Today when I was seeing an profile of a photographer, and read the lenses he uses, it felt he never used computerised filters. But he did in most of the pictures.
Difference between using a lens filter instead of filtering the bare image in Photoshop or other software based imaging program is truly economical and creative. They both omit or overstate a specific spectrum of the light range and I can add contrast, sharpen, soften, add warmth, coolness…everything in my computer. All top named photographers, whether they buy it or not, have someone with computer background to amplify their images.
As long as every tone, hues and details we care about has been captured by the film, one can then use Photoshop to change the proportion among the tones and colors for the final rendered image.
I would say that filters that change things by less than one or two stop are better done in Photoshop but if its more than that you have to use the optical filter to give Photoshop a good start.
As for my economical constraints I’m presently working with computerised filters. But on long terms I recommend lense filters which I’m gonna shift soon.
For more information about filters follow the source link:
(Internet pics edited with Photoshop)