Previous news story    Next news story

Cokin revamps square filter lineup as 'Creative Filter System'

By dpreview staff on Sep 6, 2013 at 14:26 GMT

Cokin has announced a complete overhaul of the branding and packaging of its square filters. The existing different-sized ranges ( 'A', 'P', 'Z-Pro' and 'X-Pro') have been rebranded into a single 'Creative Filter System', with the four sizes relabelled 'S', 'M', 'L' and 'XL'. Gone are the old bulky plastic storage boxes too, replaced by a slimmer 'SlidePack' design which takes up half the space, and uses a microfibre-lined sleeve to help keep your filters clean. Photographers nostalgic for the good old days can breathe a sigh of relief though - old classics such as Tobacco Grads and Sunset filters are still in the catalogue.

It's clear that Cokin has struggled to keep its front-of-lens filters relevent in the age of digital; where film photographers had little other practical choice for adding effects to their images, photographers are now more far more likely to manipulate their files after capture. The parent company went into administration in November 2010, and Cokin was rescued by Kenko Tokina in 2011. Whether rebranding and repackaging (however well-devised) will be enough to keep it going remains to be seen.

Would you buy into Cokin's Creative Filter System rather than use post-processing? Leave your thoughts in the comments.

Press release:

Cokin rethinks its range of creative filters.

New brand image. New packagings.

Cokin announces a new step in its renaissance, by simplifying its range of creative products. For years, we used “creative filters” as a generic name. Today, CREATIVE FILTER SYSTEM (CFS) becomes the official name of our range of creative products.

All the existing Cokin creative products (A Series, P Series, Z-Pro Series and X-Pro Series) are unified under this new range name. Until now, dealers had to explain the difference between each systems. However, what makes a customer decide between the different systems is the size of their lenses rather than the features of each. That’s why, instead of four different products (A, P, Z-PRO, X-PRO), it will be easier to explain CREATIVE FILTER SYSTEM as one product, available in four sizes (S, M, L, XL). Moreover, the use of “textile” denomination of sizes (S, M, L, XL) helps having a clear overview of the range. As of today, Cokin CREATIVE FILTER SYSTEM range will look like this:

Cokin also presents a more comprehensive brand identity, with pictograms and color code, to help customers understanding what system is recommended to them. Pictograms give information on the new size denomination, the previous name of the series, the minimum and maximum diameters of available adaptor rings for this size.

As a reminder, the CREATIVE FILTER SYSTEM logo carries four dots () echoing colors of each
size, for customers to understand these items are part of the same range.

This overhaul wouldn’t be complete without a total rethinking of our packaging, to replace the long-lasting 35 years plastic box which protected Cokin creative filters since 1978.

After extensive research and development, Cokin is proud to announce SlidePack™, a revolutionary and environment-friendly new packaging for its best-selling M Size (ex-P Series) filters. SlidePack™ is approximately 55% smaller and 60% lighter than the previous packaging, and is only made of recyclable material to reduce Cokin footprint and help preserving the world that gives us so beautiful pictures.

We’ve also learnt a lot about users expectations. This new packaging is more user-friendly. The filter slides in an out of the packaging with only one hand. Made of thick carton and overpacked in a ready to pegboard polyethylene strong sleeve, SlidePack™ is very protective. The inner part of SlidePack™ is coated with a microfiber cloth. Not only does it prevent the filter from being scratched, but it cleans it each time the filter slides in and out. Moreover, the design of SlidePack™ prevents the filter to drop unexpectedly. It has never been so easy to use a Cokin filter. 

The first 22 M size (ex-P Series) filters to adopt the new SlidePack™ are:

  • 001 Yellow
  • 002 Orange
  • 003 Red
  • 007 Infrared (89B)
  • 020 Blue (80A)
  • 120 Gradual Neutral Grey G1
  • 121 Gradual Neutral Grey G2 (ND8) - 0.9
  • 121L Gradual Neutral Grey G2 Light (ND8) - 0.3
  • 121M Gradual Neutral Grey G2 Medium (ND4) - 0.6
  • 121S Gradual Neutral Grey G2 Soft (ND8) - 0.9
  • 121F Gradual Neutral Grey G2 Full (ND8) - 0.9
  • 122 Gradual Blue B1
  • 123 Gradual Blue B2
  • 123S Gradual Blue B2 So
  • 124 Gradual Tobacco T1
  • 125 Gradual Tobacco T2
  • 125S Gradual Tobacco T2 So
  • 152 Neutral Grey ND2 - 0.3
  • 153 Neutral Grey ND4 - 0.6
  • 154 Neutral Grey ND8 - 0.9
  • 197 Sunset 1
  • 198 Sunset 2

Every SlidePack™ will carry a brand new graphic design and a never-seen before picture that will bring some fresh air to the range. Packagings of S (ex-A Series), L (ex-Z-PRO Series) and XL (ex-XPRO Series) as well as those for adaptor-rings and filter-holders will adopt the new CREATIVE FILTER SYSTEM graphic design in a close future.

