Hi people, particularly newbies,
I put this bit of video up to show that perhaps the rush to buy ND filters and all the complexity to use them is causing you more bother than you need, so early in film making.
The sunlight at Navagio beach, because of the white cliffs and sparkiling sea is blinding.
This was shot on auto setting, NTSC for 30 FPS 4K and straight out of the SD card, so no post pro or any of that palarva.
So, where is the jerkyness or stuttering or strobing or any other issue that ND filters are claimed to cure?
As you can see, there is a lot of close up movement in the scene yet it it is pin sharp and as crisp as anyone using 4K could wish for. I mean my original. Goodness knows what Youtube have done to it your end.
Why would you want to introduce motion blur? You don't need it, do you?
Think about using auto and forget manual, until you are an expert flyer and movie photographer. Save yourself heaps of unessary complication.
If your videos are crap, like mine, they will still be crap with ND filters. No one claims they make better movies, all that is down to you.

By the way, the authorities there don't give a rat's bottom for safety. They don't even have ropes long enough to rescue you if you attempt to climb up or down the cliff.
Note the clash of the Mavics, half way through the clip.
Everyone who has died there fell off the cliff taking selfies or leapt off with a parachute.
GPS is hard to get, and keep, hence a bit of drift.
The shots have no artistic merrit at all. This is not the proper movie.
There is a near invisible cable for tightrope walking high above, so the stray Mavic was lucky not to have hit it. No one has fallen from the cable, either.

Here's da movie!  

You need to reduce the shutter speed to create motion blur. Reducing it in brighter conditions will over expose the image so ND filters are vital if you want to create motion blur and a smoother image which is even more important when using a drone with a fixed aperture. Leaving the drone in auto will also cause the exposure to shift as the gimbal is tilted and this makes videos look very 'home made' shall we say. So it is down to the individual in what they wish to create and the level of quality they are looking for. They are not necessary in stills as there is typically no motion however, ND's do help to create beautiful long exposure stills for more serious photographers capturing moving scenes such as waves, water falls etc.

A CW Posted at 2018-5-8 22:56
You need to reduce the shutter speed to create motion blur. Reducing it in brighter conditions will over expose the image so ND filters are vital if you want to create motion blur and a smoother image which is even more important when using a drone with a fixed aperture. Leaving the drone in auto will also cause the exposure to shift as the gimbal is tilted and this makes videos look very 'home made' shall we say. So it is down to the individual in what they wish to create and the level of quality they are looking for. They are not necessary in stills as there is typically no motion however, ND's do help to create beautiful long exposure stills for more serious photographers capturing moving scenes such as waves, water falls etc.

Yes, you do need to reduce shutter speed to create motion blur, but why do you need it in the first place?
Where is the rough image in this clip? Auto, no ND filter...
So, where is the over exposure?
Where is the changing exposure due to auto? Don't forget, in this scene the very high cliff changes the lighting on transit around the wreck.
Where is the need to introduce motion blur in this super bright scene with lots of close up movement?

Obviously users can do what they want, I am not suggesting otherwise, but learning to fly and take pics or movies needs full concentration. Why add to the complexity until you have the skill and also need the complexity?

AlansDronePics Posted at 2018-5-8 23:08
Yes, you do need to reduce shutter speed to create motion blur, but why do you need it in the first place?
Where is the rough image in this clip? Auto, no ND filter...
So, where is the over exposure?

Well ND filters are sold as a separate accessory item and it is down to the buyer to decide whether they wish to use them - they are not included in the combo's so nobody is stating that they have to use them.
I use them all the time. I flew my Mavic Air for the first time last week and didn't have filters. My shutter was around 1/1000th and I had to use auto - it shifted the exposure between tilting and swaying tree branches looked like they were robotic. I ordered my filters the next day and what a difference they make. BTW - next time you fly tilt the gimbal up to a bright sky then down to the ground. In auto with no ND filter you won't be able to see the ground when the sensor is pointed to the sky.

