I am using a Nikon D200 with a 10 - 20 Sigma lens.

The camera is set to RAW and the white balance to Auto.

So off I went with a B+W 110 (3.0) SH NDx1000 - in other words capable of about 10 stops reduction.

The only way I could get a half decent exposure was to take a reading from the camera in Aperture priority mode and then switch to manual and wind the exposure down 30 stops.Yes 30 stops.

All the images came out with a brownish caste as if I had shot at the wrong white balance and looked like they had a vignette around them...see example.

So quite a disappointing day out but managed to rescue some in CS3.

Today I did a few tests and found that if I drop the white balance to 4000 I get a better image that I can improve with curves etc in Photoshop.

Do other of you have problems using strong ND filters
Eddie

Hi Eddie
I guess the 'brownish caste'  you refer to is what the manufacturer calls a 'slightly stronger warm tone' in their specification for that filter.  The filter was designed for photographing industrial processes that radiate a lot of light and heat eg steel blast furnaces and is optimised for that use. 
You have tried experimenting with the white balance to get an acceptable colour and that is probably the solution, by trial and error.  Perhaps shooting a white or grey card first, in the same light, before commencing shooting to get a level which you can correct with white balance adjustment in the RAW processing would be the surest method.
The vignetting doesn't surprise me with that lens as any filter fitted to it if used at its widest 10mm focal length needs to be extremely thin to avoid encroaching on the field of view. I use the Lee filter system, with that lens but I have to use their wide angle adapter that holds the filter virtually against the front of the lens.  Their standard filter holder will vignette at 10mm even though is is no more than a couple of mm thick.  I would be surprised if you could find a standard screw on type filter that didn't vignette. 

Curiosity is gonna cost me I expect,   but may I ask why you would use a 10stop ND filter on a scene such as above ?

Richard. 

Hi Onslow,
Thanks for the info..very informative.
Why the filter.Well on my normal lens I used an ND4 and in bright sunlight I couldnt get the shutter speed slow enough to get the slow motion in the water.I saw some gut had used the B + W 110 and thought maybe that would be the answer but from what you have said it would appear that I am wrong and using a filter too strong.
Back to the drawing board I guess. Now have to tell the wife I bought the wrong filter...oh dear.
Thanks for the info..very helpful.
Eddie

 Noooooooooooo ---  no need for such drastic action as telling the wife you got it wrong !!!

The scene above didn't use the benefits of the filter to the best advantage, it doesn't mean there are not loads of shots where it will perform so much better.  

Firstly in the shot above you are fighting a very difficult battle because because you are working against the light rather than with it.  Now imagine if you had lowered that tripod down to its unextended height and set up on the grass next to the stream in front of you. The shot from there would have been a more abstract nature of the water and rocks, zoom halfway to 15mm to get rid of the vignette and the filter would have given you a lovely shot of water movement over the rocks and down the fall.  The warming effect of the filter would enhance the image, you don't have any sky or clouds to go funny colours, but a nice warm tone cast onto the rocks and water. No tripod shadow either, if you use that lens on an extended tripod it will always capture any shadow that is there.
Imagine the lovely quality the filter would give to a sunset by the sea. The warm tones would be working with the light and the light reduction from it will give a super effect to the waves motion.
The filter has many uses but it may mean using it on shots where its benefits come into play and don't work against the light that is already there. 

Getting the best from filters and very wide angle lenses takes a bit of practise and techniques that are unique.  Anyone who has tried has made all the mistakes and more. I am no expert the only knowledge I have is from practise and talking with professionals who specialise in this type of photography.  That lens works best when up really close to the foreground, hence the low tripod. It has a very close focusing range and I tend to think of it as almost taking a macro shot of the foreground with the rest of the field of view contributing to the overall effect of the image. I try to use F11, or as near as possible, because that is where you will get the sharpest image with a C size sensor and at that aperture with focus on the middle ground everything will be in focus from a few inches to infinity. I like to use filters to balance out light where needed or to alter shutter times as you have here.

Well I hope that is helpful, as it is intended to be, and doesn't put you off experimenting with wide angles and filters. It is a very interesting genre of photography and one which I love if only I had the time to use it.

Richard.

Hi Richard,

Thanks for even more information.The location wasn't the best and I only showed that shot to give the idea of what I am getting.

We had walked through fields of mud and cow **** to get there and whilst my wife sat freezing on the edge of a hill I played with the filter.I hadn't been to this area before but knew there were waterfalls there and looking at the map knew that they had to be photographed in the morning as the contours told me the water would flow in that direction.Actually on the shot the sun was directly behind me.

As it was after walking back thru the mud and you know what we had a snack and set off in the other direction,climbed up more muddy hills,looked back and saw the falls I wanted to photograph..it always happens like that when you don't know an area.

I had previously worked out ( after another failed trip ) that I needed to shoot about f 8.

My first failing was I was working in the theory of film camera ( used to shoot on 6 x 6 ) were 10 stops back was ten stops back but with digital there are a lot of stops between the old f 8 and say f 4.

Since the shoot I tried at home to wind down the white balance to about 4000 which got rid of the caste and gave a reasonable image even though it needed a few tweaks in Photoshop.Of course I also get noise and the D200 doesn't have a cable release slot like other cameras so I got some camera shake as well.Nikon do a fancy cable release but dammed if I will pay that price for one.

So next shoot it is...set the self timer to prevent camera shake...change the white balance to 40000...switch on the noise reduction and if there is still daylight take some shots.

I asked this question originally as I thought to myself "do other guys get these problems" I don't know any other photo guys locally so asked the question on Rosity and thankfully you replied and put me in the right direction.

Once again many thanks for your time and reply. 

Eddie