Here's another

ebwest

I can't seem to get the sky to where it does look washed out, any suggestions?

Dixie

Method 1:

1. Tripod mount. Take two shots - one exposed for the sky and one for the foreground and foliage.
2. Bring both into PS in layers with the one exposed for the foreground on the top.
3. Then make the top layer active and use the eraser set to 50% and mid-range softness and erase the top layer in sky area. This will allow the properly exposed sky in the bottom layer to come through.
4. Then under Layers select Flatten Image.

Method 2: Alternate if there is enough detail in the sky in the original shot.

1. Create a duplicate layer. Adjust the top layer for the foreground and foliage and then adjust the bottom layer for the sky.
2. Then make the top layer active and use the eraser set to 50% and mid-range softness and erase the top layer in sky area.
3. Then under Layers select Flatten Image.

digismile

Although I use the same techniques as dixie in post, you might also want to get the exposure right in camera.

What you need for your rebel is a graduated neutral density filter. It's basically a filter that goes from dark to clear. By positioning the dark portion over your sky line, it will bring the exposure between the bright high lights (your sky) and the dark shadows closer together.

There are many brands of GND filters available and a couple of different formats. There are the screw on types that attach to the front of the lens. The probelm with these is that the transition line from dark to light is fixed at one spot, usually about the middle. So what if your skyline isn't along the middle of your shot.

The format I use, is a square filter (about 4" x 4") that slides into a screw-on adaptor. You can then simply position the transition line wherever you want.

The GND filters can be purchased with varying degrees of exposure adjustment, i.e. 1X exposure difference from dark to light, 2X, 3X, etc. You will often want one or more of these filters, depending on the shot.

Although you can spend a fortune on any camera accessory, you need not sell the farm to get started. Cokin sells these kind of filters and are very inexpensive ($20? each plus adaptor I think). You will be amazed at the difference this filter makes and if you do a lot of outdoor photography, it will get a lot of use.

Brad

Dixie

Hey Brad, I totally agree with you about the neutral density filters and use them a lot. The only caution I give about ND filters is that the situation doesn't always allow for their use. They really work great if the foreground foliage or structures (depending upon what you are shooting) doesn't extend into the upper portion of the image where the light area is. Otherwise you end up with part of the foliage/structure in area covered with the ND very dark in comparision with with the rest of image not covered by the ND.

Ideal situations for using ND filters are when you have a distinct break between say the foreground and the sky. However, if a large tree or structure extends to or near the top of the image then you will have tonal problems between the lower and upper portions of the large tree or structure. Of course there are degrees in between which become judgement calls.

I personally would not use ND filters for this particular scene shot by E.B. because the blown area is from the top center down to the center of the image with the background also blown to some extent. That's the reason I recommended going with two shots since the background in the center is also going to have to be toned down to some extent. In cases like this I have even worked with as many as three layers - one for the sky, one for the foreground, and one for mid-range (tonally) areas in the background.

I highly recommend the Cokin system as well and particularly for someone just starting out. The individual filters are relatively inexpensive, but you have to purchase the holder separately. You will only need one holder since they sell adapter attachment rings for the different size accessory rings on the lenses for about $10 each. They have the standard and pro holders - go with the pro because it is much larger. The standard holder is too small for a lot of the Canon lenses accessory rings. The Cokin ND filters also have varying degrees of transition from the gray to the clear areas of the filters. In each ND filter (+1, +2, & +3), they also have fairly hard breaks, medium breaks and very soft breaks between the gray and clear areas (going from short transitional areas to longer transitional areas).

digismile

I agree 100%. I have used my ND filters in less than ideal situations, and with some post work, come up with something I liked better than no filter at all. But in most cases, it's best to have a fairly distinct line between the area we're trying to hold the detail and the shadow area.

The other issue is that maybe the sky in this photo didn't really have much detail to hold in the first place. Haven't played with this image to see what might be there. I've gone out on a lot of days only to have a very weak coloured sky that even polarizers couldn't help much. Then I just change the sky in post:D

So eb, what this is supposed to tell you, is that our digital cameras aren't always able to capture the picture the way we see them because of the difference in contrast from highlights to shadows. We have to compensate by using one of several techniques (possibly in combination) multiple exposures at the correct exposure for each area of detail, ND filters, or photoshop post production (and in post production, you have a wide variety of techniques to recover detail).

The lesson here is to experiment. And if you're not already doing this, try shooting RAW. You will have a lot more latitude in post production for exposure control if you are only shooting one shot.

Hope this feedback helps.

Dixie wrote:

Hey Brad, I totally agree with you about the neutral density filters and use them a lot. The only caution I give about ND filters is that the situation doesn't always allow for their use. They really work great if the foreground foliage or structures (depending upon what you are shooting) doesn't extend into the upper portion of the image where the light area is. Otherwise you end up with part of the foliage/structure in area covered with the ND very dark in comparision with with the rest of image not covered by the ND.

Ideal situations for using ND filters are when you have a distinct break between say the foreground and the sky. However, if a large tree or structure extends to or near the top of the image then you will have tonal problems between the lower and upper portions of the large tree or structure. Of course there are degrees in between which become judgement calls.

I personally would not use ND filters for this particular scene shot by E.B. because the blown area is from the top center down to the center of the image with the background also blown to some extent. That's the reason I recommended going with two shots since the background in the center is also going to have to be toned down to some extent. In cases like this I have even worked with as many as three layers - one for the sky, one for the foreground, and one for mid-range (tonally) areas in the background.

I highly recommend the Cokin system as well and particularly for someone just starting out. The individual filters are relatively inexpensive, but you have to purchase the holder separately. You will only need one holder since they sell adapter attachment rings for the different size accessory rings on the lenses for about $10 each. They have the standard and pro holders - go with the pro because it is much larger. The standard holder is too small for a lot of the Canon lenses accessory rings. The Cokin ND filters also have varying degrees of transition from the gray to the clear areas of the filters. In each ND filter (+1, +2, & +3), they also have fairly hard breaks, medium breaks and very soft breaks between the gray and clear areas (going from short transitional areas to longer transitional areas).

Dixie

ebwest

Thanks a whole lot. I learned a lot. I had heard of the tripod method, but of course didn't think of it when I was taking the shot. It's not too hard to get back to that place so I'll give it a try.

Has far as what the sky looked like at the time, look in the water, nice blue sky with some big clouds. They're just blown out.

As for the filters, I think I just talked my wife into the nik color efex for a birthday present...I blamed Dixie (she used it on another one of mine), so I guess the filters will have to wait.

Thanks for all your advice.

Dixie

Dixie is a he, but that's okay as it's a common mistake.

When you reshoot please post the results. I would really like to see it. Also, you shouldn't apply any of the nik filters until after you've completed the layer work in most cases.

ebwest

Sorry about that. The horse looked like a female:uhoh But then again, I never knew anything about horses.


Thanks for taking the time to give some advice.