bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

Several photo processing packages have a sky replacement tool. Most work reasonably well on simple images with a distinct horizon but have problems with images with 'holes' or main features having much the same shade as the original sky.

I've included the results from the Photoshop and Luminar 4 sky replacement tools for comparison. Both tools have pros/cons. Photoshop errors on the side of not overlaying sky on the main feature and Luminar 4 errors on the side of overlaying main features. In cases like this it is probably worth the effort to resort to the tried and true method of sky replacement, i.e.: mask the main feature(s) and overlay them on the sky of your choice. Of course you could also just wait to shoot the picture when the sky is just the way you want it...

Enjoy!

bwa

Photoshop Sky Replacement

(Download)

Luminar 4 Sky Replacement

(Download)

Original Image

(Download)

FreddB Loc: PA - Delaware County

I prefer the original - almost feel the cold 🥶

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

I'm not a fan.
--Bob

Amator21 Loc: California

It would be a shame to diminish a rather nice image with either of the two processes in MHO. Maybe not so humble! Thank you for posting!
Poul

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Original.

Looks like neither program can differentiate the white snow and white sky well.

CaltechNerd Loc: Whittier, CA, USA

Looks like white snow and white sky are way too much for the existing AI. Clearly doesn't work. And what do you want to bet that in another few years both products will nail it. Their AIs just need more training.

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

Even good things have drawbacks and require fiddling 💛💛💛💛💛

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

And it was!

bwa

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

Probably the case but I even have a little trouble deciding what is snow and where the sky begins BUT I fully anticipate AI will ultimately outperform a mere human...

bwa

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

Yup, one still has to do some of their own postprocessing

bwa

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

I am not an avid fan of sky replacement nor am I vehemently against it. As a commercial photograher, oftentimes with deadlines looming and all kinds of last-minute assignments, I show up at an outdoor location like an exterior architectural shot, etc., and the skyscape is downright lousy. No time to come back on another day kinda thing.

The effect can be decent enough if it is done with skill, the direction and quality of light and colour are compatible with conditions on the ground in water reflections, and the software can handle coming in tightly behind trees, utility poles and branches other than only the horizon line.

I have a few different programs but "Landscape -Pro" does a fine job once you get the hang of all the manual finishing touches such as feathered edges.

I know I have done a good job with the art director the client likes the shot and does not comment on the "dramatic sky that I put in".

Landscape_ Pro comes for Anthropics- here's a link:

https://www.anthropics.com/landscapepro/photo_editing_software/

The price I reasonable and their customer service is first-rate. If you try it and are not satisfied, they will refund your money.

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

Sky replacement does have its place if the job requires it. Thanks for the link.

bwa

DL Loc: St. Petersburg, Fl and Island Park, Idaho

Sky replacement, if done with a realistic sky, can save a good shot with a dull sky. To me it is like saturation, it can be a great tool but I see it done to a ridiculous level way to often and in those cases it ruins the picture. Aside from the program flaws I think you picked a sky that does not fit the picture.

tcthome Loc: NJ

Like some of the others, I like the original. But, with that said I think luminar would be more realistic with some of the light reflecting on to the snow covered ground but is a little , uhh , maybe to strong & just toward the back of the ground. I use Affinity Photo & not PS but, add a layer mask, would either grab the color picker tool & sample some of the sky colors & adjust the opacity to low & selectively brush some of the sky color onto the ground. The other way would be to duplicate the backround layer, add a mask, select the sky & flip it 180* vertically & turn down the opacity. Keep in mind that if the sun is coming from behind the tree, it wouldn't be showing on the tree from the viewer's point of view in this photo & thus would need to be removed from the tree. Also with the sun light bouncing off the clouds might need to add some slight shadow from the tree also.
But for a auto 1 click operation, if your happy with it, that is all that matters.

Toment Loc: FL, IL

Yes the last looks best to my eye