I Finally Caught a 'Cloud' Break

[ShaneS]

For anyone who has followed my early morning adventures you will know that I have been struggling to find some 'good clouds' to compliment my compositions. Well I caught a break literally a figuratively with this image



This shot was actually amongst the images that I took on my Early Morning Wake Up Call 2 outing but it took me a while to 'see' the crop and figure out the PP. I was concentrating on my shot of the lava rock and sand when I turned my head to see the sun pop over the horizon and the resulting rays that you see here. A quick turn of the camera revealed another photographer in my line of sight so I had to adjust.

I had good clouds, a composition that at the time I didn't think was ideal and a struggle balancing the light and dark in PP... it took me a while to figure out if I liked it or not as it wasn't the shot I was after on the outing. For me, letting the image rest for a bit really helped and I will be curious to read what you think of it...

Any and all C&C welcome.

[Shadowman]

You definitely did catch a break, looks like a firestorm in the sky. Nicely done.

[Stagecoach]

Congratulations Shane, the sky gods were on your side.

I like the image, lots of interest and some colour

Out of curiosity I put it into the latest version of Elements ACR I'm trialling to see what the new (to me) highlights, shadows and whites controls would do that replace the old 'recovery' option, promising.

Grahame

[ShaneS]

Thanks Grahame and John. I tried to keep the PP restrained but did add a bit of pop to the sky in PP.

Do I detect a wee bit of friendly sarcasm in your 'some color' comment Grahame? The skies in my other images were just like those in the very right just above the horizon in this shot so there wasn't a lot of color to be had...it wasn't just my poor PP skills

My version of ACR doesn't have those options and that is very promising Unfortunately, I don't think that I will be getting any updates to my version of ACR unless I sign on to Adobe's monthly program.

[Mike Buckley]

Really nice, Shane! I wonder if more detail is needed in the foreground rock formation. My hunch is that it's needed when displaying it at this small size but perhaps not when displaying it at a larger size.

[ShaneS]

Thanks Mike...I did lift the shadows a bit in the foreground but I was wary of going too far. I do see a lot more detail in the larger version but to really know I would probably need to print it.

[deetheturk]

Very nice Shane

[Rebel]

The sky is great but the foreground is too dark for me.

[ShaneS]

Thank you David and Mike. Both Mikes have made reference to the foreground being to dark and while I can lighten it more it begs a question.

Does the desire for more detail and 'brightness' in the foreground come from a place of technical perfection or a place of a desire to correctly portray or enhance reality?

Yes, technically I can create a brighter more detailed foreground but there is a line that is crossed where the foreground then doesn't make sense with the sky? In this case don't we expect the foreground to be dark? There are clouds blocking the bottom of the sun, hence the rays are radiating up and to the sides at an angle, and the outcropping of lava rock is raised and dark. For me both of these issues made me hesitant to add too much detail and/or brightness to that part of the image.

I would like to hear your thoughts...

[bnnrcn]

Congratulations Shane, great image I wonder about the answer to your question about brightening the FG lava formations too.

[Stagecoach]

Both Mikes have made reference to the foreground being to dark and while I can lighten it more it begs a question.

Does the desire for more detail and 'brightness' in the foreground come from a place of technical perfection or a place of a desire to correctly portray or enhance reality?

Hi Shane,

Something I have also considered so here's my take on it;

Mike makes a very valid point in that your small image posted is likely to appear to have a 'darker' (read less detailed) foreground than the same image viewed at a larger size. This suggests that your final edit and decision should be made with the image in your PP at the same size as it will appear on CiC. We then of course get into the dodgy area of any changes that are made due to the transfer of the image, screen calibrations etc etc.

As for the crucial part of your question regarding the 'desire' for a certain 'look' of the foreground there are some simple answers in my opinion as follow;

a) There will be those that view the image and suggest brightening the foreground (I use the simple term) because 'technically' a modern DSLR should be able to be used to make this possible.

b) There will be those that view the image and suggest brightening the foreground (I use the simple term) because it enhances the image in their opinion.

c) There will be those that view the image and suggest brightening the foreground (I use the simple term) because they do not understand what 'you' are trying to portray in your image.

d) There will be those that view the image and suggest brightening the foreground (I use the simple term) although they have not witnessed that specific scene at that time of day and appreciated not only the light but the shadows.

So the simple answer is that there is no simple answer

Personally, I like to keep the foreground of these but do not want to see large areas of black.

Grahame

[Mike Buckley]

My thinking is that Grahame did a better job of answering your question than you did of asking it. There's actually only a hint of seriousness in that comment, but there is that hint. To remind everyone of the question...

Does the desire for more detail and 'brightness' in the foreground come from a place of technical perfection or a place of a desire to correctly portray or enhance reality?

The desire comes from neither place for me. It comes from Grahame's Option B: "because it enhances the image in [my] opinion."

I also need to clarify that I didn't suggest that the foreground should be brightened. Instead, I suggested that it might benefit from increased display of detail. That might happen partially because of brightening but not necessarily so; it could happen also by using Local Contrast Enhancement, altering the color balance of the brighter tones in that area, and/or brightening parts of the image some more. It doesn't matter how you increase the detail so long as once you do it you like it. Otherwise, leave it as is.

[Stagecoach]

Mike,

For clarity my response to Shane's 'question' was not meant to be referring to any comment made by specific individuals on this thread but an example of reasons that 'desires' will vary.

Agree with 'brightening' aspect of which I used in a simple term and the way I have personally been tackling this is to try and push the contrast and detail to try and make it more noticeable rather than simply increasing brightness overall which I have found tends to produce 'flat' looking rocks.

Grahame

[Mike Buckley]

Understood, Grahame. Your thinking about why preferences vary are spot on in my opinion and I never considered the possibility that you were thinking of specific individuals.

[ShaneS]

Both of you gentlemen have hit on what must be a weakness of mine in PP. The only two ways that I know to bring out more detail in a dark area is to lift the shadows (make them brighter) or the add structure via a NIK plugin which I believe is adding micro contrast but feel free to correct me on the last part.

So now it's lesson time...what are my other options in Photoshop or NIK to do this?

Mike mentioned "Local Contrast Enhancement, altering the color balance of the brighter tones in that area, and/or brightening parts of the image some more" and Grahame referred to adding contrast and detail. LCE I understand but would be interested to learn what numbers might be appropriate in percentages and pixels.

Also, how would the color balance impact detail?

[Mike Buckley]

Sorry that I can't be helpful with specific values of Local Contrast Enhancement that I use, but that's because the software that I use incorporates different sharpening values from the norm. Look up any traditional LCE values as a point of departure, remembering that you can adjust any of them a bit and/or change the opacity.

As for color balance, if you select the brightest tones of the foreground and change the color balance to the warm side, those highlights will stand out more from the adjacent dark tones of the rock formation because they would be a slightly different color balance and because they would complement the warmth of the sky.

You're correct that the Structure sliders in Nik products affect micro contrast. You can get similar effects in other software using the High Pass filter configured to a high radius, using the Blending mode, and setting it to a relatively low opacity. The big difference is that the Nik setting allows you to increase or decrease the effect whereas using a High Pass filter only allows you to increase it.

I wish Nik would call the Structure sliders Texture sliders. That's because I think most of us can relate to what adding texture does whereas adding structure doesn't mean much to most of us, at least not to me.

[ShaneS]

Mike...I realized that despite my thinking about and planning to test out your suggestions that a hectic weekend got in the way of my saying thank you for the additional information. Please accept my apology.

Once implemented and if the changes are significant enough I will be sure to post a new edit so others may learn from this as well.