shutterbug: Past Votes

v class="headstory">Previous Vote Results


With the advent of software plug-ins and image processing filters now built into cameras, do you still see a need for add-on filters for your lenses?

Submitted by Editor, Jul 15 2009



Please briefly describe what filter (s) you use and why.

Yes, there are still good reasons to use lens filters.: 62%
No, I don't use any filters over my lenses.: 36%
I am not sure what use filters are these days so haven't made up my mind.: 1%



Some filters there is no need for if you have Photoshop or other image editting software. For example warming, graduated ND, or black and white contrast filters aren't really worth the money considering you can obtain the same effect with a few adjustment layers in photoshop. But other filters are still needed to get a specific type of photographs. Such as: infrared, ND, or polarizing filters. I always use a UV filter on all of my lens just for protection. Face it, it's it's better to replace a $20 filter than a $300 lens.
—*Ryan Watkins*

I like to use a polarizing filter because it brings out rich color during the middle of the day and also cuts down on reflection of plants.
—*Barbara Eads*

I still use polarizing filters and neutral density filters.
—*Mike Gates*

Polarizers are probably the only filters worth using. Though if you like doing your work in the camera before photoshop you may use a few others, but less likely.
—*Brad Anderson*

Polarizing filter still needed. If the lens didn't capture it software can't bring it out.
—*Rob*

UV for lens protection, Polarizer for deep blue skys and ND for slower shutter speeds otherwise, PS does a better job thatn the plethora of CC filters we used to draf around for film cameras.
—*Gene*

Graduated ND and circular polarizers handy for DSLRs.
—*Fred H.*

I use 2 and 3 stop graduated ND filters to handle the range of highlights and shadows.
—*Bob Wall*

I use UV and polarizer filters on my digital camera and I still shoot black and white film so I use the above filters plus orange and red filters on my film cameras.
—*David*

I use a daylight or UV filter on all of my lenses; Why? Replacing a damaged or scratched filter is cheap and gives an extra layer of prtotection. If a bad damaged area is on lense coating it can mean that the lense is finished for good photo work.
—*Daniel*

No post processing that I have seen can improve a good polarizing lens on so many shots. Also, use of ND filters to allow slower shutter speeds in daylight. Even lowest ISO on digital cameras cannot help you reduce shutter speeds enough to allow image of water movement for example.
—*Paul*

I try to get the best image with effects at capture, reducing post-production time. I'll use polarizers, fog, warming, center-sharp, star and other Cokin filters.
—*Ed Le Doux*

With so many software options available, filters for digital photography are not necessary.
—*John Van Aken*

There is no e-substitute for a polarizer. Filters for black and white continue to be important - and surpass their electronic simulation. And of course, there's always the need to protect the lens using a UV or Skylight filter.
—*Peter R.*

I still use polarizing filters to control reflected light, and an occasional ND filter to force the camera shutter speed higher, since so many digital cameras have no control on shutter speed.
—*Don Cordell*

Polarizing filters reduce non-specular glare and haze in a way that no software is capable of doing. This makes for better contrast and color saturation.
—*Dorsey Davis*

I use a polarizer to make the sky darker blue, to make clouds stand out better, to reduce reflections off of foliage to make the greens look deeper, and to reduce reflections off of water to provide more detail. I use a starburst filter occasionally to create radial spears of light radiating from lights at night. The result is sometimes quite spectacular. Of course, UV filters are good lens protectors. I'd like to see a plug-in do that!
—*Milton McNatt*

I regularly use UV, CP, ND filters on my lens to 1) block general glare, 2) block or reduce directional glare/reflections, and 3) to reduce DOF in bright light. None of these can/should/will be accomplished in Post Processing!
—*Michael S. Rose*

Certainly haze, UV and polarizing filters are still very useful. Center filters are essential for compensating for super wide angle lenses. The old axiom always applies, "you can't add back in what wasn't captured to begin with."
—Ed

Because if you do it right the first time you don't have to spend so much time in front of the computer adding filters, etc. If you can do it TTL and get the result you want why spend any extra time in front of the computer when you can be behind the camera taking pictures!
—*Janet Kubas-Furnish*