A CW Posted at 2018-5-8 23:14
Well ND filters are sold as a separate accessory item and it is down to the buyer to decide whether they wish to use them - they are not included in the combo's so nobody is stating that they have to use them.
I use them all the time. I flew my Mavic Air for the first time last week and didn't have filters. My shutter was around 1/1000th and I had to use auto - it shifted the exposure between tilting and swaying tree branches looked like they were robotic. I ordered my filters the next day and what a difference they make.

We would love to see the before and after. Any chance?
Regarding this change of exposure you mentioned earlier. Anyone making a proper movie, sufficient to require ND filters, would either move the gimbal/pan at a suitably slow speed, or actually, record the scene after the exposure level has stabilised. The manual exposure is a step process anyway, so a pro would set it, then record the scene.

AlansDronePics Posted at 2018-5-8 23:20
We would love to see the before and after. Any chance?
Regarding this change of exposure you mentioned earlier. Anyone making a proper movie, sufficient to require ND filters, would either move the gimbal/pan at a suitably slow speed, or actually, record the scene after the exposure level has stabilised. The manual exposure is a step process anyway, so a pro would set it, then record the scene.

No, I don't post videos - just stills.
Even a slow tilt will shift the exposure - which is why pro's and experienced recreational pilots use ND filters as they want the best quality in their footage and long exposure stills are impossible without them. So yes, you do need ND filters if you want to achieve what they are designed to assist in achieving providing you know how to use them effectively. For somebody new to the hobby well, they have more important things to learn - like drone codes and flight safety!

A CW Posted at 2018-5-8 23:26
No, I don't post videos - just stills.
Even a slow tilt will shift the exposure - which is why pro's and experienced recreational pilots use ND filters as they want the best quality in their footage and long exposure stills are impossible without them. So yes, you do need ND filters if you want to achieve what they are designed to assist in achieving providing you know how to use them effectively. For somebody new to the hobby well, they have more important things to learn - like drone codes and flight safety!

So, where was the need for manual setting and ND filters in the video?

Either you do not understand the need of filters or you are just stubborn.
It has been known for decades that filters are necessary to create the right cinematic appearance - for those who need it. Nobody has ever claimed that filters are necessary to make a video.

FlyDK Posted at 2018-5-8 23:32
Either you do not understand the need of filters or you are just stubborn.
It has been known for decades that filters are necessary to create the right cinematic appearance - for those who need it. Nobody has ever claimed that filters are necessary to make a video.

So, would the video benefit from ND filters?

AlansDronePics Posted at 2018-5-8 23:28
So, where was the need for manual setting and ND filters in the video?

A gentle yaw around a rusty ship that isn't moving and central to the image with no gimbal tilts and people in the distance walking slowly... Think you need to broaden your footage before making such conclusions. That vid is not a good example of the benefits of ND filters/increasing motion blur/manual settings...

A CW Posted at 2018-5-8 23:34
A gentle yaw around a rusty ship that isn't moving and central to the image with no gimbal tilts and people in the distance walking slowly... Think you need to broaden your footage before making such conclusions. That vid is not a good example of the benefits of ND filters/increasing motion blur/manual settings...

So, ,what you are saying is that users of ND filters who fly over and pan around static countryside, you know, the usual video, are fitting filters for no good reason.

AlansDronePics Posted at 2018-5-8 23:34
So, would the video benefit from ND filters?

My point is that it's all up to you.

Well, the last two pictures are pretty overexposed, if you ask about it...

AlansDronePics Posted at 2018-5-8 23:39
So, ,what you are saying is that users of ND filters who fly over and pan around static countryside, you know, the usual video, are fitting filters for no good reason.

Who said you need ND filters for landscape videography? There is no motion to capture up there so they are pointless for that purpose. If however, you wish to Active Track someone on a bike, car, running around a pitch etc then they are very important or if the drone is flying at a fairly fast speed at low altitude such as in terrain follow then they will make a difference for sure - in fact I know they do. In the same way shutter filters are pointless in controlling reflectivity whereas polarisers cut through it if the polarisation is aligned properly. Also, set your shutter speed to 1-2 seconds over a wave crashing on a beach - the still will be a white canvas. Put an ND64 on with that SS and you'll have a stunning capture of the waves.  