Named after its founder Jean Coquin, a famous french photographer of the 70’s, Cokin is the inventor of the innovative CREATIVE FILTER SYSTEM (adaptor ring + filter-holder + filters), the most popular filter system in the world.

Comments

Total comments: 74
WayneHuangPhoto
By WayneHuangPhoto (7 months ago)

I stopped using my Cokin kit after I realized it's a better process to take multiple exposures and layer in Photoshop or combine to create a HDR. You just get more creative control rather than putting a filter over an entire scene, or even a graduated one.

That said, there is still value in ND filters for example, when you want long exposures to show movement, shooting water, etc., without overexposing.

0 upvotes
OmegaJeff
By OmegaJeff (7 months ago)

For all those concerned about the new packaging sans plastic box, Cokin does offer filter boxes that hold 10 filters or filter wallets that hold 5

0 upvotes
Vitruvius
By Vitruvius (7 months ago)

If you think you can color balance digitally without loss of image quality you are wrong.

Lots of professional photographers have tested and proved this. The best way to retain the most amout of image data is to set the digital camera WB to daylight and color balance the scene with an actual physical filter. Digital camera sensors are daylight balanced by design from factory.

Do your research.

http://tedfelix.com/Photography/Filters.html

http://photo.net/equipment/filters/digital

1 upvote
Reactive
By Reactive (7 months ago)

I owned plenty of hideous Cokin A series filters when I used film, all of which were hardly ever used apart from an 80A for tungsten correction. The only detachable Cokin P-filters I own now for my digital SLR are a polariser and a set of ND grads... all of which hardly ever get touched.

There is no future for 'creative' clip-on filters (i.e. destroy your shot for ever) when everything apart from polarising and ND-type exposure adjustment can be done post capture, with no risk.

0 upvotes
Kodachrome200
By Kodachrome200 (7 months ago)

the people who keep saying good technique at the point of capture is always the best practice are totaly right and yet completely wrong in the point they are trying to make. Graduated filters are a great example. the argument will run that darkening the sky at the point of capture will give you a cleaner exposure. but... the fact is the best sensored cameras out there have wonderful dynamic range. so what you do is you set up on a tripod you shoot at base iso. if the sky is really bright you might under expose a little bit and you can always take another shot where you expose for the sky so you know you get all the data. this is using good technique at the point of capture. its also keeping in mind what you can do at post capture. it will also allow you to apply your effect in alot more exact way. we have all scene photos where the graduated filter has hit things that were not intended. you have way more control to prevent these things from happening in a way you cant with filters

1 upvote
brendon1000
By brendon1000 (7 months ago)

How often do you shoot landscapes ? I shoot pretty often and I found GND filters make a good difference depending on the scene.

I don't use them all the time but I have taken the same photo with and without the filter and the with filter image is almost always better when properly processed.

0 upvotes
Kodachrome200
By Kodachrome200 (7 months ago)

all the time. I also do professional retouching on them for a commercial and stock photographer

0 upvotes
DimensionSeven
By DimensionSeven (7 months ago)

Blending multiple exposures (esp.with longer exposure times) has it's own backdraws and problems as well. I personally prefer to get the exposure done right in the camera, so that I see the (near) final image on the LCD right in the field.

1 upvote
brendon1000
By brendon1000 (7 months ago)

^^ +1

I don't like to leave it to the PC and figure out that I didn't leave enough headroom to process the photos.

Also too much processing can give pretty bad artifacts.

1 upvote
Kodachrome200
By Kodachrome200 (7 months ago)

good processing knowing the limits of your exposure shooting at base iso and simply shooting nikon instead of canon can prevent this. you may have to blend another exposure. but shooting a landscape on a tripod you should always be able to get there without over processing

0 upvotes
Kodachrome200
By Kodachrome200 (7 months ago)

why couldnt the sizes have always been s m l xl?

