Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos HDR Creation 
Thread started 08 Jul 2017 (Saturday) 14:53
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Old Barn

 
lijoec
Senior Member
Avatar
584 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 1416
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Long Island
     
Jul 08, 2017 14:53 |  #1

this was a fast creation, I took a single image made three copies adjusting the exposure, Then merged them in LR. I was getting better detail in the clouds and contrast this way. any comments and help are welcomed. I'm very green in this post work but thanks for looking.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Cheers,
Joe
"Image Editing OK"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Stiga
Goldmember
Avatar
3,236 posts
Gallery: 708 photos
Likes: 1238
Joined Dec 2015
Location: Nr Perth, Scotland
     
Jul 09, 2017 05:51 |  #2

lijoec wrote in post #18397257 (external link)
this was a fast creation, I took a single image made three copies adjusting the exposure, Then merged them in LR. I was getting better detail in the clouds and contrast this way. any comments and help are welcomed. I'm very green in this post work but thanks for looking.
thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by lijoec in
./showthread.php?p=183​97257&i=i7996993
forum: HDR Creation

As I understand it, there is no advantage in generating 3 images from a single RAW before processing. The whole dynamic range is in the RAW file and there 3 secondary images have nothing extra, you mightas well process the single RAW. I don't know if you can do this in Lightroom but you certainly can in SNS-HDR, easyHDR or Photomatix.


Martin
I'm not a gear guy but I have a tons of software :-)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lijoec
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
584 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 1416
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Long Island
     
Jul 16, 2017 07:09 |  #3

Stiga wrote in post #18397679 (external link)
As I understand it, there is no advantage in generating 3 images from a single RAW before processing. The whole dynamic range is in the RAW file and there 3 secondary images have nothing extra, you mightas well process the single RAW. I don't know if you can do this in Lightroom but you certainly can in SNS-HDR, easyHDR or Photomatix.

I'll have to look into those softwares. I was surprised the difference I was getting , like you said all of the IQ is there, I just couldn't get it out. It very well could be my knowledge and experience (or should I say lack of) in post work. In the past I was just doing sports and candids where it was just about timing, framing and exposure.

thanks for your help,
Joe


Cheers,
Joe
"Image Editing OK"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
8,148 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 1551
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
Post edited 9 months ago by Left Handed Brisket.
     
Jul 16, 2017 07:21 |  #4

there is definitely a benefit to merging multiple edits of one image. Not every image will benefit from doing so, but some can, hard to say if this is one of those images, typically an overcast day doesn't have that much DR and if it does, the results come out looking fake.

as a practice exercise I guess your photo is okay. The clouds are very dark in spots yet the foreground does not look like it is about to storm. This is the main problem people have with HDR, again, fake

many years ago i was given the advice to take an edit way too far and then bring it back to reality. Doing so helped me learn to recognize that it is often subtle changes that look the best. It is one thing to try to recover a bit of blown out detail, it is something all together different to bring out detail that shouldn't be there.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lijoec
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
584 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 1416
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Long Island
     
Jul 16, 2017 07:36 |  #5

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18403182 (external link)
there is definitely a benefit to merging multiple edits of one image. Not every image will benefit from doing so, but some can, hard to say if this is one of those images, typically an overcast day doesn't have that much DR and if it does, the results come out looking fake.

as a practice exercise I guess your photo is okay. The clouds are very dark in spots yet the foreground does not look like it is about to storm. This is the main problem people have with HDR, again, fake

many years ago i was given the advice to take an edit way too far and then bring it back to reality. Doing so helped me learn to recognize that it is often subtle changes that look the best. It is one thing to try to recover a bit of blown out detail, it is something all together different to bring out detail that shouldn't be there.

Thank you, now that you mentioned that , I know see what your saying.

BTW here is the original,

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4302/35117191254_90622e56f2_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/VvbM​uJ  (external link) IMG_0179 - b (external link) by Joseph Colozzo (external link), on Flickr

Cheers,
Joe
"Image Editing OK"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lijoec
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
584 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 1416
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Long Island
     
Jul 16, 2017 07:47 |  #6

and here is the single exposure adjusted.

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4325/35147848213_4d59ecc179_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/VxTU​JZ  (external link) IMG_0179 (external link) by Joseph Colozzo (external link), on Flickr

Cheers,
Joe
"Image Editing OK"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
8,148 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 1551
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
Post edited 9 months ago by Left Handed Brisket.
     
Jul 16, 2017 09:47 |  #7

as I suspected, the dynamic range here is not that great, except maybe in the deepest shadows, but since those aren't the subject, it is often better to leave them with little detail. Same could be said for the sky, which is why bringing it out too much is distracting.

so here I have the image in photoshop and have placed two color samples on the image. One is on the barn, hard to see at the bottom right of the info palette and the other is in the sky. The info palette shows the color under each labeled as #1 and #2. The numbers by each R, G, and B are before / after - in the first image there has been no adjustment so they are the same.

Once I opened the Curves dialog box (on the right of the screen cap) I control clicked (mac) on both color samples to set the little dots on the diagonal line. Doing this allows me to adjust each "color" somewhat independently. This is vastly different than just boosting exposure which would end up with blown highlights as in your post #6

Again the first pic shows no changes.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


the second pic shows how i moved the #1 point upward to lighten the colors in that range. Note the difference in the before/after reporting of the color samples in the Info palette.

this image shows a smaller "after" screen grab pasted over top of the original "before" image so you can see that the barn is much lighter but the sky has not changed. So the conclusion you should draw, if you haven't already :) is that global corrections are good to get in the right neighborhood, but using more specific controls allows you to move certain values and colors around generally more naturally than going with a HDR look.

PS. if i had wanted to darken the sky a bit, i could have moved that other point on the diagonal line down or even gone to the point in the upper most right hand side to darken even the brightest highlights.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,460 views & 3 likes for this thread
Old Barn
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos HDR Creation 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.0forum software
version 2.0 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Cliodiver
595 guests, 291 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.