Is there any way other than HDR that I could have made this shot.

[Whiskey]

Hello all!

This is a tough shot to get, but I'm trying to figure out how my camera captures different situations so that when I really want to make shot I'll know what I need to do. It was late in the day, the foreground was shadowed, and there was a beautiful blue sky above. I shot in Manual, metered on the shadows, but had the camera slightly under expose them in hopes of capturing the bright blue sky above, but the sky clipped badly.

Is there any way I could edit this photo to make the sky look more natural? Is there anyway other than HDR that I could have shot this to make the sky show up?

It is a pano BTW.

Thanks,
Whiskey

 

[Patrice]

Your photo does not show up, however what you describe is a classic situation. Tasteful HDR is only one of the ways you can pull this off. Graduated neutral density filters are another way as is exposing for the sky and pulling details from the shadows in post processing. A blend of two exposures, one for the sky and one for the shadows and masking in post processing.

 

[Whiskey]

Your right! The photo did not show up.

It should be fixed now - please let me know if you still can't see it.

I don't think I can use the graduated filters because my lens spins as it focuses. Could you give more specifics about the post processing option? Do you have some keywords I can google and find a tutorial?

Thanks,
Whiskey

 

[Buckster]

I don't think I can use the graduated filters because my lens spins as it focuses.

Use a square graduated filter and adjust it to taste after focusing.

Could you give more specifics about the post processing option? Do you have some keywords I can google and find a tutorial?

Google and Youtube search for: Photoshop Masking techniques.

Here's what I did:

1. Open the image in Photoshop.
2. Jump a copy of it to a new layer with Ctrl J (Cmd J on a Mac).
3. Click on Select > Color Range and use the eyedropper and the shift key down to select areas of the sky.
4. Increased "Fuzziness" to taste (I used a setting of 123) and click OK.
5. With the marching ants defining the selection of sky, including all the bits between all the leaves, hold down the Alt key and click the Mask icon at the bottom of the right panel.
6. Put the photo of the sky you want to use in between the two layers, and adjust size and position to taste.
7. Double-click the mask, choose Refine Mask, check Decontaminate Colors, adjust it's slider to taste, click OK.

Result:

 

[Mully]

Nice work Buckster Good explanation

 

[Buckster]

Nice work Buckster Good explanation

Thank you kindly!

 

[Big Mike]

The first stage, is to recognize when the scene will exceed the dynamic range that your camera can capture. You are probably already doing this.

Once you recognize this, you can choose what you want to do. Often, the simplest solution is the best. Just come back to the location when the lighting conditions are different.
If that's not really an option, you can try to use something like a grad filter.
But if you don't have the filter, or if the scene is not conducive to a flat transition, then you can try to get it with one exposure. The key is to know that with digital photography, blown highlight detail is not recoverable. So if you expose for the shadows and the sky blows out...you are SOL. But if you expose for the sky, you can probably bring up the shadow detail (although it will likely get pretty grainy/noisy).

And of course, taking multiple exposures can work...and there are different ways to go about doing that: HDR etc.

 

[hirejn]

The answer is no. The dynamic range in this scene is too much for the camera to capture in a single image. You could expose for the sky and let the shadows go, or you could do HDR. Doing HDR isn't a step down. It doesn't mean you don't know enough about photography. Often HDR is the only way to capture the full DR of a scene. We used to do this with ND filters, which can still work, but software makes HDR so easy it's worth a look -- specifically Nik HDR Efex Pro. HDR is another subject. There's a correct way to do it, and then there's bracketing all over the place, which is not professional. Sometimes the need for HDR is obvious, but sometimes it's not, which is where a meter can help.

Another point on this image is why was the sky worth capturing? It's blown out, but it looks like it would've been a fairly plain sky anyway. A subjective decision could have been to make something in the shadows the primary subject and crop out the sky or just hide it behind trees.

 

[Ysarex]

Is there any way I could edit this photo to make the sky look more natural?

As Buckster demonstrated you could drop in a sky from another photo. You could also fake a sky with an appropriate blue gradient.

Is there anyway other than HDR that I could have shot this to make the sky show up?

Yes. You could use a camera capable of a 14 bit raw capture and make sure the sky was not clipped in the exposure. Then there would be some hoops to jump in post processing, but I've managed scenes similar to what you have here with a single exposure.

Joe

 

[Whiskey]

I don't think I can use the graduated filters because my lens spins as it focuses.

Use a square graduated filter and adjust it to taste after focusing.

Could you give more specifics about the post processing option? Do you have some keywords I can google and find a tutorial?

Google and Youtube search for: Photoshop Masking techniques.

