sunnyVan]

You should probably get 3 stops strength. 1 and 2 stops are barely noticeable. I have a 3 stop soft and a 3 stop medium strength. 3 stop hard seems too strong. One 3 stop soft is a very good start. Add slowly.

Well, that answers my question and saves me some money in the long run.

The Lee system seems to be the best answer.

Thanks!

 

[Ozarker]

Skip the round filter – that forces you to put even a straight horizon in the middle of the frame, and that's generally not where you want it. As for uneven horizons (trees, mountains), you'd use a soft grad for those. Hard grad for straight horizons (oceans, Kansas).

You might also need the hard grad for these states:
The state with the most land in the flat, flatter and flattest categories is, perhaps surprisingly, Florida. Illinois, North Dakota, Louisiana, Minnesota, Delaware, Kansas, Texas, Nevada and Indiana round out the top ten. (From mentalfloss.com/article/58976/kansas-really-flatter-pancake) ;D

Well, I live in Nevada and have to completely disagree with the Nevada part. Nevada happens to be the most mountainous state in the lower 48 with "over 150 (named) mountain ranges." Whoever wrote that article has never been to Nevada. Also, we have featureless horizons (lead ups to mountains) that are angled for miles and miles at a time. I've often been accused of having my camera tilted. It is quite dramatic.

We have a lot of dry lake beds that are flat, but they are surrounded by huge mountains.
http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/namerica/usstates/nvland.htm

In fact, Nevada is spanish for "snowy".

 

[serendipidy]

Skip the round filter – that forces you to put even a straight horizon in the middle of the frame, and that's generally not where you want it. As for uneven horizons (trees, mountains), you'd use a soft grad for those. Hard grad for straight horizons (oceans, Kansas).

You might also need the hard grad for these states:
The state with the most land in the flat, flatter and flattest categories is, perhaps surprisingly, Florida. Illinois, North Dakota, Louisiana, Minnesota, Delaware, Kansas, Texas, Nevada and Indiana round out the top ten. (From mentalfloss.com/article/58976/kansas-really-flatter-pancake) ;D

Well, I live in Nevada and have to completely disagree with the Nevada part. Nevada happens to be the most mountainous state in the lower 48 with "over 150 (named) mountain ranges." Whoever wrote that article has never been to Nevada. Also, we have featureless horizons (lead ups to mountains) that are angled for miles and miles at a time. I've often been accused of having my camera tilted. It is quite dramatic.

We have a lot of dry lake beds that are flat, but they are surrounded by huge mountains.
http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/namerica/usstates/nvland.htm

In fact, Nevada is spanish for "snowy".

Yes, I've driven through Nevada several times and the mountains there are quite majestic 8)

 

[Ozarker]

Skip the round filter – that forces you to put even a straight horizon in the middle of the frame, and that's generally not where you want it. As for uneven horizons (trees, mountains), you'd use a soft grad for those. Hard grad for straight horizons (oceans, Kansas).

You might also need the hard grad for these states:
The state with the most land in the flat, flatter and flattest categories is, perhaps surprisingly, Florida. Illinois, North Dakota, Louisiana, Minnesota, Delaware, Kansas, Texas, Nevada and Indiana round out the top ten. (From mentalfloss.com/article/58976/kansas-really-flatter-pancake) ;D

Well, I live in Nevada and have to completely disagree with the Nevada part. Nevada happens to be the most mountainous state in the lower 48 with "over 150 (named) mountain ranges." Whoever wrote that article has never been to Nevada. Also, we have featureless horizons (lead ups to mountains) that are angled for miles and miles at a time. I've often been accused of having my camera tilted. It is quite dramatic.

We have a lot of dry lake beds that are flat, but they are surrounded by huge mountains.
http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/namerica/usstates/nvland.htm

In fact, Nevada is spanish for "snowy".

Yes, I've driven through Nevada several times and the mountains there are quite majestic 8)

Las Vegas, right?