I recently returned from a trip to the Caribbean and packed very few glass filters. Many of the effects and color correction filters simply don’t matter anymore because they can be done in post-processing. But there are still a few that matter very much.

Filters I Still Carry

Skylight or UV

I use these to protect the lens and for no other reason. I’d rather scratch a filter than the lens glass. I cannot honestly say that either skylight or UV makes any apparent difference to my images. But every one of my lenses that isn’t a macro has one or the other on it.

Circular Polarizer

I always try to carry one of these filters. It’s not always necessary — in fact, it’s often unnecessary — but I’d rather have it and not use it than the other way around.

This image (no correction, right out of camera) was shot with a circular polarizing filter. As you can see, the coral sea bottom is clearly visible. One of the effects of a circular polarizer when shooting water scenes is to reduce polarized glare, allowing for a clearer view of details below the surface. Nik Software has a wonderful polarizing tool in their Color Efex software. It’s important to note that this is an emulation of what might happen if you had used the glass filter to begin with. In the case of the image I’ve shown, the image information below the surface would have been lost in the glare, so the software emulation would not have reproduced the effect — it would have deepened the blues and slightly enhanced the contrast in the clouds, but that’s it.

Scratch and Star Filters

At night, these filters can lend some sparkle to an image. Again, the effect can be reconstructed in Photoshop, but many of us have better things to do with our time. And… there’s something special about a purely analog effect.

Gradient Neutral Density Filters

For those shooting RAW you might be thinking you’re off the hook with this one. What a gradient ND filter does is apply a neutral density (darkening) across one half of the frame. The filter can be rotated to match your horizon line. You use these when, for example, the sky is very bright as compared to the foreground. And why would the RAW shooters think they’re off the hook? Because you can fix it in Lightroom or Adobe Camera RAW. But again, the better your image is made, the more you will be able to do with it later. Getting it “right” in camera is the best first step you can take.

Neutral Density Filters

Regular ND filters darken everything. These tend not to be particularly useful in a travel or landscape setting, as you can normally drop the ISO to 100 or so and crank up the shutter speed. So unless you are looking for motion blur and shallow depth of field, they aren’t a carry-around filter. But… for small-studio work, you might find your lights are too bright to shoot portraits at flattering apertures (say, f/5.6 or so). An ND filter can really help out here by giving you back a stop.

Filters I No Longer Carry

• Color Correction: I just can’t justify carrying any color-correction filters because I shoot everything in RAW and the chances are I will get a more accurate color rendering in post-processing than if I had guessed and used a filter in the field.
• Color Effects: Similarly, for effect filters like the coffee or blue/yellow filters that were so cool on film, there is more flexibility shooting it neutrally in RAW and deciding on this kind of effect in post.
• Soft-focus: Sadly, the soft-focus filter has found its way out of my gear bag. There are so many Photoshop techniques and add-on filters to get dreamy effects or flattering skin treatment that soft-focus in the world of still digital photography is (in my opinion) better left to post.
• Warming, Landscape, etc.: Same as color correction. This can be handled with the tweak of a slider, be it color temperature, clarity…

And the Wrapup Is…

I still use glass filters, but sparingly. I typically get thin filters, as I have no need to stack them; it’s either the skylight or the polarizing filter — never both. Each time I get a new lens that has yet a different barrel size, I curse the lens manufacturer over the change and re-evaluate what kind of glass filter is absolutely necessary.

But with that said, now that digital is not a shiny new toy, I find myself thinking, “I’ll fix it in Photoshop later” a lot less. When you’re faced with thousands of images to process, the ones that get bypassed are the ones you have to “fix.” If there’s a way to get it right in camera, the original idea of the image might make it to the select pile of images (if there’s such a thing as a digital “pile”).

I’ve used a boatload of Photoshop tools and add-ons. By far the most useful are:

• Adobe Camera RAW color balancing. This cannot be overstated. This is where your color correction filtering comes into your digital workflow. I’ll say it again: Get your color balanced how you want it using your RAW converter; anything after that is destroying perfectly good pixels.
• Nik Color Efex Pro. These are about the coolest tools available for changing the color and applying effects way beyond what you can do in Camera RAW. You can download a demo copy and see how they work for you but be forewarned: They are addictive!

At the end of it all, I find that less is more in terms of applying filtration. If the image was captured correctly, then it should be a snap to post process it.