I utilize filters that produce effects unatainable with image processing (Photoshop, Nik) such as polarizers, star and other dePfraction effects.
—*Paul Antrim*

At a minimum, I can't imagine life without several neutral density filters. Given a minimum ISO of 100 on most DSLRs, there is no way to use a slow shutter speed without them, especially if you want to manage depth of field. Also, of course, I need a polarizer for glare. Software cannot handle either of these issues. Both need to be addressed at the light source.
—*Steven B.*

I regularly use a circular polarizer. I also use neutral density graduated to control sky / foreground exposure. I can tweak the results digitally, but without the filters I'd have to use HDR to retain digital information.
—*Paul Hinrichs*

I still use a polorizer to darken the sky and contrast with white clouds. I also like the effects of a warming filter on a lot of scenes.
—*Larry Shank*

I use my polarizing filter on just about everything I shoot outside. Throw in graduated neutral density. Proper application can make for a better capture.
—*Jim Albert*

Could not live without my graduated ND filter.
—*Bugsman*

I can do it with filters and by have a stock unfiltered original, I have more options with plug-ins
—*Bob Vannix*

Very definitely. There will always be a need for polarizing and graduated neutral density filters.
—*Dennis*

ND for longer exposures, graduated ND for reducing sky exposures, circular polarizer for sky and reflections.
—*Jim Hayes*

A polarizer can be essential to reduce reflections, darken blue sky and cut haze. Nearly impossible with software.
—*Roland Reisley*

I believe you still need to use Polarizing filters, as you really can only partially mimic this effect in software. Particularly the reduction of reflections from water or highlights. Also, I still find that using a neutral density filter is the only way to reduce highlights enough to take long exposures. I still use a graduated neutral density filter to reduce dynamic range for landscapes, because the effective exposure is better than using a software effect to "dim" the sky, or "brighten" the foreground.
—*Doug Wigton*

I have been in the Aerial Photography business for 32 years. I hav not used a filter since digital. First, I do not fly until the light is right. And, by using RAW I have every tool needed at my finger tips to modify or enhance the image I start with. Note: I had more than 40 Nikon filters I could not give away!
—*D. Lynn Justis*

One should always try to get the best shot in camera. ND, split ND, and polarizer filters are essential to outdoor photography.
—*Joe*

No one has devised a polarizer plug in for Photoshop or Nik that works as good as the real thing.
—*W. Spruance*

Circular Polarizer and Graduated Neutral Density filters still have a place in my camera back but I only use them for specific problems. I do not subscribe to the silly policy advocated by profiteering dealers that I should have a "protective filter" on all my lenses. Why on earth would I want to purposely cover the front of a $2K lens with a $60 filter and compromise the optics? Those users are the same people putting transparent plastic covers on their sofas.
—*Robert Agli*

You cannot duplicate the effects of a polarizer filter in Photoshop or any other image processing software.
—*Russ Alexander*

No software can do what a polarizing filter can, and its often easier and better to use a split ND filter in the field than to use the Gradient Tool in Photoshop.
—*Gerry Bishop*

I use an ultra violet filter on each lens which I own as a protection for the lens, not necessarily because I need it. I own polarizing filters for most lenses, but I don't use them.
—*Frank Scharf*

Even the polarizer can be emulated quickly (and better) for skies using Lightroom. But for foliage color, it's the best and I still keep one in case.
—*Don Dement*

I use ND filters and polarizers at times.
—*John Frenzel*

I still use my two coveted filters for landsacape work- my polarizer and my ND filter (usually my split ND known affectionationely as Mr Splittie!) Why? Software filters are cool but 2 major reasons- 1. I see through the view finder of my D300 the "customized" image I'm getting in real time and, as always, less time at the computer means more time for enjoyment of the actual creating of photo images of the subject I am pursuing in the field,
—*Peter A. White*

Programs can't replace Polarizers.
—*Jim Jones*

In this digital age, the only filters I use are UVs to protect my lenses.
—*Merrill Shea*

I doubt that any of the in-camera or computer processing software will ever effectively replace the add-on lens filters for professional effects.
—*Mel Reimer*

