Finally - Blue Skies for C&C

[sjconner]

I live in Southwest Montana and spring is being vengeful. It has been rainy and cold for the last couple of weeks. We woke up to a bit of snow this morning! Part way through this afternoon the sun came out and it warmed up (upper 40's). I raced over the hill and took this picture. A little bit of PP and voila. I do have a question - our sky is as blue as this picture but the image out of the camera is never this blue. Why is that?

Thanks, Susan

 

[abc123_4]

this is nice photo
wonderful sky
i think the grass dark

 

[lunaaa]

very nice

 

[haynchinook334]

i think the grass dark

Is that a question?

I like the blue sky and the shadows under the clouds. But, i think the grass needs to be darker a little. IMO.

 

[pbelarge]

Susan
In answer to your question, the human eye sees in much greater dynamic range than the camera can. Hence when we see the results in camera, people have come in droves to PP. Your shot looks like it was taken on a very sunny day, that does not help the situation.

 

[PJL]

A polarizer filter will help you get bluer skies without PP. In situations where you have a really bright sky but a dark landscape or other dark subject on the lower half of your screen, you could also consider using a graduated density filter. Also, for landscape shots, don't be afraid to crank up the saturation settings in your camera.

 

[Pgeobc]

>A polarizer filter will help you get bluer skies without PP.<

Ditto. At high altitude, there is more blue light and more ultraviolet light because there is less atmosphere to filter it out. The polarizer, well applied, can help a lot.

 

[Overstanding]

Very nicely composed. I agree the grass could be a little darker. Fliters are very helpful tools. I need to learn how to use them myself.

 

[abc123_4]

i think the grass dark

Is that a question?

is not a question
just a theory

 

[Wiggz]

Great shot! Although on the grass it seems like there could be more vibrancy. Especially in contrast with the sky. Also the only (and this is only my novice opinion) thing I would have done different is put the horizon just a tad lower in the shot.

 

[GeneralBenson]

Nice composition, but I think the sky is way over saturated and darkened too much. The highlights of all the clouds are clipped, which gives it that point and shoot, sunny day look. It looks like the image had too much dynamic range, and you clipped the highlights, then just darkened everything else in PP, which make the whole scene look too dark and over saturated, except for the blown out highlights. People are all saying that the grass could be darker, but if anything, it's a touch too dark. It only looks bright compared to the fact that the whole scene is equally or more too dark. not a bad edit, consider the highlights are lost, but I think the blue could be brighter.

 

[Live_free]

i think the grass dark

Is that a question?

is not a question
just a theory

:meh:

 

[PJL]

>A polarizer filter will help you get bluer skies without PP.<

Ditto. At high altitude, there is more blue light and more ultraviolet light because there is less atmosphere to filter it out. The polarizer, well applied, can help a lot.

The one caveat is that there is such thing as "too wide" with a polarizer -- that is, if you use a really wide angle lens, you can get blotchy results, which will cause parts of the sky to come out darker than others.

 

[sjconner]

I used a circular polarizing filter. I forgot that I had my camera set to tungsten. The shots before the landscape were snapshots taken indoors with the white balance adjusted for tungsten lighting. I did shoot in raw so I was able to kinda "save" the shot in pp.

Note to self for the future - ALWAYS check camera settings!