Assignment #48: Heavenly Grounds
Nikolai
Registered Users Posts: 19,035 Major grins
This time we going to have some fun both shooting and post processing. :wink
One of the typical annoyances of the digital imaging is the lack of dynamic range even in the best (available) modern cameras. How often do you find yourself in a position when either sky is blown out, or the ground reads (0,0,0)?
Well, while we still cannot make it "right", we can try to make it "look right". We can take several exposures, at least two, or produce different "developments" from RAW file, and then blend them together in software.
I'm not talking about HDR here. I'm talking about simple manual blending.
In a simple case the workflow would look like this:
Of course, instead of redeveloping RAW twice you can simply take separate exposures (tripod is a must).
Now, what's in the books?
Each entry should provide the following:
Fresh pictures only. Post-processing as requested. For the rest of the rules please consult this sticky.
Let's get some blending going!
One of the typical annoyances of the digital imaging is the lack of dynamic range even in the best (available) modern cameras. How often do you find yourself in a position when either sky is blown out, or the ground reads (0,0,0)?
Well, while we still cannot make it "right", we can try to make it "look right". We can take several exposures, at least two, or produce different "developments" from RAW file, and then blend them together in software.
I'm not talking about HDR here. I'm talking about simple manual blending.
In a simple case the workflow would look like this:
- Take a RAW picture exposed for the sky
- Open it in PS
- Go back to RAW, adjust exposure for the ground (ignore blown out skies)
- Open this new version in PS
- Using Move tools (or pressing Ctrl), move the "skies" into the "ground" shot (it will come as a separate layer; you can also do copy/paste routine)
- Add mask to the "skies" layer
- Activate linear gradient tool (make sure you have default colors, "D")
- Apply gradient to the mask, play with it to get what you want.
Of course, instead of redeveloping RAW twice you can simply take separate exposures (tripod is a must).
Now, what's in the books?
Each entry should provide the following:
- A frame that is exposed for the "skies"
- A frame that is exposed for the "ground"
- Your resulting mask
- Your resulting image
- (Inline) EXIF data and any additional technical info you deem necessary to share. Full EXIF link is optional.
Fresh pictures only. Post-processing as requested. For the rest of the rules please consult this sticky.
Let's get some blending going!
"May the f/stop be with you!"
0
Comments
Two layers, one for the sky, one for the dark stuff. OK
I would like to mask with the eraser.
I have done it before, as it is very easy and works just fine.
I don't know how to submit a photo of the resulting mask unless making a print screen. Is that good enought ?
And if I shoot jpg ?
OK, I do know that RAW is better, etc. etc.
The results are very similar in the final proposition of the photo.
I assume that breaketing is forbiden.
Cheers
While you may use more than 2 exposures, more often than not it's an overkill. I'd like to emphasize - we're not talking about HDR. FOr that baby you may need 5-7 frames, but this method works nicely with 2. I tried 3 several times, but each time ended not using the thirds one. Maybe for more extreme conditions....
Well, my friend, in these walls Eraser is considered "bad" (due to it destructive nature), so here's your opportunity to learn something new (and better...:-)
I give you a tip: Alt (Option) + Click
ACR4 (from CS3) work with JPEGs, too. You have less freedom adjusting exposure, though.
And since the bracketing is NOT forbidden
HTH
Thank you for the tips. I couldn't do that Option+Click trick, so I made a print screen with the mask on.
I noticed that the Gradient Tool - 1.st time using it - makes a remarkable line of transition. It may be good for pictures having linear transition from areas or - and this is the most probable - I don't know how to use it properly, in spite of having been reading for some hours now (only).
I thought that the Eraser Tool used in a mask was not destructive because I always can reverse the erased areas, changing black to white in the tool bar.
The purpose of this shot is only for you to tell me if this is the job to be done.
I shot - RAW this time - as soon as I got home measuring the light to the sky and proceeding as you pointed.
Thank you Nikolai.
The final picture, the third, has been cropped. The others have not.
After seeing this in the preview panel I think I did a lauzy job !
One for the sky, one for the trees on our right and another one for the trees on our left.
Just for the sake of comparing.
In fact, this one gave me more work and it was a little bit more time consuming.
Both side by side. The "new" one on our left.
Different crop however.
Even the best?... Uhm, I've taken pictures that look like that right straight out of my S5Pro when set to 400% DR. Not that I don't plan to play the game of doing the assignment. I'll just be pulling out the Sigma SD-14 or my Olympus 770SW to do it, because I just can't bring myself to limit the DR of my S5Pro when it can do it right in the first place.
Thank you for your entries!
I challenge you to leave your comfort zone and try gradient on mask. Trust me, you don't want to use Eraser to the rest of your life...
Sure I have, with most cameras, but not with my S5Pro. With the S5, I pretty much always shoot 400% DR whenever it's possible and in RAW. It's a camera that can under or overexpose a typical image by 4 stops and still pull a usable image out of it. When exposed properly (or even EV +1 which I often use for good color saturation and lower noise), it's really hard to blow highlights without trying to. In all honesty I get horrid problems with lens flare and difraction from the highlights before the they start blowing out on the sensor.
