Cokin filters!

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Dmac on January 31, 2012 at 11:54am

"However the assertion was made that Cokin filters are glass and that would lead one to believe that they are difficult to scratch"

This is absolutely not the case, Yes I stated that they were glass, and my apologies if I was incorrect in my statement of materials, but in no way would that fact lead me to believe that they were scratch resistant if I were a reader.

Glass filters may scratch easily just as other materials do.

My only assertion is that I have had them for 20 years or so and have never broken or scratched one because I have been extremely careful with them.

As for whether to use them now or not, that is up in the air as many old schoolers will say that the finished product comes directly from the camera, whist the new breed will say "hey we have the technology to edit so why not edit"

As I stated,  I have not used the filters to date on the digital camera and I am learning to use photoshop etc... but that would not preclude me from attempting to use them with the new technology.

Who is to say absolutely what art is ?

Is it making the picture perfect when taking it, or making it perfect on the computer?

Both in my mind are artists, just different types.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Max Kalkman on February 3, 2012 at 8:30pm

I wholeheartedly disagree with your statement. I'm comfortable doing HDR work and Photoshop. Before I decided I couldn't stand being inside behind a computer screen all day I was a programmer and did enough graphic design along with it that I knew Photoshop before I had ever even heard of a RAW file.

And those skills mean precisely nothing to me when I am shooting and virtually nothing in post. I'm glad I can tell when I will need to HDR something because what I had in my minds eye requires it, but HDR being a better tool is nothing more than opinion. With the way I have my workflow set up, what comes out of camera is my final product. It just happened to be what worked best for me commercially and now I treat my fine art / personal shoots the same way. Some sports shooters have the same issue where they dont have time to edit before their images are sent out. Now granted you wouldnt HDR sports probably, but you're about as likely to need Cokin filters there.

Anyways, aside from workflow issues, Cokin filters and HDR are by no means the same effect just one in analog and one in digital form. HDR utilizes tonemapping on a per pixel basis and expands the latitude of images. Cokin filters rely on amounts of light transmission relative to gradients etc. Cokin filters also dont expand latitude. They compress the latitude before it reaches the film/sensor. Maybe some similar effects are possible, but there will always be very different peripheral effects from these different techniques.

Painters often use similar yet slightly different brushes to create different effects. HDR is one such brush, Cokin filters are another.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gary Vernon on January 31, 2012 at 8:10am

Fred is quite right there being photographer's of varying degrees of software editing abilities here - i agree with getting used to using a CP and a few ND grad's, the problem as Nathan says is you need a scene that complements the ND filter.

The option is to learn about bracketing and merging to get the whole dynamic range of a scene that a single exposure on occasions will struggle with.

I agree with Fred -  too many so called HDR compositions are over the top and out of vogue, quite often they are just pseudo HDR tone-maps for the sake of it..

Most if not all of the new idiot proof HDR mode camera's only produce a compressed JPEG which is the worst scenario to start an editing workflow..

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kenton Smith on February 7, 2012 at 4:23pm

You've spurred a really interesting discussion here. I find the HDR vs. graduated ND filters especially interesting. To me HDR is so much more than just replacing a graduated ND filter. You  can't use a filter to fix multiple exposure variations in a single scene (eg. taking pictures of a house from inside and getting properly exposed outside through the windows).

Software is great, if you know how to use it well. Using a graduated "filter" in software poses the same challenges as it does in real life, you just have a little easier time visualizing it. You can just as easily mess up an image using a software filter as you can a hardware one.

Finally there are some filters you can't do with software. A full ND is one of those examples. If you're trying to get the nice flowing water effect in the middle of the day, you can't and there's nothing you can do in software to fix it. The other is a polarizer; sure you can make skies bluer in software but you can't make water see-through, or easily cut through reflections.

I'd say if you're just looking to experiment, go with the Cokin filters. They aren't crazy expensive but you have to take good care of them. If you decide that you always use a specific type of filter, then maybe you go and buy a high quality screw-on glass one. I've had both and I think there are good and bad aspects to them all.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Charles Mercer on February 8, 2012 at 12:38am

You should have no problems with Cokin filters for DSLR still photos. I use them all the time - circular polariser, grads and full NDs. Provided there are no serious scratches you should be OK. Light blemishes will not show up because the filter is so close to the lens it won't pick them up. However, video is a different matter where an absolutely flat unrippled surface is required, such as that found on the Tiffen range and more expensive filters. Having said that, Cokin still works with video, but I make videos professionally so I tend to go for the more expensive ranges. Try Cokin out, you won't be disappointed.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page