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (7 months ago)

Cokin didn't always have four sizes of filter. In fact they started off small, which worked just fine for most lenses when photographers were using compact manual focus primes and 24mm was considered really wide. Then as lenses got larger (especially zooms) and wideangles got wider, Cokin introduced larger and larger filter sizes to cope. 'X-Pro' and 'Z-Pro' are both relatively recent additions.

2 upvotes
Kodachrome200
By Kodachrome200 (7 months ago)

great answer thanks.

0 upvotes
Ferling
By Ferling (7 months ago)

You can't really blame the younger crowd. Not having any real influence with using filters, for wanted to do everything in post.

I agree with others that ND's, Grads and Haze filters (including UV's to protect lenses), those that directly improve the IQ to create the cleanest, error free image as a baseline, (from which to effect PP) is the best approach today.

I like the old plastic boxes. Much easier to organize/stack in a drawer in my rigging cart, (which is a Stanley FatMax 4 in 1). Clearly marked on the edge with a sharpie. SlidePacks might require some folder tabs for those frequent users.

I occasionally use a Soft filter (though I prefer the Schneider with it's micro lens lets) as a time saver when shooting several portraits to limit my needs in PP. I also like to use them for video, the square lenses are big enough for standard matte boxes.

It's tough to justify the price of new with all the glass being offloaded in Yard Sales, swap meets and eBay.

1 upvote
Kodachrome200
By Kodachrome200 (7 months ago)

I have to disagree. spending tons of money on filters doesnt make much sense anymore. Its good to have s a solid ND and polarizer. the res are either sort of pointless with digital or bad taste to begin with. If i want to bring down the sky for instance in a landscape will shoot at base iso on a tripod. maybe underexpose a bit. with my d800 i should be able to get that sky back. i can always take a second exposure for the sky and do some blending in an extreme case. if i want bluer skies or some such i will always be able to do that cleaner in post. there just really is no need for 500 filter collection anymore. a polarizer add nice contrast and darkening to the sky so much easier than any post processing and NDs are needed more than ever cuz iso 100 has pretty much become the floor. but that is it as I see it

0 upvotes
brendon1000
By brendon1000 (7 months ago)

^^ Who says you need 500 different GND filters ? Me and my friend have exactly 3 GND filters - a 2 stop soft GND which I use the most, a 2 stop hard edge GND which I use sometimes and a 3 stop hard edge GND when the sky is really really bright. GNDs are even more useful when doing long exposures as the difference between ground and sky can become even more pronounced.

The coloured ones I agree are mostly useless. I use their system only for their GND filters and nothing else.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Ferling
By Ferling (7 months ago)

@Kodachrome200. I come from film, and when Photoshop was a toy project, (called "Display"), between two brothers, and filters were needed for all kinds of corrections. I still shoot film, but I only kept the few that made a difference for digital and as toys for effects. I also made mention of buying them cheap on eBay, etc.

I will tell you that a nice Soft FX, properly done, will kill a lot of post processing needs. A starlight will do wonders on gems when the client wants those enhanced catch lights and sparkles, etc. So, just because I use Photoshop, doesn't mean that I always have to if I can do things right during the shoot, (which translates into less billable time).

I speak from actual use and experience, and you're gonna have a hard time to convince me that I'm wrong.

2 upvotes
DotCom Editor
By DotCom Editor (7 months ago)

I'll stick with Lee.

0 upvotes
Ignat Solovey
By Ignat Solovey (7 months ago)

ND, ND Grad, Polarizers, Infrared, 400nm UV Block (for conditions, where UV is an issue) and traditional filters for black and white (Red, Orange, Yellow, Yellow-Green, Green, Blue). Everything else is successfully and better replaced with digital effects.

1 upvote
InTheMist
By InTheMist (7 months ago)

I shoot a lot of landscape and disagree with those who say that filters aren't necessary.

I regret buying the Nikon 14-24/2.8 for this reason. Legendary lens but filters are a problem.

I use Lee though because I was disappointed with the quality of my first Cokin starter kit. Maybe I got the wrong one, maybe because the marketing message is not clear, but it's a done deal for me.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
stevens37y
By stevens37y (7 months ago)

They should have anti-reflection coating.

