Mossy water.. How do i fix this?

Bayer-Z28

When I TRY to get a decent shot, something always doesn't come out exactly right. This is a part technique and part lightroom question.

What can I do to this pic? I merged a couple layers trying to get the underside of the bridge. But the color just isn't there for me.. It just doesn't pop the way I'd like it to.

pathfinder

To my eye, it looks like you never got enough exposure in your longer frames to capture the detail in the underside of the bridge. Indeed, the whole image appears under exposed, which is the antithesis of HDR work.

THis is one of mine, and I still am not fully satisfied with my HDR work, especially with moving water which I think offers real challenges, but also real opportunities. My HDR's don't have the pop in color i want sometimes, and moving water can create strange artifacts and colors as well

angevin1

Bayer-Z28 wrote:

When I TRY to get a decent shot, something always doesn't come out exactly right. This is a part technique and part lightroom question.

What can I do to this pic? I merged a couple layers trying to get the underside of the bridge. But the color just isn't there for me.. It just doesn't pop the way I'd like it to.

Its prob not going to pop. When I opened this in LR2, it had a lot of noise under the bridge, obviously underexposed. What type of effect are you looking for? When I look at this scene, I typically think of moodiness, not pop. But I will say; a tripod, longer exposure, and perhaps even flash would have helped illuminate.

angevin1

pathfinder wrote:

To my eye, it looks like you never got enough exposure in your longer frames to capture the detail in the underside of the bridge. Indeed, the whole image appears under exposed, which is the antithesis of HDR work.

THis is one of mine, and I still am not fully satisfied with my HDR work, especially with moving water which I think offers real challenges, but also real opportunities. My HDR's don't have the pop in color i want sometimes, and moving water can create strange artifacts and colors as well

Sweet Work!

SKnight

Chances are I'm wrong but I'd try a polarizing filter to reduce the glare from the sky and water then try a longer exposure to light the bridge underside.

Zerodog

SKnight wrote:

Chances are I'm wrong but I'd try a polarizing filter to reduce the glare from the sky and water then try a longer exposure to light the bridge underside.

I am with you. Higher f stop with low ISO and as long exposure as you can get will bring out the colors. Even flash the underside of the bridge by hand if your exposure is long enough. The filter will help reduce glare and also help gain you more exposure time.

pathfinder

You will not be able to capture the detail on the under side of the bridge with a single exposure that does not blow the sky, I have tried many times and cameras just do not have that kind of dynamic range.

That is why the original poster was shooting more than one frame and trying to composite them.

You need 3 -5 stops different exposure for the shaded under side of the bridge and the highlights in the sky. The "easiest" way to do this is HDR, with at least three frames shot 0 ED, -2 EC and + 2 EC. You might actually need +/- 3 stops EC.

Adding flash could be done of course to the under side of the bridge. Might be hard to cover that large area evenly and uniformly.

MarkR

Are you using matrix metering by any chance? 'Cause this kind of scene is more likely to confuse a meter due to the very bright highlights and very deep shadows.

If I was shooting this handheld, I'd try spot metering the underside of the bridge or the water and then dialing in -1 or -2 EV. That will put the bridge or water in shadow but with details visible. I'd also shoot RAW so that Lightroom will have as much data as possible to try to tweak highlight recovery and fill light.

Or I'd cheat and take multiple exposures and merge them, as others have suggested.

Either way, I suspect that the vibrance and clarity sliders will help give this some "pop."

pathfinder

HDR is cheating? Really?:D

MarkR

pathfinder wrote:

HDR is cheating? Really?:D

If the goal is to take a single correct exposure, then HDR is cheating. Or at the very least, may involve more time and equipment than is/was available. I know I don't always carry a tripod with me, for example. And HDR is not directly available in Lightroom, which is the only software we know for certain the OP has.

Personally, I'd just expose for the bridge and let the highlights blow out, but that's just me.

pathfinder

I see the comment about Lightroom in the OP's original post.

But then I don't under stand the comment about "merging a couple of layers" if the OP ONLY has Lightroom. Merging layers sounds like something done in Photoshop to me.

I am not aware of blending modes in Lightroom

MarkR

pathfinder wrote:

I see the comment about Lightroom in the OP's original post.

But then I don't under stand the comment about "merging a couple of layers" if the OP ONLY has Lightroom. Merging layers sounds like something done in Photoshop to me.

I am not aware of blending modes in Lightroom

It's ok. I don't know what I'm talking about.

I do stand by my assertion that a) shooting RAW, b) spot metering for the bridge or water, possibly at -1 or -2 EV, and judicious use of recovery, fill light, vibrance and clarity sliders is probably the best way to start approaching this image. I wouldn't worry too much about highlights blowing out, as they're pretty much blown anyway, and not critical to the image in any case.

If I had time and inclination, I'd consider taking two or more exposures and blending them together.

MarkR

Also, Bayer-Z28, I'd be happy to show you how I'd process your image strictly from a Lightroom PP point of view if you'll give me permission to use your original image.

pathfinder

MarkR wrote:

I do stand by my assertion that a) shooting RAW, b) spot metering for the bridge or water, possibly at -1 or -2 EV, and judicious use of recovery, fill light, vibrance and clarity sliders is probably the best way to start approaching this image. I wouldn't worry too much about highlights blowing out, as they're pretty much blown anyway, and not critical to the image in any case.

I do agree that if the plan is to shoot a single frame and try to capture the under side of the bridge as well as the surrounding water and possibly sky, what you describe is how I would approach the exposure also.

Shooing RAW and use of Recovery and Fill sliders has been a dramatic improvement in the processing of digital files for me. I have been going back and re-editing files that I shot prior to the Fill and Recovery sliders, and find I can make much better images with the newer RAW software than I could several years ago. Handling highlights and shadow tones has gotten much better.