Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
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 RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 16 Sep 2013 (Monday) 03:18
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

How is this done?

 
GunnarOlafsson
Junior Member
Avatar
20 posts
Joined Jul 2013
Location: London, England
     
Sep 16, 2013 03:18 |  #1

Hi,

I have been seeing a few photos lately were the photographer says he uses one exposure for the background and a different one for the foreground.

I assume he has a tripod and takes two photos. Let's say 20sec and another photo at 1sec.

How do they separate and splice together these two photos so perfectly. Is is time intensive manual work in Photoshop or can you autmate this in Photoshop. Any tutorials out there?

Look at this sample for instance:
http://500px.com/photo​/46197624 (external link)

Many thanks


Gunnar Olafsson
Canon 60D, EFS 17-55mm f/2.8, EF 50mm f/1.8, Helios 44M-4 f/2, EF 85mm f/1,8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
nittaya
Member
122 posts
Joined Jul 2013
Location: dubai
     
Sep 16, 2013 03:34 |  #2

this is called digital blending. i also do it. it needs tripod. how difficult it is depends
how you select a scene . some scenes are very easy and straight forward when it
comes to digital blending some are very difficult. it is done manually in photoshop
working in layers.taking highlights from one shot and shadows from other.
The picture you are refering to is considered easy one.

here are some tutorials http://www.luminous-landscape.com …ls/digital-blending.shtml (external link)


other way is to use hdr.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GunnarOlafsson
THREAD ­ STARTER
Junior Member
Avatar
20 posts
Joined Jul 2013
Location: London, England
     
Sep 16, 2013 03:39 |  #3

OK, I think I get the idea now.

When you explain it as highlights vs. shadows.

Many thanks Nittaya!


Gunnar Olafsson
Canon 60D, EFS 17-55mm f/2.8, EF 50mm f/1.8, Helios 44M-4 f/2, EF 85mm f/1,8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
armis
Senior Member
899 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 19
Joined Jan 2012
     
Sep 16, 2013 04:23 |  #4

It's a nice shot but here the blending was probably easy to do. The settings aimed to blur the sky but not the flowers (which would have been moving in the wind), so the resulting exposures would have been similar except for DoF (but aperture was probably set so that it didn't cause any visible differences in DoF), noise (due to different ISO settings) and motion blur (but the mountains look just the same at 1s or at 20s, so for most of the transition it's a complete non-issue). Blending becomes complicated when exposures are different and you want to blend bright with dark, for instance; this one must have taken all of 2 minutes to blend.

Basically, it's like blending two shots: one at f/4, 10s, ISO 100, the other at f/8, 5s, ISO 800. You get the same overall "brightness" but the DoF, noise and blur are different. It's all about selecting the settings that make the difference as seamless as possible in your situation; then the blending is just a technicality.


Fuji X-E2, 18-55 and 55-200 zooms, Samyang 12
www.wtbphoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Picture ­ North ­ Carolina
Gaaaaa! DOH!! Oops!
9,234 posts
Likes: 202
Joined Apr 2006
Location: North Carolina
     
Sep 16, 2013 06:33 |  #5

Sorry, but I do not believe the photographer was truly revealing. Looking at the picture as a whole and the elements in it, I do not believe this was a simple two-exposure blend. This is a composite.


Website (external link) |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
armis
Senior Member
899 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 19
Joined Jan 2012
     
Sep 16, 2013 06:50 |  #6

Picture North Carolina wrote in post #16300258 (external link)
Sorry, but I do not believe the photographer was truly revealing. Looking at the picture as a whole and the elements in it, I do not believe this was a simple two-exposure blend. This is a composite.

Of what?

edit: just to be clear, this isn't a belligerent or challenging question, just curiosity.


Fuji X-E2, 18-55 and 55-200 zooms, Samyang 12
www.wtbphoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PhotosGuy
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
75,941 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 2576
Joined Feb 2004
Location: Middle of Michigan
     
Sep 16, 2013 06:50 |  #7

In this part of the tut...

The Painted Mask

This is the most labour intensive of the manual methods.
Use Layer / Add Layer Mask / Hide All. Now select the Paintbrush Tool and choose a fairly large brush. Start painting over the light part of the image. You are removing the overexposed layer and revealing the darker image underneath. Don't worry about overdoing it because once the light layer is removed the process stops. Be careful not to get too close to the dark area with the large brush. Also, make sure that you don't miss any areas that you want to include.
Change to a smaller brush and increase the magnification. Very carefully erase the light layer along the edge of where the dark area meets it. If you make a mistake, use the History Palette to go back.
The only drawback with this method is that it requires sometimes finiky painting, and this can become difficult if the dark and light areas aren't large and easily paintable. The advantage is that it gives you very precise manual control of what gets blended and what doesn't.

He left out that you need to paint with a white brush. Here's some more links: Three pages on Layer Masks (external link)
&
Adjustment layer basics (external link)


FrankC - 20D, RAW, Manual everything...
Classic Carz, Racing, Air Show, Flowers.
Find the light... A few Car Lighting Tips, and MOVE YOUR FEET!
Have you thought about making your own book? // Need an exposure crutch?
New Image Size Limits: Image must not exceed 1600 pixels on any side.

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

891 views & 0 likes for this thread
How is this done?
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
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?
Register to forums
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 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is shuadchaun
990 guests, 309 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

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.