# Filters for Ourdoor Portraits?  Or just for Landscapes?



## Fleetwood271 (Jun 20, 2011)

Do you and/or Should I, use a filter when shooting portraits outdoors?

I have a Circular Polarizer that I use almost all the time on my 24-75mm 2.8 lens.  I actually bought it especially for a trip to the Smoky Mountains last year.  But I leave it on almost all the time, when I'm shooting outdoors.  

I do not have a ND filter.  But I am planning to buy one before I go back to the mountains this year.

However, I will be attending a model shoot / workshop in a few weeks.  We will be shooting models, outdoors, by a lake.  Do I need to use a filter for those type shots? If so, what type?  If ND, what density?

Or am I thinking about this all wrong?  Do I simply need to adjust my aperture and shutter speed in order to get the correct exposure?  I guess I am thinking about the bright, August, Tennessee sun reflecting off the water.  Would a filter help me be able to shoot at a larger aperture, say f/4, or f/5.6, as opposed to without a filter being something like f/8, or f/11?


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 20, 2011)

It depends on the type of shots you want to take.  A neutral density filter will allow you to use a larger aperture for your shots(not really applicable for most landscape photos), or a slower shutter speed where you want to blur some motion.  There are also cases where at tourist spots you can never get a clean shot without somebody in your shot.  A strong ND filter and a very slow shutter speed can make a meandering tourist disappear out of your shots.  When you have a very bright sky and want to capture detail in the sky and the landscape, a graduated neutral density filter can be invaluable.  When you are taking pictures of items that cast weird reflections, a polarizing filter can be invaluable.

In reality, based on your statement of 'we will be shooting models, outdoors, by a lake' it sounds like you need a powerful flash rather than a filter so that you can properly expose your subject and not blow out the background.

I would recommend you contact the person who is sponsoring the shoot and ask them what kind of gear they would recommend.  They are the only ones who are likely to know the situations that you will be faced with and should be able to offer you better advice than we can.  If he can't, you might want to reconsider who is sponsoring your workshop.


----------



## Fleetwood271 (Jun 20, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> It depends on the type of shots you want to take.  A neutral density filter will allow you to use a larger aperture for your shots(not really applicable for most landscape photos), or a slower shutter speed where you want to blur some motion.  There are also cases where at tourist spots you can never get a clean shot without somebody in your shot.  A strong ND filter and a very slow shutter speed can make a meandering tourist disappear out of your shots.  When you have a very bright sky and want to capture detail in the sky and the landscape, a graduated neutral density filter can be invaluable.  When you are taking pictures of items that cast weird reflections, a polarizing filter can be invaluable.
> 
> In reality, based on your statement of 'we will be shooting models, outdoors, by a lake' it sounds like you need a powerful flash rather than a filter so that you can properly expose your subject and not blow out the background.
> 
> I would recommend you contact the person who is sponsoring the shoot and ask them what kind of gear they would recommend.  They are the only ones who are likely to know the situations that you will be faced with and should be able to offer you better advice than we can.  If he can't, you might want to reconsider who is sponsoring your workshop.



Thanks!  I actually sent messages to three of the six instructors who will be at the shoot, asking the same questions.  I also wanted to hear some thoughts from people here on TPF.
The only flashes I will have available will be a Nikon SB-700, and a Vivitar 285HV.  I do have triggers, and stands, so if I need to use both of those (alone or together), I can.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 21, 2011)

I would say YES, DEFINITELY keep the polarizer handy for shooting by a lake during the daylight hours. Many times, when the sun is behind the subject, and the subject is a large body of water, there will be a very large reflection on a majority of the surface of the water; many times, that reflection will create a fairly bright,light, and ugly, distracting background. Using a polarizer can really,really help to subdue the reflection on the top of the water.