One of the reviews actually described the way the FujiFilm SuperCCD works sorta like the camera doing the excercise of this assignment for you: It's like loading both 100 ISO and 400 ISO film into the same camera at the same time and then merging the best results of the two shots into one HDR image.
Now you wanna talk any other digital Camera I've Owned (too many video cams to keep track of, mostly Sony, Olympus C-700 SuperZoom, Olympus Stylus 770 SW, Sony Alpha-100, Sigma SD14 and a handful of lesser P&S's I can't name by memory) then sure, I've blown highlights before.
I'll tell you what... When I find the shot for this assignment, I'll use both my SD14 and the S5Pro and when I post the assignment done with the SD-14 (it has colors as sublime as the HDR on the S5Pro) I'll also post the shot taken with the S5Pro as a comparison. There is around a 5 stop difference in the cameras' dynamic ranges.
Hmmmm...
It's thread about - Assignment #48: Heavenly Grounds
not about cameras you had !!!
Try to post some pics here
XTi, G9, 16-35/2.8L, 100-300USM, 70-200/4L, 19-35, 580EX II, CP-E3, 500/8 ...
DSC-R1, HFL-F32X ... ; AG-DVX100B and stuff ... (I like this 10 years old signature :^)
This gives me an excuse to shoot RAW and do some experimenting. I did this a little differently as I started with the sky exposure as the background layer and then added the grass. I found it a little easier to do it this was as the blown out sky is easier to select (deselect 'continguous' to get all the parts hiding in tree branches).
Here is the properly exposed sky.
Here is the grass.
Here is the mask used.
And finally the final image
EXIF data can be found here
Website: Tom Price Photography
Blog: Capturing Photons
Facebook: Tom Price Photography
Thank you for your entry!
While this is totally useful technique, the results usally have one big flaw - certain artificial halo along the tree line. The gradient-based approach I've mentioned is often free from it. In your case of very sharp contrast between the tree tops and the sky I would recommend maybe three exposures (of for the skies, one for the trees and one for the sun-lit lawn) and two gradients (one across the tree tops, and another across the tree roots). Please also note that you can apply three separate curves to your three layers, which can help with the blending and can also improve each part of the image.
HTH
Website: Tom Price Photography
Blog: Capturing Photons
Facebook: Tom Price Photography
Here is what I did:
1. I "curved" the 1.st shot to the sky
2. I did the same to the grass/people.
(I know I have exageted but I did it on purpous, on both pictures)
3. I created 2 layers, mask, played around and got this.
The mask picture is missing OK. I know.
But how is the final result ?
I can understand that this is an usefull tool.:D
Next step: Fresh start from a RAW file with a better final result. I hope.:D
I tried to apply the gradient mask but these type of pictures just don't lend themselves to that technique. The different angles from the trees don't allow you to get rid of the halo. However, I tried something else that does seem to work. Same pictures, but instead of generating a new layer with just the sky, I generated a layer with the entire sky shot. Then made a mask and with a large brush masked away most of the underexposed grass in the sky shot. Then I changed the brush to something small and significantly lowered the opacity and ink flow, essentially making an airbrush. Then on the sky layer I outlined the edges of the trees. This allows you to get the brighter grass layer through but you can control the mask more precisely at the edges and eliminates the halo.
Here is the mask
Here is the final picture
EXIF information is the same as the previous post.
Website: Tom Price Photography
Blog: Capturing Photons
Facebook: Tom Price Photography
Without the mask it's very hard to figure out what it was (in this case, that is), hence we're missing almost entire point of the exercise...
Sorry for being insistent, but I would really like to see the results based upon the gradient mask
I'll try to work something out of your shots later and see if it's feasible...
Here's my take on your pics:
Mask:
Result:
I'm not saying it's perfect, in fact, it' not, but it's very easy to fix and it has been done in a matter of seconds...
HTH
When I stopped trying to select the sky before I pasted and just stick the whole picture in as a layer it works just the way you said. Too much thinking can be a bad thing somethings.
Thanks, Nik...
Website: Tom Price Photography
Blog: Capturing Photons
Facebook: Tom Price Photography
I'm afraid I'm failing to express myself clearly.
Two layers. One mask. One gradient.
That's all I'm asking for.
No selection. No Quick Mask. No eraser.
As to the getting image of the mask. There are many ways to skin a cat in PS, here's what I do:
- Have a mask ready
- Alt/Option+Click the mask icon (mask become visible as a b/w image)
- Alt/Option+A (Edit|Select All)
- Ctrl/Command+C (Edit|Copy)
- Ctrl/Command+N (File|New), hit OK
- Ctrl/Command+V (Edit|Paste)
- Ctrl/Command+S (File|Save)
6-7 clicks... It's really way faster to do than to type it up...You're welcome! Glad you liked it! Yeah, I agree, often the simplest way works much better.
It's not your fault Nikolai. It's mine.
Sky:
Very nice, thank you!
I would make the ground just a bit darker to keep the impression of the low light, but other than that it's exactly what I've asked for:-)