Analog filters? Really? Why?
I have a strong Computer Science background and feel right at home with a keyboard beneath my fingers. Learning a new piece of software, such as Photoshop, comes as second nature. Recently, a few of my fellow computer-science-slash-photographer friends admitted confusion as to why I've had this growing appreciation for using filters in the field. I'm talking about analog filters, such as polarizers and graduated split ND's, as opposed to anything applied during a digital workflow.
"Why would you bother messing with that split ND filter when you can just merge two frames together in Photoshop?" is the one that I get asked most frequently. This article is an attempt to explain my seemingly old school behavior.
Logic
A computer is a tool. Software is a tool. A camera? A tool! One of my goals as a photographer, and techie, is to make sense of available tools, their functions, and how they behave within a given scenario. By applying each tool to my photography workflow, I can determine which solves each problem faced while creating an image.
Physical Law
The effects of certain analog filters range from difficult to virtually impossible to simulate with digital workflow. For example, a circular polarizer represents a filter that is not easily simulated in Photoshop. Now, a circular polarizer relies on the thoery that propogating photons travelling as a wave can be resolved as two linearly polarized waves of equal magnitude whos planes of polarization exist at right angles. That's 90°, left and right polarization. Without this filter, and the physical law it leverages, try revealing detail beneath the surface of a calm, mirror-surfaced lake using only Photoshop. It simply cannot be done without inventing data. By the way, this is fine if your creative goal is to invent data!
Personal Preference
I like to make great images in the field. I'm not opposed to using technology to improve my images, but I'd rather enjoy my time creating them out there. My day job keeps me in front of a computer for several hours per day. The computer and I, we spend plenty of quality time together. I enjoy using Photoshop, too. However, nothing pleases me more than getting the image I want in the field, right there, closest to the actual experience.
I enjoy the tactile sensation of working with my gear. There are times when it is so cold that my fingers are falling off and I'm cursing my inability to hold an object that weighs virtually nothing while remaining still for thirty seconds. However, most of the time I enjoy a hands-on workflow, moving various bits and pieces around in a way that produces a great image.
In many situations, I prefer the look produced by analog filters. I've spent hours on a single image, within Photoshop, merging various layers into a final image that achieves impossible tonal range, only to find that it doesn't quite look right. The midtones might be off a little, or my long exposure times have left subtle movement artifacts scattered throughout the scene.
I often appreciate the obvious indicators that it is, in fact, a photograph. Often times, I'll look at an image and note "Oh, look, right there is where the photographer placed a 3-stop hard ND filter. I can see the line, right there. Hey, they did a great job of capturing this scene." I can appreciate the work that it takes to control a challenging situation, and I acknowledge that the objective is to portray a vision of the experience. In a world of 1's and 0's, where I control every aspect of my code, I can write an application that reprents a "beautiful clean". When I create a digital capture, i can achieve "beautiful clean" results with post-processing software. However, I can opt use an analog workflow to create my vision. For me, this is highly enjoyable, equally challenging, and very relaxing.
My camera is my stress reliever. Photography helps me to relax. Fiddling with knobs, buttons, filters, and other little bits of equipment puts me in a relaxed state. Filters are something that I can study endlessly without consequence, knowing that I have strong computing skills to back me up when analog workflow fails me.
While we're on the topic of personal preference, I'll admit that my preferred brand of filters is Singh-Ray, for a number of reasons. Firstly, I am impressed consistently with the results that I get when using their products. They are aggressive in meeting the needs of photographers. Their attitude is that a photographer knows what they want and why. Founder Bob Singh was once quoted saying, "Just tell me what you want and we'll make it for you. We do that for anyone. You photographers know what your needs are better than we do." Lastly, they seek feedback from their customers. Well, I'm very transparent when it comes to feedback and I'm not on anyone's payroll. It's a matter of my own personal preference and respect for their brand.
So, this rather long-winded explanation should not only define why I keep a stack of analog filters in my bag, but should also give you an idea of how I think while creating images.
Jamie, JFP
|
|