Somewhere on the web is a great example of when NOT to use a polarizer to remove the reflection on the top of water. It might be at the Popular Photography web site, but the sample there shows that by using a polarizer and cutting the reflective glare off of the surface of a small creek, the entire body of water appears to DISAPPEAR!@!! The creek looks like a dry arroyo with a bunch of rocks littering it!! At times, the reflection on top of the water, like in the small creek with clear water and a red-rock bottom in the adforementioned example, helps to create almost the ENTIRE visual representation of the water!!! To be fair, the creek example was shallow,still,not-wave-rippled,clear water; most large lakes are going to have some wind waves and/or be deep enough and have some color cast (blue/brown/green water coloration) so that there will always be at least "some" visual clues that the background is indeed, a lake.

It kind of depends on what you what the emphasis to be...if you want to convey the idea of a bikini-cld model (and I know a passel of swimwear-clad, busty, blonde, Model Mayhem models are booked for this seminar) in a very bright, sun-drenched environment, wearing sunglasses, it's possible that at least "some" glare on the lake surface will be desired. Conversely, if the skies are really white and pale, and the lake is reflecting ugly, white skies, cutting down the glare will make the water look MUCH darker, and more naturally blue or green or clear, and you will want to try and cut the glare with the polar.

I happened to see the on-line brouchure for the seminar,and they are going to have evening sunset sessions; at those, the sun will be low in the sky, so there will not be nearly the same problem with sky reflections and glare on the lake surface, due to the low placement of the sun in relation to the sky. During the evening sessions, the polarizer will cut down on the brightness of the sun about as much as a 1.5 stop ND filter would,and will serve to allow you to shoot at wider f/stops, for shallower DOF, and more background blurring, but it might make focusing a bit tricky too.


----------



## mickmac (Jun 21, 2011)

Polarizing filters have a tendency to make skin look pasty.


----------



## Big Mike (Jun 21, 2011)

I can't see you using an ND filter when shooting models...but bring the polarizer, if only to check what it will look like with it on/off.  

As Derrel mentioned, lakes in the daytime can look dramatically different with or without the polarized reflection removed.  It may be the difference between seeing the reflected sky & background in the lake, vs seeing down into the water, maybe even the bottom if the water is clear.  

Polarizing filters can make skin look weird though....so keep that in mind.


----------



## Fleetwood271 (Jun 21, 2011)

Derrel said:


> I would say YES, DEFINITELY keep the polarizer handy for shooting by a lake during the daylight hours. Many times, when the sun is behind the subject, and the subject is a large body of water, there will be a very large reflection on a majority of the surface of the water; many times, that reflection will create a fairly bright,light, and ugly, distracting background. Using a polarizer can really,really help to subdue the reflection on the top of the water.
> 
> Somewhere on the web is a great example of when NOT to use a polarizer to remove the reflection on the top of water. It might be at the Popular Photography web site, but the sample there shows that by using a polarizer and cutting the reflective glare off of the surface of a small creek, the entire body of water appears to DISAPPEAR!@!! The creek looks like a dry arroyo with a bunch of rocks littering it!! At times, the reflection on top of the water, like in the small creek with clear water and a red-rock bottom in the adforementioned example, helps to create almost the ENTIRE visual representation of the water!!! To be fair, the creek example was shallow,still,not-wave-rippled,clear water; most large lakes are going to have some wind waves and/or be deep enough and have some color cast (blue/brown/green water coloration) so that there will always be at least "some" visual clues that the background is indeed, a lake.
> 
> ...


 


Big Mike said:


> I can't see you using an ND filter when shooting models...but bring the polarizer, if only to check what it will look like with it on/off.
> 
> As Derrel mentioned, lakes in the daytime can look dramatically different with or without the polarized reflection removed.  It may be the difference between seeing the reflected sky & background in the lake, vs seeing down into the water, maybe even the bottom if the water is clear.
> 
> Polarizing filters can make skin look weird though....so keep that in mind.



Derrel and Big Mike - Thanks!  I really appreciate your help.

And yes Derrel, there will be 12 of those "swimwear-clad, busty, blonde, Model Mayhem models" that you mentioned.  

Oh woe is me.....


----------

