Still Struggling with Mountain Scenes

[Brownbear]

Thank you Terri. That you like the composition is helpful to hear because it is something that I am working on improving.

Christina, I can't add anything to the discussion on the bracketing issues, but just wanted to say that I really like the composition.

[Brownbear]

Just to finish up this thread so others can learn from my learning experience...


- I've tried several variations of post processing that image (which I have come to loathe) including Mikes post processing suggestions, which did help, but not enough... I also managed a better edit using LR Enfuse by using the exposures exactly as photographed but that didn't work out either.

- I believe I did a better job processing the image by keeping the mountains darker as they were in the scene at hand... However, this is impossible and the quality is insufficient, so I'm trashing the image and I might add that I'm delighted to send it to the trash bin!

- The image was photographed prior to sunrise 5:32am... The sky was a beautiful dark pink... The mountains were also beautiful... When I process the two exposures I end up with unnaturally green (as in daylight green) and a dark pink sky... The two colours just don't go together (in the combined exposures) to create the beautiful scene I saw where the colours went together beautifully.

3. The haze on the middle mountains just destroys the image.

Here is my best try... Better but it still doesn't work




Frank most graciously tried to help me with post processing the image but encountered the same insurmountable problems.. He has advised me that the next time I try to photograph the scene to try 5 exposures, so I will try this next time around, which will likely be a few months from now...


In other words I need to learn about bracketing appropriately for the scene at hand.

I also intend to study how the light falls to minimize the haze, purchase some polarizers to help with the haze and filters to help with the exposure of the sky... At this moment in time learning to use filters sounds far simpler and quicker than bracketing and combining the shots in post processing.

Following are a couple of more scenes from that morning that seem to work better, still not where I want them to be, but a little better.

1.

Prior to sunrise before the sky was pink... 5:32am... Required just one exposure... (whereas the image first posted 5:37am used 2 exposures (+ and -1)




#2 (6:07 am)

The light was beautiful on the mountain peaks but when I combined the two exposures I lost the natural beauty of the light, and the haze is evident. The middle mountains should be lighter but again lifting the exposure on the hazy bits of the mountains just doesn't look good because of the haze.



All that said, I do think that I am learning to capture a nicer composition of the scene, just not the natural beauty of the light.

Thank you to everyone, as always for your help and feedback. And an especially BIG thank you to Frank for trying!

[Mike Buckley]

I do think that I am learning to capture a nicer composition of the scene

No question about that!

[FrankMi]

When Christina offered to share her RAW images I thought that the post-processing would be fairly standard and relatively easy to accomplish. However, I quickly realized the issues she was facing were anything but standard or easy.

It took me three attempts to get it even close to reasonable and along the way, I learned that I had some misconceptions about the shooting environment that threw me off. I didn't initially realize that this was captured before sunrise as it looked like a flatly lit overcast day so my first attempts were way off base. The final clues came from her post above as she articulately described the difference between what she saw and how the image turned out.

What I ended up with is still a long way from what she saw with her eyes that morning but I now have a better idea as to why that is so, what needs to be changed next time she has a chance to photograph this scene, and what could be done to compensate for what was available in the RAW image. From what I've learned, it is clear to me the she has some pretty impressive post processing skills and a determination that will help her to continuously improve.

When I looked closely at the images I noticed several things that would make these images difficult to process.

The lighting is very flat. This come from not having any direct lighting available to create definition, particularly in the shadows. Without the shadows, the image lacks contrast. As there are no clouds that can be seen, the sky lacks definition.

Because of the flat lighting, the haze is more difficult to minimize without losing the detail.

The exposure bracketing that was done was at -1EV, 0EV, and +1EV. Owing to the pre-dawn flat lighting, a -2EV or more for the sky would have really helped and a +2EV for the forest would have overcome the muddy appearance that is prevalent in underexposed shadows.

For a sunrise or sunset image where the sun is below the horizon, bracketing exposures up to 4EV in 2EV increments on a tripod can really help.

For processing, I took the three images and labeled them as Over, Normal, and Under (exposed), aligned images and cropped to remove miss-aligned borders.

I took the Under image and darkened it as it was too bright to reveal the color in the sky.

Using the Under image, I masked through to the Normal image layer below it to expose all of the Normal image except for the sky to retain the color and detail in the sky and see through the rest of the mountain and lake below. I then merged the layers.

Using the same mask in the newly merged layer to the Normal layer below, I added a Brightness/Contrast Adjustment layer on the Normal layer and set it for -20/50 and softly extend the mask down to bring in the first layer of light forest. This allowed me to control the haze without loosing too much detail in the top layer of forest. I again merged the layers.