1 upvote
cknapp61
By cknapp61 (7 months ago)

I am still using my Cokin filters from the 1970's with my Nikon D700, I thought this was standard practice, the ND filters really help control dynamic range. Not sure if the micro-fibre lined new packaging is the way to go. I have, and still use, the old Cokin "box" which holds multiple filters, each separated by slots, nothing touches the filter except along the edges.

2 upvotes
Sordid
By Sordid (7 months ago)

I consider all filters but ND and polarizers quite obsolete these days.

0 upvotes
3a
By 3a (7 months ago)

:)

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (7 months ago)

"Would you buy into Cokin's Creative Filter System rather than use post-processing?"

Of course not. Only something which cannot be done in PP is useful, polarizers and such.

2 upvotes
cknapp61
By cknapp61 (7 months ago)

As someone who used to shoot Kodacrhome 25 regularly, good technique at the point of capture is always the best solution...there are options in PP, but controlling dynamic range at the point of capture trumps PP. I still use my 1970's Cokin ND filters on my Nikon D700.

4 upvotes
nofumble
By nofumble (7 months ago)

I gave mine away. With Nik software, I never miss it.

0 upvotes
Mr Fartleberry
By Mr Fartleberry (7 months ago)

Better, their old yellow packaging and graphics were not exactly appealing. Like Hoodman.

0 upvotes
G Davidson
By G Davidson (7 months ago)

I really should use it and get things right at capture... But they are just too much trouble and with an HDR image I can get pretty much the same effect, arguably even better. What would be good would be digital variable ND filters, set in the camera. It's being able to customize where you apply the darkening effect that is so powerful an option.

0 upvotes
tinternaut
By tinternaut (7 months ago)

Yes and no.... The square filters are an effort, and a mixed result, but the one time I got it right (I'd say of less than ten times in the past seven or so years) was wow moment that HDR can't match.

0 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (7 months ago)

A company trying to revive some lost ground since digital came in.

These products are great not only for pictures but for video and video effects, such as star filters etc.

.

2 upvotes
brainnolo
By brainnolo (7 months ago)

I use the Cokin A system, and except for the plastic box I am actually very satisfied with the system. I will replace the old filters (I used Graduated ND) with these once they are unusable.

Actually, I do not see how digital filters are going to replace (G)ND, or Polarizers. The other Cokin filters however are pretty much redundant IMHO, with few exceptions.

@ZAnton: What are you talking about? Sauter (Munich) has them, and www.versandhaus-foto-mueller.de delivers to all Germany (that's how I got them). Yes their site is lousy but the delivery was quite fast.

4 upvotes
LMNCT
By LMNCT (7 months ago)

It would be great if they would sell the new soft storage system separately so that those of us with the old filters could replace the plastic boxes with something more user friendly. I like Cokin and have used the system for years. I especially like the ND filters because I can stack them. When you acclimate yourself to the holder it is easy to work with...and they do (did) have a solid slide which could be used as a "lens cap".

2 upvotes
ZAnton
By ZAnton (7 months ago)

Cokin is a virtual company. I am looking for a place where I can buy their PRO filters (in Germany) for 3 years, and still can not find anything. Neither amazon, nor ebay or any other more or less big shop has their products. Their internet page has not functioned for years (is it now?).
So dpreview, please delete these news, so that other people would save their time by reading it and searching these phantom filters.

0 upvotes
Sordid
By Sordid (7 months ago)

Hu?
I just made a quick Google search with the terms
cokin kaufen deutschland
and found quite a bunch of stores selling them.

0 upvotes
DimensionSeven
By DimensionSeven (7 months ago)

http://versandhaus-foto-mueller.de/
Bought my Z-pros from them this spring. Good price and cheap shipping.

0 upvotes
Vlad S
By Vlad S (7 months ago)

What would be really nice, if they put ribs on the inside of their adaper rings, so that one would not have to unscrew the ring to put a lens cap on.

1 upvote
TomUW
By TomUW (7 months ago)

I agree. I recently considered resurrecting use of my Cokin filters and rejected it for this reason, and just bought some polarizers and ND filters instead.

0 upvotes
dccdp
By dccdp (7 months ago)

Hmmm... so, the new name is Creative System (CS). The next logical step would be to rent them to the old customers at $9.99 per month. Filters do enhance Clouds beautifully, after all... ;)

7 upvotes
plevyadophy
By plevyadophy (7 months ago)

ha ha ha!! that was funny!!! love it!!

