Quick question

Brett

I would really like to know how scenic shots with an object and the sky are done properly. When I take pics, Im still young and learning, but the sky will be invisible persay, it will be mostly white, or no clouds will show up. If the clouds and sky show up, the main object will be too dark.

This is a cheap example of what I would like my pictures to turn out more like.


Another example of how I would like them to turn out would be the pictures in dkapp's thread http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=4802&page=1&pp=10

Also I got a neutral density filter for christmas so Im hoping this will help me for these things. So if I can get any suggestions and tips, it would be greatly appreciated.

gus

Just throw a few $ at it......

http://www.fredmiranda.com/shopping/DRI

GREAPER

why dont you show us one or two that are not comming out the way you want...

I think what you are saying is that you are blowing out the sky in your landscapes. This happens becuase the difference in the brightness of the sky and of the foreground is greater than the exposure latitude of your film or digital camera.

There are several ways to work around this. One way is to shoot an exposure metered for each and combining them with software as mentioned by the ruler of the wasteland above...

Another is to use a graduated neutral density filter which will reduce the amount of light from the brighter area bringing it closer to the exposure value of the darker area and hopefully within the dynamic range of your media...

I hope that makes some sense,,,

Brett

Well I got my neutral density filter, but I've been too busy to take any pictures for the last few weeks. But here is an example of how my pictures turn out. Just click to see a bigger version.

gus

Copied it...curved one dark & one light & used freds prog to overlay them.

maybe it is alright but i didnt see a big diff.

Brett

The house is brighter now, but the sky is still "missing".

gus

Brett there just isnt any 'sky' there that i can see..i can P/shop one or 2 cloud lines but nothing to write home about.

I take literally hundreds a month of sky shots & in the situation that you have in that shot...i would give it away. From my point of view you need shape to start with & that shot has no definition of anything really (sky wise i mean)

Days of heavy cloud like that difuse the light too much.

gus

I just hit it a bit harder...

Just no real definition in the cloud that i can see thus any camera will not get it. The camera will adjust the light/dark aspect but it wont show what isnt there to start with.

Hope that helps.

Brett

It does help, so basically these pictures are done with the camera by setting everything properly, I use manual mode all the time, but frequently forget about the background of things.

Steve Cavigliano

Brett,
Greaper's got it. Either a grad ND, or multiple exposures blended (really easy to do with subjects like your splitlevel house). One other suggestion would be to use a polarizer. Depending on the angle of the Sun, it will darken up the sky. Yes, it will also cost you about 1.5 stops overall. But, for landscape shots, speed usually isn't all that important. Also, if there's any way to shoot this subject in the early AM, or late afternoon, it might help lessen the dynamic range that you are trying to capture.


Like Gus, I played with your shot in PS and there's just not enough detail in the sky to work with, IMO. You can darken it, but you won't see clouds or much variation in color.

FWIW, it's not you Brett. It's a limitation we all have to work within. Well, unless you have a $30000 MF digital back that will capture 10+ stops of DR

Geeze, I shouldn't have brought that up. If Andy reads this post, he might go out and pick one up. Good thing B&H is closed today


Steve


Steve

Ann McRae

A polarizing filter will help bring out any sky details that are there when you shoot the photo.

Examples of what a polarizing filter can do can be found in my Vegas gallery:
http://canadian-ann.smugmug.com/Vacation/16371
Harsh, non sweet light shots, but the sky has detail thanks to a good polarizer.

If the exposure necessary for the sky and subject is too greatly different it may be necessary to take two shots at each of the appropriate exposures and blend them.

ann

Brett

Thanks Steve and everyone else for the help.

dkapp

I gave it a quick effort, about 2 min worth of work. Here is what I did.
1.) select the sky & put into its own layer
2.) select the house & put into its own layer
3.) select the grass/trees & put into its own layer

4.) going layer by layer, doing curves & levels adjustment until I get something that looks good.
5.) change the layer opacity until it fits nicely with the entire image.

6.) Upload.

Spending more time paying attention to the detail will yield better results.

Let me know if you have any more questions.

Dave

ginger_55

Well, I actually like the shot........sky or not.

But sometimes there is no sky. That has always been my understanding. If no sky, then compose accordingly. In other words if there is no sky find something else to focus on. Preferably the ground. Or maybe a portrait, I have read they are good with the soft lighting of "no sky".

The advantage to the fact that someone gives us "no sky" sometimes is that other times we get sky to die for. As in sunrises and sunsets. I don't even think I would notice your house in some of the sunrises and sunsets I shoot. (I go to the beach a lot, early and late)

And the problem with those magnificent skys, the sunrises and sunsets, everyone shoots them, so no one wants them.

Those are just some bits of something I have picked up in 65 yrs here in the world of skys and no skys.

ginger

So, what is wrong with your picture again? I like it, reminds me of my husband, weary.

ginger_55

Uh, Dave, love what you did in that short amount of time.

Maybe you could write a book on it.

How do you put each part of a photo into its own layer? I know that is totally basic, I just don't know how to do it.

You asked if there were questions:D

g

(If you would have to meticulously pull out each item, it would take longer than you are talking about?????)

Be gentle, he may be only 16, but I am elderly and slow.........

Brett

Dave, for 2 minutes of time, you managed to do what I wish I could. The pic is very close to how I wish it would have turned out the first time. The clouds have definition to them, some depth, and it completes the photo. I really like the mood in the picture now, it seems like something out of a horror movie, with the heavy looking clouds and all. Thanks again.