| Article: |
Top Ten Digital Photography Tips | |
| Subject: | save on expensive polarizers | |
| Date: | 2002-10-23 13:39:15 | |
| From: | apyh | |
|
Response to: save on expensive polarizers
|
||
|
one quick note...
|
||
Showing messages 1 through 5 of 5.
-
save on expensive polarizers
2002-11-01 14:59:40 stephaniem [View]
-
best speed on moving objects?
2010-01-04 15:52:53 ERICON5 [View]
what's the best suggested speed to capture a moving object on stage( musical act/band) with spots lights that constatnly change of color and capture the object regardless of the background? -
save on expensive polarizers
2003-11-10 06:32:12 anonymous2 [View]
oooh.... "at my rates for Photoshop work...". Guess us hacks should make sure we purchase a Polariser then.
Great article Derrick. -
save on expensive polarizers
2003-01-20 14:52:23 anonymous2 [View]
What are your rates for photoshop work? I have to outsource some work and I'm looking for competant individuals to handle image processing for the web... tlh@sysmatrix.net
-
save on expensive polarizers
2002-11-01 14:58:13 stephaniem [View]
I think polarised sunglasses are a great way to experiment with polarisation effects, especially for beginners. For anything like quality work, though, remember that the best sunglasses have abysmal optical quality compared to even a half-decent camera lens.
Polarisers do many, many things that can't be simulated easily in Photoshop - or at all, in some cases.
Polarisers don't uniformly increase contrast in an image; they darken only polarised light. This includes light from a clear sky that's at 90 degrees from the sun; reflections off water, glass and most other NON-metallic surfaces. They don't alter colour. Simulating these effects accurately in Photoshop is very time-consuming indeed; tweaking layers and curves isn't the same thing at all.
A polariser can also serve as a handy ND2 filter to give you that extra long exposure or that shallower depth of field. Try simulating vehicle light trails in Photoshop; sure, you can do it with some practice. But shallow depth of field is a little harder to get right.
Polarisers can also see through the reflections on water or glass. Photoshop can't.
$50-$100 for a polariser? Outrageous? Possibly. But at my rates for Photoshop work, that's a bargain.



Polarisers do many, many things that can't be simulated easily in Photoshop - or at all, in some cases.
Polarisers don't uniformly increase contrast in an image; they darken only polarised light. This includes light from a clear sky that's at 90 degrees from the sun; reflections off water, glass and most other NON-metallic surfaces. They don't alter colour. Simulating these effects accurately in Photoshop is very time-consuming indeed; tweaking layers and curves isn't the same thing at all.
A polariser can also serve as a handy ND2 filter to give you that extra long exposure or that shallower depth of field. Try simulating vehicle light trails in Photoshop; sure, you can do it with some practice. But shallow depth of field is a little harder to get right.
Polarisers can also see through the reflections on water or glass. Photoshop can't.
$50-$100 for a polariser? Outrageous? Possibly. But at my rates for Photoshop work, that's a bargain.