:o)

0 upvotes
Thanatham Piriyakarnjanakul
By Thanatham Piriyakarnjanakul (7 months ago)

I want review!! :)

1 upvote
GabrielZ
By GabrielZ (7 months ago)

What! Cokin are still around? I thought they disappeared from the scene yonks ago! I had a substantial set of Cokin square filters back in the days of film and thoroughly enjoyed them. I assumed today with the digital darkroom and the advanced image processing available to all, that such filters (with the exception of polarizers, and UV ones to protect the lens) had become obsolete.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Jorginho
By Jorginho (7 months ago)

Well...the more the DR of the camerasensors gets better the less use there is for it. Detail lost in highlights on sensors are still not easily retrived. With a Cokin gradfilter things still get a lot better. Even on the best cams out there.

0 upvotes
Jorginho
By Jorginho (7 months ago)

I just decided on the 84.5 filter series. Quite a few Dutch reviews by pro photographers convinced me. In general: in spite of the hard (organic) glass not scratch free, but no colour cast not even when you put two or three in your filterholder. Price is okey. So...no Cokin (creative) for me.

But a good thing they survive.

0 upvotes
photonius
By photonius (7 months ago)

ah, nice, but not available everywhere yet. Still, they fit the Cokin P and same material as Cokin, Hitech, Lee, Singh-Ray (C39). perhaps dyes are better (no IR leak??)

0 upvotes
D1N0
By D1N0 (7 months ago)

yeah heart shaped bokeh highlights!

0 upvotes
RichardAB
By RichardAB (7 months ago)

It seems to me that simplifying the range of filters is a very good idea, as is the rebranding to Creative Filter System, because that describes exactly what it is.

I have Cokin A filters, now to be called Small, which I use (as appropriate) with my Nikon P7100 using the Cokin A Digi Holder:

2 x Neutral Grey
2 x Graduated Neutral Grey
1 x Circular Polariser

I'm sure photographers have a need for the CFS, I hope the company prospers.

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (7 months ago)

Interesting they're putting Kenko on the radar in the US. When folks discover Hoya = Kenko (usually) they're gonna go for the Kenko glass filters.

0 upvotes
photonius
By photonius (7 months ago)

Decent price with decent quality will sell. Look at how Lee is continuously sold out, despite the high price. They just need to update for modern needs, i.e. NDs, and gradients (no color necessary usually) for photography, and sets of filters for video (effects that are not easy to do in post).

0 upvotes
misha marinsky4
By misha marinsky4 (7 months ago)

I have a Cokin blue/yellow P173 polarizer. It's far less expensive than the Singh-Ray.

I use it with my dSLR and MILC. Thoughts/critique from others?

0 upvotes
LWW
By LWW (7 months ago)

I still have my star burst filter from the early eighties, still in pristine condition and will forever remain so!

0 upvotes
itchhh
By itchhh (7 months ago)

My Lee Split Grads, 10 Stop, and polarizer are indispensable.

1 upvote
Hoefie
By Hoefie (7 months ago)

If I have a 77mm lens, what filter should I get: M, L or XL ?
As there is an overlap on all sizes; is the size really the only difference between the four ranges ?

0 upvotes
photonius
By photonius (7 months ago)

Depends on focal length and what body it's on, i.e. the angle of view. You should get the range that covers the lens with your largest front diameter, taking into account the angle of view. I.e. on a tele, you can stack a bunch of 77mm filters with little effect, while on a wide angle, a thick filter (e.g. variable NDs) may already give hard vignetting.

0 upvotes
dylanbarnhart
By dylanbarnhart (7 months ago)

The standard P, which is now Medium size, filter holder vignettes on my Canon 10-22 (APS-C camera). Then I bought a 1-slot holder, which still vignettes a little bit at 10mm. I had to modify it by filing off some plastic in the 4 corners to remove all the vignetting.

So if you don't want to go through the trouble, buy the L size. There's a big price jump when buying the larger size though, not to mention the bulk.

0 upvotes
DimensionSeven
By DimensionSeven (7 months ago)

Instead of buying the Cokin Zpro (L) size holder, I'd go for the Lee holder. MUCH better, wider and flexible.

0 upvotes
Kinematic Digit
By Kinematic Digit (7 months ago)

Bravo Kenko.... thank you for redesigning the antiquated and rather large boxes. I actually reconfigured one of my smaller camera bags into a filter storage system with slide in padded slots. This new packaging to me is the precise kind of evolution that was needed. Whether or not this saves the product is yet to be seen.