Using the mask from the light forest in the merged layer again to the Normal layer below and softly extended the mask down to the second layer of forest, the goal being to get a more defined separation of the natural layers of forest in the image while controlling the haze. Merged the layers again.

In the final masking process I used the same mask against the merged layer to the Normal layer once more for the lowest layer of forest. What Brightness/Contrast values did I choose? The ones the worked best when I played with the settings to make the forest layer look its best in each case. For the last mask, I softly masked down to the foreground forest but I also masked up from the bottom to keep the water darker and more realistic for the lighting and the scene.

There was the typical horizon leveling, cropping, and tweaking of the image but given the layers and masking, that could be done on one layer at a time to get each layer of forest to look as it should in a pre-dawn light. Not to much color or brightness.

In the end, the best image will be done in a re-shoot, but now, thanks to what we have learned in post processing, we can get a much better in-camera capture for the next attempt.

Here's what I ended up with. Not perfect, but a bit better and a learning experience I can take with me to my next photo shoot.

[ajohnw]

i was hoping Christina would post links to the raws. I like a challenge and have no chance of taking shots like these in the UK. Very doubtful that I would get up at 5am to take theme either. If I did though I'm sure I would take a lot of exposures especially if I wasn't sure what I was doing which I probably wouldn't in a situation like this one. Memory card space is cheap and moments come and go.

John
-

[Mike Buckley]

I just have to mention that I'm humored by the title of the thread. That's because if I take it literally I would infer that there actually might be serious landscape photographers shooting mountain scenes who don't struggle with them. I know better.

[Brownbear]

Hi Frank,

Thank you for taking the time to do this, and I know that it took up a lot of your time. Your version is the best this image could be, and almost there. You nailed the natural beauty of pink sky and the uppermost mountain peaks! A a much needed inspiration for me to try this scene again, and I will later this year when sunrise is a bit later in the day.

Also truly appreciated are all the very helpful tips and insights you have shared that will stand me in good stead for the next time around. Bracketing is new to me and I never would have thought of taking more images with a wider range of exposure, but will do next time around.

I will try a replicate your version, later this week. I need a few days break from looking and thinking about this image. The post processing exercise will help prepare me for when I manage a better capture.

Thank you! If I could give you 10 helpful clicks on the helpful button, I would... On that topic I think their should be super helpful button that we can click for members who go above and beyond to share their knowledge.

When Christina offered to share her RAW images I thought that the post-processing would be fairly standard and relatively easy to accomplish. However, I quickly realized the issues she was facing were anything but standard or easy.

It took me three attempts to get it even close to reasonable and along the way, I learned that I had some misconceptions about the shooting environment that threw me off. I didn't initially realize that this was captured before sunrise as it looked like a flatly lit overcast day so my first attempts were way off base. The final clues came from her post above as she articulately described the difference between what she saw and how the image turned out.

What I ended up with is still a long way from what she saw with her eyes that morning but I now have a better idea as to why that is so, what needs to be changed next time she has a chance to photograph this scene, and what could be done to compensate for what was available in the RAW image. From what I've learned, it is clear to me the she has some pretty impressive post processing skills and a determination that will help her to continuously improve.

When I looked closely at the images I noticed several things that would make these images difficult to process.

The lighting is very flat. This come from not having any direct lighting available to create definition, particularly in the shadows. Without the shadows, the image lacks contrast. As there are no clouds that can be seen, the sky lacks definition.

Because of the flat lighting, the haze is more difficult to minimize without losing the detail.

The exposure bracketing that was done was at -1EV, 0EV, and +1EV. Owing to the pre-dawn flat lighting, a -2EV or more for the sky would have really helped and a +2EV for the forest would have overcome the muddy appearance that is prevalent in underexposed shadows.

For a sunrise or sunset image where the sun is below the horizon, bracketing exposures up to 4EV in 2EV increments on a tripod can really help.

For processing, I took the three images and labeled them as Over, Normal, and Under (exposed), aligned images and cropped to remove miss-aligned borders.

I took the Under image and darkened it as it was too bright to reveal the color in the sky.

Using the Under image, I masked through to the Normal image layer below it to expose all of the Normal image except for the sky to retain the color and detail in the sky and see through the rest of the mountain and lake below. I then merged the layers.

