Effect of fixing badly underexposed shot in LR
Jun 25, 2017 10:56:50 #
GregWCIL wrote:
I'm not an expert but it probably depends on your camera. I know I have read on my D500 that recovering underexposed shots gives similar results to shooting at a higher ISO. Your mileage may vary. Either way, you tend to lose some contrast and of course gain noise in the finished product.
That's a very nice photo. Perhaps the frog was that bright, but he almost looks over-exposed now. You might try adjusting your "whites" slider down a bit or the "highlights" slider.
That's a very nice photo. Perhaps the frog was that bright, but he almost looks over-exposed now. You might try adjusting your "whites" slider down a bit or the "highlights" slider.
Since someone else pointed it out first, I think so too.
Jun 25, 2017 11:34:40 #
Shadows-Highlights applied with a slight edge darkening vignette.
lamiaceae wrote:
Since someone else pointed it out first, I think so too.
Jun 25, 2017 13:42:43 #
amfoto1
Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
Fotoartist wrote:
Shadows-Highlights applied with a slight edge darkening vignette.
This now looks slightly flat and lifeless. OP's adjustments looked better to me, on my calibrated, graphics quality monitor.
Jun 25, 2017 14:09:22 #
Add contrast then. And while your at it you should take out those distracting out of focus elements.
amfoto1 wrote:
This now looks slightly flat and lifeless. OP's adjustments looked better to me, on my calibrated, graphics quality monitor.
Jun 25, 2017 15:19:18 #
Stats153 wrote:
Thanks. It's downloadable now.
I don't see visible noise. You must have shot in RAW?
Jun 25, 2017 16:19:09 #
MtnMan wrote:
I don't see visible noise. You must have shot in RAW?
Yep. Luminance smoothed a bit in LR
Jun 25, 2017 17:18:25 #
Jun 25, 2017 17:56:18 #
Jun 25, 2017 19:02:28 #
Stats153 wrote:
I was out shooting some sunset shots the other nig... (show quote)
Slight to moderate underexposure, especially with your camera, is almost always preferable to overexposure. I think you might have gone too far to correct the image, so it has a washed out appearance. I took the liberty to play around with it, added some contrast, local color saturation (on the log), made the frog darker and added some microcontrast, masked the log and frog separately from the background, and gave the background a darker, slightly less saturated look , as well as removed detail so it is less sharp, to bring the frog and log into prominence, and spent a few minutes taking out that annoying out of focus blade of grass. This would not be a final edit - there are other things like flaws on the blades of grass that I would take out, but it shows what can be done, and how I would have interpreted the scene.
Jun 25, 2017 19:16:02 #
Jun 25, 2017 19:21:07 #
Stats153 wrote:
I was out shooting some sunset shots the other nig... (show quote)
If that's your only mistake I would say you are ahead of the game.
Jun 25, 2017 19:30:08 #
Jun 25, 2017 20:10:28 #
sirlensalot
Loc: Arizona
I would not worry about underexposing using LR. It does a good job of recovering details.
Jun 25, 2017 20:43:21 #
That's how it's done on Madison Ave.
tinplater wrote:
Wow, a photograph by committee.
Jun 25, 2017 21:15:42 #
tinplater wrote:
Wow, a photograph by committee.
I take it you've never worked with a Creative Director for an Advertising company or Corporate Graphics department . . .
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.