Portraite on fire

RoadkillRoadkill Registered Users Posts: 494 Major grins
edited February 4, 2009 in Technique
Need some help/advice. Trying to take some self portraits involving fire and as usual the dynamic range issue is the problem. Either the face is properly exposed or the fire is. I shot this in a variety of ways, from auto to manual and everything in between. I also tried using the onboard strobe set at 1/128 and 1/64 power, just to try and balance light levels, without much success because then the strobe would greatly reduce the natural color.

So I’m looking for any tips/tricks either in shooting or PS post production.

467551059_nGNHK-L.jpg

If anyone lives in the Tampa Fl area and wants to attempt some shooting of this nature, drop me a PM.
http://roadkill.smugmug.com/

Comments

  • kdogkdog Administrators Posts: 11,681 moderator
    edited February 4, 2009
    One word: HDR. (Or is that three words. headscratch.gif)

    You can make a pseudo-HDR by shooting RAW. Save TIFFS at -2 stops, 0 and +2 stops, and combine. Or, if you're using Photomatix, it'll do that for you from a single RAW file.

    Of course you can simply combine two exposures (one for the face, and one for the fire) manually in Photoshop instead of using HDR.

    Cheers,
    -joel
    Moderator of Landscapes forum
    Link to my Smugmug site
  • RoadkillRoadkill Registered Users Posts: 494 Major grins
    edited February 4, 2009
    Tried HDR and man did that come out messed up, just didnt look right at all. Worked well on the fire but the face.... eeek.
    http://roadkill.smugmug.com/
  • kdogkdog Administrators Posts: 11,681 moderator
    edited February 4, 2009
    Roadkill wrote:
    Tried HDR and man did that come out messed up, just didnt look right at all. Worked well on the fire but the face.... eeek.

    Dunno which HDR tool you used, but I'd be tempted to try the exposure-blend option in Photomatix, which is actually non-HDR blending of the exposures. Of course any solution is going to require post work in PS afterwards.
    Moderator of Landscapes forum
    Link to my Smugmug site
  • kdogkdog Administrators Posts: 11,681 moderator
    edited February 4, 2009
    BTW, the shot you posted look just about right anyway. ne_nau.gif
    Moderator of Landscapes forum
    Link to my Smugmug site
  • canon400dcanon400d Banned Posts: 2,826 Major grins
    edited February 4, 2009
    kdog wrote:
    Dunno which HDR tool you used, but I'd be tempted to try the exposure-blend option in Photomatix, which is actually non-HDR blending of the exposures. Of course any solution is going to require post work in PS afterwards.

    Hi Kdog,
    I have recently purchased Photomatix and I have only been using Tone Mapping. I have just put an image through the Exposure-blend option not realising that it was there. Am I right in saying it is best used using the last option 'shadows and highlights intensive' putting through two images one under and one over exposed. I would really appreciate your comments on this.
    Regards
    Bob
  • kdogkdog Administrators Posts: 11,681 moderator
    edited February 4, 2009
    canon400d wrote:
    Hi Kdog,
    I have recently purchased Photomatix and I have only been using Tone Mapping. I have just put an image through the Exposure-blend option not realizing that it was there. Am I right in saying it is best used using the last option 'shadows and highlights intensive' putting through two images one under and one over exposed. I would really appreciate your comments on this.
    Regards
    Bob
    Hi Bob,

    No, I wouldn't say that. I've used the fixed blending options as well as the variable ones. You need to play with them all until you get what you're looking for.

    Probably the biggest factor is realizing that you're not going to get the finished product from Photomatix. What you get is often quite conservative and doesn't come to life until you start post processing in Photoshop (or wherever). So don't worry if the image seems flat. The pop will come later in PS.

    Just to throw another curve at you, if you haven't done so already, you should also experiment with the Tone Compressor option in the HDR panel. It gives you an alternate way of tone mapping that's much more conservative than the default Details Enhancer panel. It gives a look somewhere in between Details Enhancer, and a simple exposure blend.

    Yeah, lots of choices and it can take a long time to try them all on each image. I always keep trying the various options until I get what I want, and then stop looking. I attended a Photomatix workshop, as well as read a book on it, and I've still yet to see firm guidelines on when to use each option. eek7.gif Try 'em all seems to be the mantra. The real pros will actually process the image a couple of different ways, and then blend together in Photoshop. Or, they'll pick one variant and blend it with one of the original frames. I've yet to go to that extent myself.

    As my instructor at the workshop said, the current crop of HDR tools are still in their infancy and quite crude. These things will definitely get better over time as the art matures.

    Have fun,
    -joel
    Moderator of Landscapes forum
    Link to my Smugmug site
  • canon400dcanon400d Banned Posts: 2,826 Major grins
    edited February 4, 2009
    kdog wrote:
    Hi Bob,

    No, I wouldn't say that. I've used the fixed blending options as well as the variable ones. You need to play with them all until you get what you're looking for.

    Probably the biggest factor is realizing that you're not going to get the finished product from Photomatix. What you get is often quite conservative and doesn't come to life until you start post processing in Photoshop (or wherever). So don't worry if the image seems flat. The pop will come later in PS.

    Just to throw another curve at you, if you haven't done so already, you should also experiment with the Tone Compressor option in the HDR panel. It gives you an alternate way of tone mapping that's much more conservative than the default Details Enhancer panel. It gives a look somewhere in between Details Enhancer, and a simple exposure blend.

    Yeah, lots of choices and it can take a long time to try them all on each image. I always keep trying the various options until I get what I want, and then stop looking. I attended a Photomatix workshop, as well as read a book on it, and I've still yet to see firm guidelines on when to use each option. eek7.gif Try 'em all seems to be the mantra. The real pros will actually process the image a couple of different ways, and then blend together in Photoshop. Or, they'll pick one variant and blend it with one of the original frames. I've yet to go to that extent myself.

    As my instructor at the workshop said, the current crop of HDR tools are still in their infancy and quite crude. These things will definitely get better over time as the art matures.

    Have fun,
    -joel

    Thanks ever so much Joel and Wow the information you have supplied is brilliant. I am quite sure the originator of this thread and everyone else that has Photmatix installed will applaud your knowledge knowing you have read up and then culminating in having an instructor giving sound advice.
    Regards
    Bob
  • kdogkdog Administrators Posts: 11,681 moderator
    edited February 4, 2009
    canon400d wrote:
    Thanks ever so much Joel and Wow the information you have supplied is brilliant. I am quite sure the originator of this thread and everyone else that has Photmatix installed will applaud your knowledge knowing you have read up and then culminating in having an instructor giving sound advice.
    Regards
    Bob

    Thanks, Bob. I think you're a little too kind, but thanks. :D
    Moderator of Landscapes forum
    Link to my Smugmug site
Sign In or Register to comment.