FlyDK Posted at 2018-5-8 23:44
My point is that it's all up to you.

I fully agree with you.

TheCenda Posted at 2018-5-8 23:45
Well, the last two pictures are pretty overexposed, if you ask about it...

Which ND filters would have no effect on. Like basic sun glasses, it just limits the light and the drone or manual compensates for.
However, it has nothing to do with ND filters. The point of the post.

AlansDronePics Posted at 2018-5-8 23:50
Which ND filters would have no effect on. Like basic sun glasses, it just limits the light and the drone or manual compensates for.
However, it has nothing to do with ND filters. The point of the post.

Well actually the sky is totally washed out in the last picture because you have tilted down into the blacks of the image in auto. Your histogram must of been split in two... If you set to manual and aligned the shutter speed and tilt gimbal angle more effectively you would have brought down the exposure in the sky to balance out the whole image.

A CW Posted at 2018-5-8 23:47
Who said you need ND filters for landscape videography? There is no motion to capture up there so they are pointless for that purpose. If however, you wish to Active Track someone on a bike, car, running around a pitch etc then they are very important or if the drone is flying at a fairly fast speed at low altitude such as in terrain follow then they will make a difference for sure - in fact I know they do. In the same way shutter filters are pointless in controlling reflectivity whereas polarisers cut through it if the polarisation is aligned properly. Also, set your shutter speed to 1-2 seconds over a wave crashing on a beach - the still will be a white canvas. Put an ND64 on with that SS and you'll have a stunning capture of the waves.

We have all read about users who fit a filter and leave it on, regardless.
I have never seen the wisdom of that.
I have noticed a big difference in, shall we say strobing, at 24 fps that isn't there at 30 fps. This is another myth you see on here about the need to use 24fps and 1/50th and ND filters. The filters seem to be there to cure the self created problem of slow frame rate.
If you are introducing a deeper explanation on the limits of ND filters, I welcome it.

A CW Posted at 2018-5-8 23:47
Who said you need ND filters for landscape videography? There is no motion to capture up there so they are pointless for that purpose. If however, you wish to Active Track someone on a bike, car, running around a pitch etc then they are very important or if the drone is flying at a fairly fast speed at low altitude such as in terrain follow then they will make a difference for sure - in fact I know they do. In the same way shutter filters are pointless in controlling reflectivity whereas polarisers cut through it if the polarisation is aligned properly. Also, set your shutter speed to 1-2 seconds over a wave crashing on a beach - the still will be a white canvas. Put an ND64 on with that SS and you'll have a stunning capture of the waves.

Regarding your stills, I would love to see them.
I have tried ND16 on moving water and it is not sufficient to provide a worthwhile effect in UK summer. I suppose a higher filter would eventually achieve something.

AlansDronePics Posted at 2018-5-9 00:04
We have all read about users who fit a filter and leave it on, regardless.
I have never seen the wisdom of that.
I have noticed a big difference in, shall we say strobing, at 24 fps that isn't there at 30 fps. This is another myth you see on here about the need to use 24fps and 1/50th and ND filters. The filters seem to be there to cure the self created problem of slow frame rate.

There are people who will buy ND filters because somebody on YT tells them to and dare I say it because it makes their drone look cool LOL yet they don't know the difference between the ISO and shutter speeds.
On the flip side, they do serve a core purpose in creating motion blur when required. They are not as essential as some will make out but to say they are pointless is equally ignorant.

A CW Posted at 2018-5-9 00:01
Well actually the sky is totally washed out in the last picture because you have tilted down into the blacks of the image in auto. Your histogram must of been split in two... If you set to manual and aligned the shutter speed and tilt gimbal angle more effectively you would have brought down the exposure in the sky to balance out the whole image.

Yes, I can see me doing all that on a trivial holiday video. Not!
A pro would have made it a separate scene after all adjustments, wouldn't they.

AlansDronePics Posted at 2018-5-9 00:11
Yes, I can see me doing all that on a trivial holiday video. Not!
A pro would have made it a separate scene after all adjustments, wouldn't they.

