Desert Canyon Feedback Requested

[wrench]

Hi everyone. It's been awhile since I've posted. I've recently had another trip to Moab and wanted to get some feedback on a picture I've been working on. It's an HDR image comprised of three images processed in Digital Photo Professional.

I have mixed feelings on HDR images. Sometimes they just don't look right, but I hate having to choose between the sky or the foreground. I think this one turned out better than some others I've done in the past, but still doesn't quite look natural to me.

Your feedback is greatly appreciated!

[IMG]Delores River Overlook, Utah by Big00Ern, on Flickr[/IMG]

[Signguy Gary]

I don't use DPP but I use Lightroom. In Lightroom you can use a linear mail to apply the effect HDR in this case to only the sky. I'd Toya something you can try with DPP? The sky is the first thing that jumped out to me that it didn't look HDR to me.

[Manfred M]

I've moved your post to the Nature & Architecture forum. This is where people will comment on your work.

[Manfred M]

Hi everyone. It's been awhile since I've posted. I've recently had another trip to Moab and wanted to get some feedback on a picture I've been working on. It's an HDR image comprised of three images processed in Digital Photo Professional.

I have mixed feelings on HDR images. Sometimes they just don't look right, but I hate having to choose between the sky or the foreground. I think this one turned out better than some others I've done in the past, but still doesn't quite look natural to me.

Your feedback is greatly appreciated!

My first question would be why you chose to use an HDR technique on this image? Normally one uses the technique in order to compensate for an image exceeding the camera's ability to capture the full dynamic range, but that does not seem to be the case here.

Another effect of HDR is that the images end up being rather flat and have low contrast; that is certainly the case here. I don't know DPP at all, so can't give specific suggestions, but increasing the overall image contrast would probably help here.

[Stagecoach]

Ernie,

I have to admit it does not look quite natural to me either and is rather flat. Looking at the sky it appears quite cloudy and I wonder why it was necessary to merge three images? Could the DR not be captured in one image?

It would be interesting to see one of the original un-merged shots, the one with the closest exposure.

[wrench]

Thank's for moving the post to the right forum.

[Shadowman]

It does look flat but can be further processed to bring out more detail.

[Manfred M]

Added a bit of contrast (curves) and desaturated the image slightly. Still not to my taste.

[wrench]

My first question would be why you chose to use an HDR technique on this image? Normally one uses the technique in order to compensate for an image exceeding the camera's ability to capture the full dynamic range, but that does not seem to be the case here.

Another effect of HDR is that the images end up being rather flat and have low contrast; that is certainly the case here. I don't know DPP at all, so can't give specific suggestions, but increasing the overall image contrast would probably help here.

I had been shooting all day and was having trouble with the sky being blown out. My shots were either missing the beautiful detail in the clouds or the foreground was under exposed. So when I got to this spot, I guess I just decided to shoot HDR and went on auto pilot from there. I got about 10 shots before the rain got to me and this one turned out best.

After looking at the middle image again a few minutes ago, I must admit that HDR was probably not required in this image.

[wrench]

Here is the middle of the three images with the shot settings:

[IMG]IMG_5153 middle by Big00Ern, on Flickr[/IMG]

And here is the same image that I edited in DPP to bring in some contrast and color:

IMG_5153 middle corrected by Big00Ern, on Flickr

I think the last image looks the best. Clearly this scene didn't warrant HDR processing. I did lose a little contrast in the dark clouds, but overall the image looks better.

[Shadowman]

Here is the middle of the three images with the shot settings:

[IMG]IMG_5153 middle by Big00Ern, on Flickr[/IMG]

And here is the same image that I edited in DPP to bring in some contrast and color:

IMG_5153 middle corrected by Big00Ern, on Flickr

I think the last image looks the best. Clearly this scene didn't warrant HDR processing. I did lose a little contrast in the dark clouds, but overall the image looks better.

Looks much better.

[Polar01]

Ernie, shooting in these location and be very trying, I have done the same images because of the nature of the area images are very often flat in appearance. This is where the use of a soft edge GND filter can come in handy a two or three stop filter instead of dropping down from the top instead coming up from the bottom would have in this case darken down the fore ground and allowed you to shoot at a slower speed. I maybe of some thought into purchasing a set as they can help greatly in conditions like this.

Cheers: Allan

[csa mt]

I hope you don't mind my playing with your image in FastStone. Here's the result, plus cropping some of the sky out.

[wrench]

I hope you don't mind my playing with your image in FastStone. Here's the result, plus cropping some of the sky out.

Not at all! The crop does look better. Did you also increase the contrast or saturation?

[Stagecoach]

Thanks for posting the original Ernie, and to me it confirms one of the exposures was good.

Again, I hope you don't mind but I could not resist using this image to practice with new to me PS CC using some standard processes I use for landscape that suffer similar concerns, haze and flatness. The below was achieved using Soft Light and Multiply blend layers for the global scene and Highlights/Shadows specifically for the sky, all by gradients.



Grahame

[wrench]

Just to give you an idea of what I was dealing with earlier in the day, check out the image below. The sky is very bright and blown out in the middle. I wish the foreground had a bit more exposure.

[IMG]IMG_5127 by Big00Ern, on Flickr[/IMG]

[wrench]

Ernie, shooting in these location and be very trying, I have done the same images because of the nature of the area images are very often flat in appearance. This is where the use of a soft edge GND filter can come in handy a two or three stop filter instead of dropping down from the top instead coming up from the bottom would have in this case darken down the fore ground and allowed you to shoot at a slower speed. I maybe of some thought into purchasing a set as they can help greatly in conditions like this.

Cheers: Allan

Thanks for the input! I've never used filters before. Definitely something I should learn to use.

[Stagecoach]

Ernie, looking at the image post 16 the sky is not blown out and again a good exposure.

Not sure what PP software you use but it would be a straightforward procedure to increase the exposure in the foreground area only.

[wrench]

Thanks for posting the original Ernie, and to me it confirms one of the exposures was good.

Again, I hope you don't mind but I could not resist using this image to practice with new to me PS CC using some standard processes I use for landscape that suffer similar concerns, haze and flatness. The below was achieved using Soft Light and Multiply blend layers for the global scene and Highlights/Shadows specifically for the sky, all by gradients.



Grahame

What a difference!That is a huge improvement! This was done with photoshop?

[Stagecoach]

What a difference!That is a huge improvement! This was done with photoshop?

Yes, I did that with photoshop but it could also be done just as easily with just about any other basic software package such as Elements, GIMP etc.