Here's what I did:

1. Open the image in Photoshop.
2. Jump a copy of it to a new layer with Ctrl J (Cmd J on a Mac).
3. Click on Select > Color Range and use the eyedropper and the shift key down to select areas of the sky.
4. Increased "Fuzziness" to taste (I used a setting of 123) and click OK.
5. With the marching ants defining the selection of sky, including all the bits between all the leaves, hold down the Alt key and click the Mask icon at the bottom of the right panel.
6. Put the photo of the sky you want to use in between the two layers, and adjust size and position to taste.
7. Double-click the mask, choose Refine Mask, check Decontaminate Colors, adjust it's slider to taste, click OK.

Result:

This DEFINITELY wins the prize for the most creative solution. I'm afraid I'm a noob when it comes to photoshop - I don't understand these mask things at all. I will try this tonight or tomorrow, I'd love to know this tool better.

Thanks,
Whiskey

 

[Whiskey]

Is there any way I could edit this photo to make the sky look more natural?

As Buckster demonstrated you could drop in a sky from another photo. You could also fake a sky with an appropriate blue gradient.

Is there anyway other than HDR that I could have shot this to make the sky show up?

Yes. You could use a camera capable of a 14 bit raw capture and make sure the sky was not clipped in the exposure. Then there would be some hoops to jump in post processing, but I've managed scenes similar to what you have here with a single exposure.

Joe

I'm pretty sure the Rebel t4i is capable of 14 bit raw images, I know it's at least 12. I will try shooting in Raw when I go back to the same spot tomorrow, then drop the images in Photomatix and see what I get.

Thanks,
Whiskey

 

[Whiskey]

The answer is no. The dynamic range in this scene is too much for the camera to capture in a single image. You could expose for the sky and let the shadows go, or you could do HDR. Doing HDR isn't a step down. It doesn't mean you don't know enough about photography. Often HDR is the only way to capture the full DR of a scene. We used to do this with ND filters, which can still work, but software makes HDR so easy it's worth a look -- specifically Nik HDR Efex Pro. HDR is another subject. There's a correct way to do it, and then there's bracketing all over the place, which is not professional. Sometimes the need for HDR is obvious, but sometimes it's not, which is where a meter can help.

Another point on this image is why was the sky worth capturing? It's blown out, but it looks like it would've been a fairly plain sky anyway. A subjective decision could have been to make something in the shadows the primary subject and crop out the sky or just hide it behind trees.

Sorry,.. I didn't mean to imply that HDR was a step down,.. it's more like I'm trying to get a feel for when I really need it and when I don't. This particular shot I didn't have a tripod for, doing a pano that lines up nicely was tough enough, doing the same with HDR may have been tougher. That's another good thing to test though, when I go to the same spot tomorrow I will give hand held HDR Pano's a try.

Thanks,
Whiskey

 

[Whiskey]

Anyway,.. Like I implied above, I'm going to hike down there tomorrow at the same time and give some of these ideas a shot!

Thanks everyone for your help!
Whiskey

 

[Whiskey]

The first stage, is to recognize when the scene will exceed the dynamic range that your camera can capture. You are probably already doing this.

Once you recognize this, you can choose what you want to do. Often, the simplest solution is the best. Just come back to the location when the lighting conditions are different.
If that's not really an option, you can try to use something like a grad filter.
But if you don't have the filter, or if the scene is not conducive to a flat transition, then you can try to get it with one exposure. The key is to know that with digital photography, blown highlight detail is not recoverable. So if you expose for the shadows and the sky blows out...you are SOL. But if you expose for the sky, you can probably bring up the shadow detail (although it will likely get pretty grainy/noisy).

And of course, taking multiple exposures can work...and there are different ways to go about doing that: HDR etc.

Forgive my lack of understanding here,.. but I was under the impression that there was less data in the "Shadowed" areas, so they are less capable of containing fine details than brightly lit areas, so if you wanted to retain detail exposing slightly on the bright side helped retain that detail without getting allot of noise.

Is that true up until the point where it clips then you loose everything?
With this image it is obvious looking at the histogram that clipping has occurred, but can I tell even if clipping has occurred in a very small area?

Thanks,
Whiskey

 

[Dominantly]

As soon as I saw the image I knew you had to be local based on those oaks.

Anyways, like stated this is a pretty wide dynamic range that is difficult to correctly capture with less than ideal light. If I was going to give it a go, I would return when you had some beautifully warm light from a sun low on the horizon.

I typed out how I would go about editing this, but its just kind of a pain, especially with those trees and the blown sky pieces all over the place.