Tap 'M' instead of 'A' in your camera settings and tilt your gimbal about 5 degrees further up and that should have done it. It's not difficult.

AlansDronePics Posted at 2018-5-9 00:08
Regarding your stills, I would love to see them.
I have tried ND16 on moving water and it is not sufficient to provide a worthwhile effect in UK summer. I suppose a higher filter would eventually achieve something.

You'll need an ND64 and ideal light conditions. Go into my profile on here - I've alredy posted about 50 using mutliple drones that I've owned over the years.

A CW Posted at 2018-5-9 00:10
There are people who will buy ND filters because somebody on YT tells them to and dare I say it because it makes their drone look cool LOL yet they don't know the difference between the ISO and shutter speeds.
On the flip side, they do serve a core purpose in creating motion blur when required. They are not as essential as some will make out but to say they are pointless is equally ignorant.

I agree with you.
I never said they were pointless, did I?
I provided a typical clip in brilliant sunlight and auto settings and most amateur droners taking video would be delighted with the sharpness and clarity in their scenes, whatever their subject was.
I also pointed out that perhaps they shouldn't rush out and buy filters.
I think even you will agree, the clip is a typical droners video subject and it clearly shows ND filters are no solution. They are not needed most of the time.

A CW Posted at 2018-5-9 00:15
Tap 'M' instead of 'A' in your camera settings and tilt your gimbal about 5 degrees further up and that should have done it. It's not difficult.

Not on topic. ND filters.
In any case, as I said, a pro would have made the adjustment to exposure, then taken the scene. Not done it whilst panning.

A CW Posted at 2018-5-9 00:16
You'll need an ND64 and ideal light conditions. Go into my profile on here - I've alredy posted about 50 using mutliple drones that I've owned over the years.

Thank you. I will have a peek later.

AlansDronePics Posted at 2018-5-9 00:19
I agree with you.
I never said they were pointless, did I?
I provided a typical clip in brilliant sunlight and auto settings and most amateur droners taking video would be delighted with the sharpness and clarity in their scenes, whatever their subject was.

Well how much they are needed depends entirely on the videographer. As I said, I use them all the time whilst others I know don't use them at all as they prefer very sharp footage or don't record moving subjects. As Fly said, it's all down to the individual need and artistic preference. To you they do not seem worth while. To me, I won't fly without them.

AlansDronePics Posted at 2018-5-8 23:50
Which ND filters would have no effect on. Like basic sun glasses, it just limits the light and the drone or manual compensates for.
However, it has nothing to do with ND filters. The point of the post.

Little child that likes to argue, aren't you?

You asked about overexposing, all of those pictures a exposed wrong. Sorry you have to hear that, but maybe you'll learn that later.

Surprisingly, no, it's not about ND filter, but setting camera wrong.

But there are many occasions to use them even for still photography, for example long exposure.

Noone said you NEED them and have to use them, so please stop acting like you are forced to and automatically it means they are useless for anybody

A CW Posted at 2018-5-9 00:24
Well how much they are needed depends entirely on the videographer. As I said, I use them all the time whilst others I know don't use them at all as they prefer very sharp footage or don't record moving subjects. As Fly said, it's all down to the individual need and artistic preference. To you they do not seem worth while. To me, I won't fly without them.

I think we are all happy on that point. Thanks for partaking.

AlansDronePics Posted at 2018-5-9 00:19
I agree with you.
I never said they were pointless, did I?
I provided a typical clip in brilliant sunlight and auto settings and most amateur droners taking video would be delighted with the sharpness and clarity in their scenes, whatever their subject was.

They are not needed most of the time.
You can't say that. If I want to make a video with my MP camera, all flying at higher speed at lower altitudes, watching nearby trees pass the camera, I certainly will need it - IF I want that motion blur, instead of a chuppy outcome.

Your video is only very slow flying and that's what makes all the difference.

TheCenda Posted at 2018-5-9 00:26
Little child that likes to argue, aren't you?

You asked about overexposing, all of those pictures a exposed wrong. Sorry you have to hear that, but maybe you'll learn that later.