Using the same mask in the newly merged layer to the Normal layer below, I added a Brightness/Contrast Adjustment layer on the Normal layer and set it for -20/50 and softly extend the mask down to bring in the first layer of light forest. This allowed me to control the haze without loosing too much detail in the top layer of forest. I again merged the layers.

Using the mask from the light forest in the merged layer again to the Normal layer below and softly extended the mask down to the second layer of forest, the goal being to get a more defined separation of the natural layers of forest in the image while controlling the haze. Merged the layers again.

In the final masking process I used the same mask against the merged layer to the Normal layer once more for the lowest layer of forest. What Brightness/Contrast values did I choose? The ones the worked best when I played with the settings to make the forest layer look its best in each case. For the last mask, I softly masked down to the foreground forest but I also masked up from the bottom to keep the water darker and more realistic for the lighting and the scene.

There was the typical horizon leveling, cropping, and tweaking of the image but given the layers and masking, that could be done on one layer at a time to get each layer of forest to look as it should in a pre-dawn light. Not to much color or brightness.

In the end, the best image will be done in a re-shoot, but now, thanks to what we have learned in post processing, we can get a much better in-camera capture for the next attempt.

Here's what I ended up with. Not perfect, but a bit better and a learning experience I can take with me to my next photo shoot.

[Brownbear]

John

Here is the link for the 3 raw files (Nikon NEF files)... If you like a challenge this image should certainly suffice!

Next time around I will take more exposures.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/9f8yqmg8t...KY7FlR2dcHwZAa

Mike

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on mountain scenes, it makes me feel a little bit better. Still frustrated but better.

Note:

If anyone feels like taking on the same challenge as John, please feel welcome to do so. All I ask is that the sky is a natural pink as it appeared pre-sunrise, and that you post your results and a brief summary of your processing steps to share as a learning experience for everyone on this thread. I will keep the files in the drop box link for a week or two.

PS I used a tripod, mirror up and remote release but the images still need to be aligned.

[ajohnw]

I just have to mention that I'm humored by the title of the thread. That's because if I take it literally I would infer that there actually might be serious landscape photographers shooting mountain scenes who don't struggle with them. I know better.

It looks to be a tough one for anybody to me Mike. Widish dynamic range, probably mixed colour temperatures and it seems mist but playing with the shot some of the odder aspects of that might be down to processing. There is a strange blue cast buried in it in places.

However I get an immediate improvement when I convert the last one from aRGB to sRGB. Afraid I agree with the infamous KR on that subject. It's a good root to all sorts of problems when things are to be displayed on a PC screen. Personally when people post aRGB images I feel that they should mention it. Many will come out flatter than they should be and will also have colour shifts even with a colour managed browser if shown on an sRGB screen.

John
-

[Brownbear]

Hi John,

I wonder if you can help me with this sRGB thing... I have my camera set to the sRGB colour profile. In Lightroom I have everything set to sRGB and I can see this is retained when I export the file...

In Photoshop CC when I go to the edit menu my settings are for sRGB, and the other settings say preserve this setting... I don't know how or why my images are being converted to aRGB.

Thank you.

It looks to be a tough one for anybody to me Mike. Widish dynamic range, probably mixed colour temperatures and it seems mist but playing with the shot some of the odder aspects of that might be down to processing. There is a strange blue cast buried in it in places.

However I get an immediate improvement when I convert the last one from aRGB to sRGB. Afraid I agree with the infamous KR on that subject. It's a good root to all sorts of problems when things are to be displayed on a PC screen. Personally when people post aRGB images I feel that they should mention it. Many will come out flatter than they should be and will also have colour shifts even with a colour managed browser if shown on an sRGB screen.

John
-

[bnnrcn]

I really don't know how I missed this thread Christina, may be I haven't been online everyday recently and that's why but your thread is full of usefull information and your composition is very nice, thanks for posting

[Mike Buckley]

Christina,

I recommend that you post screenshots of all of your software settings pertaining to the color space. People who know your software well will probably be able to figure out something you have missed or have configured incorrectly.

Consider starting a new thread so others can learn from it. I'm sure you're not the only person experiencing this problem.

[Brownbear]

Binnur

It is always nice to know that others learn from my threads, too.

Mike

Great idea.. I will do just that later today.

[Manfred M]

Christina - I've been watching this thread, but have kept quite, waiting for someone to make the point I was planning to.

The issue with your captures are the lighting, and while the images are properly exposed and we can get additional details out of them, the problem is still that everything other than the snowy mountain peak are in shadow and are rather flat. While the composition itself if quite nice, you can't do much if the lighting isn't right for the image.