It is still a specialty product, but with the growth in CSCs, I've found new life with my ancient A series Cokin filters.

The next thing for the evolution to be complete is to redesign the holders so that they do not allow light leakage from the sides and also to make the filter multi-coated and anti-scratch coatings (perhaps they are going to come out with a Pro series for that).

Other square systems are leaping ahead of Cokin in their filter system, so if Kenko wants this product to survive, then they need to consider durability, flare resistance and light leakage prevention for the future of the system (also round those annoying corners!).

Comment edited 10 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
TxCamFan
By TxCamFan (7 months ago)

Nice update. I've been wanting to try these filters. Some things you can't do in PP and for others - it's still better to get it right in camera rather than spend time behind a computer in PP.

0 upvotes
Kinematic Digit
By Kinematic Digit (7 months ago)

Honestly, the only filters that matter are the grad filters for specific long exposure instances. ND filters are multi-coated in circular systems to prevent flare and way more durable and less cumbersome (and do not have a magenta cast). The next is the linear polarizer which gives a much stronger polarization effect over circular polarizers, but only good on contrast detect focus cameras (which is great for all the mirrorless systems).

The other stuff is a waste of money (and yes I still have a Tobacco grad filter lol).

In the days of film I loved Cokin, but in the day of digital, most of the filters were made obsolete not by post processing, but by digital camera technology (specifically white balance correction).

5 upvotes
CarVac
By CarVac (7 months ago)

Since when are linear polarizers more effective than circular polarizers? They both do the same thing to incoming light, except the CPL's also do stuff to light going out.

1 upvote
Kinematic Digit
By Kinematic Digit (7 months ago)

CarVac, its not a huge difference, but with the quarter wave plate that is used to allow phase detect AF systems to work better and also for proper metering, counteracts some of the polarizing effects that the linear polarizer already performs (probably shouldn't have said much stronger, when it's actually pretty subtle difference). A circular polarizer is technically a linear polarizer with either one or two quarter wave plates. Those quarter wave plates depending on how they are designed also contribute the variations in quality from manufacturer to manufacturers.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
astwood1285
By astwood1285 (7 months ago)

I liked some of the Cokin filters and quite often it's easier to use the filter than to post process. They are quick and easy to use and remove so a one with, one without approcah is feasible. Tobacco grads were not a crime but an oddity...

1 upvote
groucher
By groucher (7 months ago)

Tobacco grads were a crime against photography. Please don't bring them back.

2 upvotes
HeyItsJoel
By HeyItsJoel (7 months ago)

Wrong.

3 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (7 months ago)

You mean the sky isn't red or brown on cloudy days?

0 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (7 months ago)

Looks cool in classic movies though.

0 upvotes
turbsy
By turbsy (7 months ago)

Still better to get it done in camera. The ND, GND and polarizer are still usefull.

4 upvotes
Dimitris Servis
By Dimitris Servis (7 months ago)

Cokin A and P series are really good solutions for polarizers and ND grads. As a side note, one of the most lovable things is the Franglish editing.

2 upvotes
TheSquid
By TheSquid (7 months ago)

I still have my A Cokin filters from my film days. While a few of the filters do not work with digital, there are many that do. I don't think you can polarize post process quickly and easily just as an example why it's relevant. Many times it's faster and easier to get it in camera than go back and work for hours to get it in post.

1 upvote
Dimitris Servis
By Dimitris Servis (7 months ago)

You cannot achieve polarization with PP, whatever you do.

8 upvotes
Philip Goh
By Philip Goh (7 months ago)

Another thing that can't be done in PP is long exposure photography, where you need to stack multiple ND filters.

5 upvotes
Model Mike
By Model Mike (7 months ago)

Several years after purchasing two NG grads, one has changed colour to a very muddy brown while the other has stayed neutral. The new branding is welcome, but I hope it's accompanied by better QC.

2 upvotes
TheSquid
By TheSquid (7 months ago)

Dimitris, there are a few instances where you can fake a polarizer in post such as glare on car bodies and some glass. Granted, it will take a long time to make it convincing but it is possible.

0 upvotes
Dimitris Servis
By Dimitris Servis (7 months ago)

@TheSquid

then maybe it is not photography but painting :-D You could recover some detail under the glare highlights, if there is any remaining, but never to the extent revealed by the polarizer.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 74