Which One? Here are two versions of the same photo; (1) the original image and (2) the original with sky replacement. I did the edit because I found the sky boring, but now I need...

mffox Loc: Avon, CT

Here are two versions of the same photo; (1) the original image and (2) the original with sky replacement. I did the edit because I found the sky boring, but now I need expert guidance from the UHH experts. Thanks.

Mark

(Download)

DWU2 Loc: Phoenix Arizona area

I vote for #2.

Toment Loc: FL, IL

The second looks fake because the horizon is missing.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Clouds near the water line need to be smaller and less distinct IMO to indicate distance and curvature of the earth.

Also, the color of the water doesn't really connect to the new sky either. Note the deeper blue of your original sky and the cyan of the replacement.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

The second.

tradio Loc: Oxford, Ohio

I did not notice it at first but #2 does look fake when you stare at it.

NMGal Loc: NE NM

I like #1 because the “boring” sky does not steal away from the land.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

#1.
The horizon looks phony in #2 and I agree with NMGal about the clouds being distracting in #2.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

mffox wrote:

Here are two versions of the same photo; (1) the original image and (2) the original with sky replacement. I did the edit because I found the sky boring, but now I need expert guidance from the UHH experts. Thanks.

Mark

#1 because the replacement sky in #2 looks fake.

I think it's something to do with the clouds right down on the horizon.

I hope you don't mind.... I wanted to try something with the image. Instead of replacing the sky I took the image apart and edited the sky separate from the rest of the scene.

Basically I boosted the contrast in the sky. I also dodged the extra dark upper right corner where it was getting pretty dark.

After I'd done that, the foreground didn't quite look right, so I ended up boosting the contrast and adjusting the dynamic range of that, too.

I also felt the image needed some sharpening to bring out detail in the foreground. Doing that adds some micro contrast.

Finally I added a very weak magenta filter just to warm the image slightly.

See what you think (be sure to click through to the larger versions, they appear quite a bit differently than the preview shown with this response)...

(Download)

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

amfoto1 wrote:

#1 because the replacement sky in #2 looks fake.

I think it's something to do with the clouds right down on the horizon.

I've seen clouds down to the horizon in Florida.

kpmac Loc: Ragley, La

# for me.

jdubu Loc: San Jose, CA

When I replace skies, the horizon is as critical to me as interesting cloud formations. So I always keep that in mind when I shoot various skies to add to my skies stock.

The second replacement sky is good because the light fall mimics the sun location well, but the horizon is not natural. Whether the clouds are too distracting is your choice since you decided to do a replacement.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Longshadow wrote:

I've seen clouds down to the horizon in Florida.

Of course...

But there is nearly always some distance haze and loss of detail closer to the horizon.... Google "cloudy sky" images and study them. I think you'll see what I mean.

Billowing cumulus clouds like the replacement sky also would throw some shadows on the scene in places, too.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

amfoto1 wrote:

Of course...

But there is nearly always some distance haze and loss of detail closer to the horizon.... Google "cloudy sky" images and study them. I think you'll see what I mean.

Billowing cumulus clouds like the replacement sky also would throw some shadows on the scene in places, too.

Interesting, I didn't analyze the physics present or not present in the shot, light angles, no haze at the horizon, cloud shadows,...
I just looked at the shot as an image.
One of the benefits of having a simple mind I suppose.

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

amfoto1 wrote:

#1 because the replacement sky in #2 looks fake. ... (show quote)

I looks great to me because I've never attempted anything like that. A little darker to the upper right? Maybe haze rolling in.... or a light sprinkling of rain from a cloud out of the picture?