D3 and Filters

Now that I have a D3, which has all sorts of
color corrections in its electronics, do I
still have a use for the myriad colored
filters I have collected?

Thanks,
Mike.

In article upHNj.9322$XF3.7656@trnddc04, Mike -- Email Ignored
wrote:

Now that I have a D3, which has all sorts of
color corrections in its electronics, do I
still have a use for the myriad colored
filters I have collected?

in general, the only filters you need are a circular polarizer and
neutral density filter. coloured filter effects can be done much more
effectively in photoshop.

colour correction filters for tungsten light can theoretically reduce
noise by matching the light to the sensor's native white point, but
it's minor and the d3 does quite well in low light anyway.

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 06:00:26 -0700, nospam
wrote:

In article upHNj.9322$XF3.7656@trnddc04, Mike -- Email Ignored
wrote:

Now that I have a D3, which has all sorts of
color corrections in its electronics, do I
still have a use for the myriad colored
filters I have collected?

in general, the only filters you need are a circular polarizer and
neutral density filter. coloured filter effects can be done much more
effectively in photoshop.

And what about graduated neutral density filters, to correct
over-contrast in landscapes, for example?

Father Kodak

In article , Father Kodak
wrote:

in general, the only filters you need are a circular polarizer and
neutral density filter. coloured filter effects can be done much more
effectively in photoshop.

And what about graduated neutral density filters, to correct
over-contrast in landscapes, for example?

that would fall under the neutral density filter category

however, taking a few photos and combining them into an hdr is an
option.

nospam wrote:
In article , Father Kodak
wrote:

in general, the only filters you need are a circular polarizer and
neutral density filter. coloured filter effects can be done much more
effectively in photoshop.
And what about graduated neutral density filters, to correct
over-contrast in landscapes, for example?

that would fall under the neutral density filter category

however, taking a few photos and combining them into an hdr is an
option.

For practical purposes, even grad NDs are less useful these days - given
the possibility to push exposure from one properly exposed (to save
highlights) low iso raw file.
You don't need HDR, just gradient blends using masks, or much simpler
and better, just by using Capture NX properly.
I still carry grad nds with me, but seldom use them.

Mike -- Email Ignored wrote:
Now that I have a D3, which has all sorts of
color corrections in its electronics, do I
still have a use for the myriad colored
filters I have collected?
Use the workflow you are more comfortable with. I'm only
just starting to use WB on camera rather than using filters.
I'm familiar with using colour correction filters so for
months I have left the camera on daylight and used
correction filters. (NB - make sure the camera is set to
daylight, or it will try to adjust out the effect of the
filter).

I find that the use of correction filters gives me more
predictable colour balance than using the various WB
settings on camera. Of course the camera WB is faster.

BTW - if you are planning on doing B&W, then I'd suggest
still using your B&W contrast filters. Photoshop can emulate
them but the result just isn't the same.

I haven't done tests, but in theory using colour correction
filters should give you greater dynamic range in your
highlights and shadows when you are at extremes (such as
tungsten lighting).

Thanks,
Mike.

In article
, Doug
Jewell wrote:

BTW - if you are planning on doing B&W, then I'd suggest
still using your B&W contrast filters. Photoshop can emulate
them but the result just isn't the same.

that's a bad idea. due to the bayer pattern, using a colour filter
will adversely affect the resolution of the sensor.

plus, photoshop can duplicate what the filter would have done and a
whole lot more, including selectively applying various filters to
different parts of the image.

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 06:33:14 -0700, nospam wrote:
: In article
: , Doug
: Jewell wrote:
:
: BTW - if you are planning on doing B&W, then I'd suggest
: still using your B&W contrast filters. Photoshop can emulate
: them but the result just isn't the same.
:
: that's a bad idea. due to the bayer pattern, using a colour filter
: will adversely affect the resolution of the sensor.
:
: plus, photoshop can duplicate what the filter would have done and a
: whole lot more, including selectively applying various filters to
: different parts of the image.

And all the B&W filters except yellow are dark enough to cost you a stop or
two, which could adversely affect autofocus.

Bob

nospam wrote:
In article
, Doug
Jewell wrote:

BTW - if you are planning on doing B&W, then I'd suggest
still using your B&W contrast filters. Photoshop can emulate
them but the result just isn't the same.

that's a bad idea. due to the bayer pattern, using a colour filter
will adversely affect the resolution of the sensor.

plus, photoshop can duplicate what the filter would have done and a
whole lot more, including selectively applying various filters to
different parts of the image.

"Mike -- Email Ignored" wrote in message
news:upHNj.9322$XF3.7656@trnddc04...
Now that I have a D3, which has all sorts of
color corrections in its electronics, do I
still have a use for the myriad colored
filters I have collected?

Thanks,
Mike.

No. Throw them away except the polarizer.