Polarizers and neutral density/graduated neutral density filters are still a mainstay in my photography.
—*Spencer Wood*

The less post-processing of images I have to do, the better. I use a polarizer. I haven't found a way remove glare and reflections in Photo Shop.
—*Woody Stephens*

In software, it is easy to tweek the effects you want using filter by NIK or Tiffen, but relying on these filters to create an effective image will most often look fake - like the current fad of overdoing HDR images. Filters on the lens give us the opportunity to be creative in the field where it counts the most. In my image Jefferson Sun (on my website - www.mstrphotography.com) I could never have achieved the level of detail and lack of noise in the Jefferson Memorial and the surrounding trees without the use of a Singh Ray Variable Neutral Density filter and fill flashes.
—*Michael Rosenberg*

No plug-in is going to bring back data that was lost when a picture was shot. I carry a CP fliter.
—*Phil M.*

Kinda hard to duplicate the effects of a polarizer or a split ND filter in processing, so I always carry those.
—*Tom D.*

I use polarizing, neutral density and color correcting filters - simply because I have them and am not interested in purchasing more software. Importantly, I am a believer in the axiom that it's more important to achieve the image in camera than to massage to something else.
—*John Sandstedt*

UV filters are cheap lens insurance. C-Polarizers are of great benefit to (especially) nature & outdoor photographers, and I find no substitute for a 3-stop Graduated ND filter. Other than those, not a lot of use for filters in this, the digital age.
—*Paul F.*

I carry only ND & polarizing filters now, clear glass protects my lenses. I understand that my low pass filter removes UV.
—*H. Jack Morgan*

Digital filters cannot duplicate a gradual neutral density filter for better definition of sky & highlights in landscapes.
—*Jerry Guthrie*

Two lens filters I use most oftern I believe are still better alternatives to software; circular polarizers and graduated neutral density. Here are the reasons: Blownout/clipped highlights are just that and can't be recovered in any software that I know of without it making those bright spots look unnatural. There's a natural looking richness to the color resolution when using polarizers and/or GNDs that software doesn't seem to achieve. Nature is more complicated than the stilted algorithms that are embedded in software and filters like soft GNDs or circular polarizers are better suited to capturing those subtlties. I'd rather be in the field photographing than behind a computer screen especially when it's not raining, so filters in the field cut down on the time in the digital darkroom.
—*Ron Landis*

I use 2 filters quite often—a skylight/haze filter and a circular polarizer (but not at the same time). I also use a graduated or split neutral density filter from time to time.
—*Chuck Pine*

The cost effectiveness far out ways repairs of any type.
—*James*

Must have the following: circular polarizer; gradient; set of NDs. These correct lighting situations which cannot be fixed in Photoshop.
—*Tom Nation*

I still use two filters pretty often. That would be my 8-point light filter and my UV filter. The 8-point saves me a lot of time in Photoshop getting the same effect and the UV filter is really just protection for my lense (fingerprints, dust, etc.)
—*J. Peele Jr.*

There will always be a place for a good UV or skylight if for only to protect expensive optics and a good polarizer is indispensable.
—*Tom Bence*

I think some photogs have become so adept at using plug-ins and other processing, they have over looked the fact that if you make the best image before digital editing, the result after editing can be even better. So I still use real filters, for the best results.
—*Pete Arnold*

You can't make digital ND filters that is for sure. Anything to modify the light before it even hits the sensor is usable. Filters will NEVER go obsolete.
—*Christopher*

Polarizer and Split ND are the only ones I use anymore.
—*Ken K.*

There are some effects that will never be attainable without actually having the glass in front of the lens. Even if software comes close, after the time spent in post, you could have just used a real filter.
—*Duncan Hill*

Until the dynamic range of digital cameras is greatly increase there will always be a need for graduated filters, ND filters for increasing exposure times and the good old polarizer.
—*Steven Cicchetti*

There are things you can do with filters that you can't do as well in the computer... and that takes a lot less time - any time I can save on post-production is a plus.
—*Jeff Signorini*

Click Here For Previous Votes