Glen Affric landscape: Here's a bit of practice for anybody wanting to flex their landscape editing muscles (DNG below the JPG). -...

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Here's a bit of practice for anybody wanting to flex their landscape editing muscles (DNG below the JPG).

-

JPG.

(Download)

Link to DNG.
Attached file:
(Download)

photophile Loc: Lakewood, Ohio, USA

Here is my pp version:

R.G. Loc: Scotland

photophile wrote:

Here is my pp version:

Wow - that was quick!

. There are some nice, rich colours there, Karin.

photophile Loc: Lakewood, Ohio, USA

R.G. wrote:

Wow - that was quick!

. There are some nice, rich colours there, Karin.

Thanks R.G.

AlMac Loc: Newcastle Upon Tyne - UK

R.G. wrote:

Here's a bit of practice for anybody wanting to flex their landscape editing muscles (DNG below the JPG).

-

Here's my go R.G. All in Lightroom.

With the DNG file. Used my usual start with highlights and shadows. Linear grad filter to darken the sky then used the brush tool to make local adjustments, mainly sharpening and contrast on the mountain.

Looking at it on this site I think I've gone overboard with the greenery in the foreground on the right. My eyes seem drawn towards it. It looked ok on my screen in L/R but it stands out more on here.

Alan.

(Download)

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

Here's an attempt:

1. Decreased exposure
2. Increased contrast
3. Decreased saturation
4. Increased temperature
5. Added sepia
6. Increased sharpness

I'm not sure how that little bit if FX logo got in there during the screenshot--sorry about that.

(Download)

R.G. Loc: Scotland

AlMac wrote:

.....Looking at it on this site I think I've gone overboard with the greenery in the foreground on the right. My eyes seem drawn towards it. It looked ok on my screen in L/R but it stands out more on here......

Hi AlMac. Thanks for joining in. Overall I'd say your colours are strong without looking garish. I think the trouble with the vegetation on the right is that it was getting direct sunshine and it's not only brighter but also a bit strong on yellow (a naturally eye-catching colour). If you've selected that area it might be worth trying a slight WB shift away from yellow to see if that helps it to blend in. I've found that if you spend too long looking at shots like this you can become desensitised to slight colour shifts (then notice them after you've posted them

).

I think you experienced the same thing that I do with shots like these, which is that the main mountain of interest needs to lose some of the haze. Wouldn't it be great if we could arrange for haze to appear selectively

.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

jaymatt wrote:

Here's an attempt:

1. Decreased exposure
2. Increased contrast
3. Decreased saturation
4. Increased temperature
5. Added sepia
6. Increased sharpness

I'm not sure how that little bit if FX logo got in there during the screenshot--sorry about that.

Thanks for contributing, John. I find your treatment surprisingly effective. Maybe we're showing our age when we can relate to shots which are reminiscent of the way they used to be printed in the press, brochures etc in days gone by.

lloydl2 Loc: Gilbert, AZ

thanks RG a fine composition... this time I took an artsy approach taking advantage of the PS mixer brush to smooth the water and sky

(Download)

R.G. Loc: Scotland

lloydl2 wrote:

thanks RG a fine composition... this time I took an artsy approach taking advantage of the PS mixer brush to smooth the water and sky

Thank you Lloyd. That's got me thinking that I could try a merge without any anti-ghosting (this one used the maximum). I've found that the level of anti-ghosting can be used to control the softness of things like waves and clouds.

lloydl2 Loc: Gilbert, AZ

so I gather this was an HDR blend? Sometimes on shots with water I like to do a long exposure which also smoothes out the water and clouds... Usually need to use an ND filter to get the exposure long enough.. I just discovered this mixer brush tool and have been playing around with it mostly on water but also in combination with frequency separation on portraits to smooth out skin color and tone on the color layer. It's real easy to over do it though and lose the subtle shading that contours the face. Great scene loved working on it.

R.G. wrote:

Thank you Lloyd. That's got me thinking that I could try a merge without any anti-ghosting (this one used the maximum). I've found that the level of anti-ghosting can be used to control the softness of things like waves and clouds.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

lloydl2 wrote:

so I gather this was an HDR blend? Sometimes on s... (show quote)

Glad you enjoyed working on it. I haven't got the ND filters for proper long exposure shots. Maybe it's my next big adventure......

A technique that I've had recommended to me for waterfalls and streams is to take multiple exposures in "Continuous Shutter Release" mode and then blend or merge them together. I've tried it on a waterfall and it worked well, and I can't see any reason why it wouldn't work well on waves. But for proper smoothness it'd need a long exposure.

lloydl2 Loc: Gilbert, AZ

yeah, I've tried that technique (maybe I didn' t take enough shots), it worked to an extent but no where's near as good as a long exposure. They have variable dial in ND filters available now where you can dial in A range of stops of darkness like 3 to 10. They are expensive but less than buying a bunch of single stop ones..

R.G. wrote:

Glad you enjoyed working on it. I haven't got the ND filters for proper long exposure shots. Maybe it's my next big adventure......

A technique that I've had recommended to me for waterfalls and streams is to take multiple exposures in "Continuous Shutter Release" mode and then blend or merge them together. I've tried it on a waterfall and it worked well, and I can't see any reason why it wouldn't work well on waves. But for proper smoothness it'd need a long exposure.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

lloydl2 wrote:

........They have variable dial in ND filters available now where you can dial in A range of stops of darkness like 3 to 10........

I've read that the ones that use two polarising filters don't work very well in some situations. Maybe they have an alternative now.

lloydl2 Loc: Gilbert, AZ

the one I got was a B&W 1 - 5 stop... not sure if it uses double polarizing filters or not..