Learning to see the light and understanding what can (and cannot) be pulled out in post are some very important parts of photography. It's important to learn to see this way; a lot of very experienced photographers will walk away from a shot because they recognize that it won't work because the lighting is not right.

[Mike Buckley]

a lot of very experienced photographers will walk away from a shot because they recognize that it won't work because the lighting is not right.

Or at least will delete it from their computer without bothering to post-process it. The idea that we don't get at least one keeper every time we venture out is difficult for a lot of people to accept.

[Digital]

Christina, I think Manfred said it quite well.
Professional photographers will go back to the same spot repeatedly until they get the proper light.


Bruce

[Brownbear]

Hi Manfred,

Thank you for taking the time to drop in and advise.

I always visit this place at sunrise or sunset with the intent to capture beautiful light but it's not working.

At sunrise the light comes from behind the mountains which if I understand correctly helps me create a more 3D image... Later in the morning (a time I have yet to visit) the shadows on the mountains will likely be too harsh... I only visit the day after a heavy rainfall to minimize haze but these mountains are on the North Shore of Vancouver and far enough away from the city that the haze should be minimal, yet it's still there.

At sunset the light is front light which I think also creates flat lighting, especially on those two snow capped peaks... Perhaps a better strategy might be to visit at sunset and focus on just one part of the scene which is partially lit from the side?

On this morning I was happy to capture the pink sky (not always seen) but I didn't recognize the flat lighting in the rest of the scene, likely because I was so enthralled by the pink sky that I didn't pay enough attention to the other lighting ...

I will keep working on seeing the right light, and just learned what can and cannot be pulled out in post. Walking away is something that I also have to learn to do, more often than not

Christina - I've been watching this thread, but have kept quite, waiting for someone to make the point I was planning to.

The issue with your captures are the lighting, and while the images are properly exposed and we can get additional details out of them, the problem is still that everything other than the snowy mountain peak are in shadow and are rather flat. While the composition itself if quite nice, you can't do much if the lighting isn't right for the image.

Learning to see the light and understanding what can (and cannot) be pulled out in post are some very important parts of photography. It's important to learn to see this way; a lot of very experienced photographers will walk away from a shot because they recognize that it won't work because the lighting is not right.

[Brownbear]

Mike... I'm working on the delete part and truly getting better at it... This one was hard for me to delete because of the beautiful pink sky... At the time of photographing the scene I thought for sure that I might have managed a few decent shots, alas...

Bruce... Thank you for sharing.. I've visited this scene six to eight times to try and learn and find the best light but I'm learning that it is not easy to find and I will keep visiting.

[ajohnw]

Hi John,

I wonder if you can help me with this sRGB thing... I have my camera set to the sRGB colour profile. In Lightroom I have everything set to sRGB and I can see this is retained when I export the file...

In Photoshop CC when I go to the edit menu my settings are for sRGB, and the other settings say preserve this setting... I don't know how or why my images are being converted to aRGB.

Thank you.

I don't use anything from Adobe so not really however and this confused me - the correct work space for one package I use is prophoto and then sRGB is set separately as a file output profile. Sounds strange but makes some sense. It's displaying via my monitor sRGB profile so I adjust appearance based on that but as the data is in prophoto I can't loose any of it or get posterisation effects as I adjust. Actually all of my software does the same thing and prophoto in reality is 32bit floating point / channel which is something of an overkill. You might find Adobe offer the same setting for workspace as they should be able to handle medium format deep colour which is 3x16bit.

The aRGB message came up when I loaded the image with the GIMP. It normally states sRGB when they are. It does this because it converts to it's own internal RGB space and formats and offers to keep the profile or discard it.

John
-

[Brownbear]

Thank you John. Appreciated.

I just posted the question with screen shots as suggested by Mike. Hopefully I will be able to figure this out.

I don't use anything from Adobe so not really however and this confused me - the correct work space for one package I use is prophoto and then sRGB is set separately as a file output profile. Sounds strange but makes some sense. It's displaying via my monitor sRGB profile so I adjust appearance based on that but as the data is in prophoto I can't loose any of it or get posterisation effects as I adjust. Actually all of my software does the same thing and prophoto in reality is 32bit floating point / channel which is something of an overkill. You might find Adobe offer the same setting for workspace as they should be able to handle medium format deep colour which is 3x16bit.

The aRGB message came up when I loaded the image with the GIMP. It normally states sRGB when they are. It does this because it converts to it's own internal RGB space and formats and offers to keep the profile or discard it.

John
-