Please drop the attitude. It is not necessary here.
Best if you read the OP, properly, think about it and ….

Hi, nice video and photos, having a lot of fun, thanks for sharing.

DJI Diana Posted at 2018-5-9 00:31
Hi, nice video and photos, having a lot of fun, thanks for sharing.

It was an amazing place to visit. Thank you.

AlansDronePics Posted at 2018-5-9 00:22
Not on topic. ND filters.
In any case, as I said, a pro would have made the adjustment to exposure, then taken the scene. Not done it whilst panning.

Not on topic? We have discussed using manual settings over auto. Your still shot in auto is grossly over exposed in the sky. I have explained why and what you should have done to balance the exposure - you do not need to be a professional to align an exposure value correctly for photography. Sorry for undermining your entire thread but it is obvious you have quite a bit to learn and I would hate to see new pilots take your advice and not get the best out of their hobby by regarding filters as pointless and adding little value - which is totally incorrect. Anyway, I've said all that really needs to be so take care and fly safe!

A CW Posted at 2018-5-9 00:34
Not on topic? We have discussed using manual settings over auto. Your still shot in auto is grossly over exposed in the sky. I have explained why and what you should have done to balance the exposure - you do not need to be a professional to align an exposure value correctly for photography. Sorry for undermining your entire thread but it is obvious you have quite a bit to learn and I would hate to see new pilots take your advice and not get the best out of their hobby by regarding filters as pointless and adding little value - which is totally incorrect. Anyway, I've said all that really needs to be so take care and fly safe!

Amen, we stated and a matter of fact.

There is a lot of noise in the video, what where you style settings?also the people walking in front of the wreck are showing a lag, this could be prevented by a ND filter

Jos A Posted at 2018-5-9 01:12
There is a lot of noise in the video, what where you style settings?also the people walking in front of the wreck are showing a lag, this could be prevented by a ND filter

Not so on the original.
I did mention YouTube issues.
I cannot remember the settings, but were most probably Landscape and Cinelike.
Others have tried to criticise the picture over exposure... These were only added so they had context for the wreck. Lighting drift etc.
As I said, there is no merit in the artistic aspect and none were claimed.
There will be no noise in the video that would be cured by ND filters. The ISO will be at 100 in this brightness. ND filters would not help, Unlikely UV would either, because of the changing sun angle. But UV was not the point of the post.

As a sidenote, the authorities there DO care but for areas like this allow it to slide, probably more interested in the idiots that fly in laganas and kalimaki in the final approach airspace.

The photographs are pretty poor and the video could have been much better and that will be the comments of those who see the improvements ND filters bring, yes not necessarily needed for photographs but not having control of aperture in these small drones, makes it difficult to control light.

If you are happy with what you see, really this is what matters, to you and yes in certain situations auto can be very good it’s also a good tip to newbies because they can concentrate on flying.

I would say I for one from both a safety and privacy situation I would have been annoyed with someone flying directly over me as you were along with another drone , I have to say is showing some ignorance, you did say gps was not great so the likelihood of you loosing gps and flying your drone into someone’s face was somewhat increased, but your concern seems to be negligible .

If you were to fly under your countries rules you would never have been allowed fly in such a situation, and I’m almost certain that people out for a day at the beach would prefer not to have drones with cameras flying so close and directly overhead.

Viridis Posted at 2018-5-9 01:42
As a sidenote, the authorities there DO care but for areas like this allow it to slide, probably more interested in the idiots that fly in laganas and kalimaki in the final approach airspace.

Perhaps they care now after turning up for a cliff rescue there and  the man, after an hour hanging on, fell to his death because they didn't have a rope. It says so on the public sign with a detailed explanation of him phoning his girlfriend asking her to get help.
Or the plastic tape along the cliff edge where bisarely, parents go beyond it to dangle themselves and kids over the drop for selfies.
OR the fact the ship is paper thin because of rust and the edges cut like a rusty saw. OK, this is a huge money spinner for the locals, but caring, I saw none.
I am quite happy to take my own risks on the wreck, but not near the cliff edge and certainly not to climb on it.