This was from a single raw file that stretched from one end of the histogram to the other (maximum dynamic range) . The blue channel was slightly blown, but there was no over exposure. The perspective was from a protected environment somewhat cave like.
This was not a single file HDR. A lot of dodging and burning as well as basic raw conversion. There was cropping of the foreground.
Post Processing was in LightRoom 4.X
I have CS6, but generally do not use it unless I print.
Nikon D300
Nikkor 16-85 at 16 mm
1/8 second at f/22
ISO 500
Tripod
Can this image be improved? Reshooting is out of the question.
Raccoon Creek, Western Pennsylvania
(
Download)
What do you think needs to be improved? I think it's quite attractive as it is.
Heirloom Tomato wrote:
What do you think needs to be improved? I think it's quite attractive as it is.
Most images can use some work. Feedback helps to find what you are missing.
Actually this should have been in post processing - I erred.
just my personal opinion, but the HDR seems a bit overdone. the areas that my brain tells me should be in deep shadow aren't, and it makes the image look flat. the shot was taken from a cave-like setting, yet the foreground, and the overhead areas, look almost as bright as the outside, and it robs the image of depth.
the trick with HDR is to bring out SOME detail in the shadow areas... brighten them enough to show what's there, but not so much that the shadows don't look like shadows anymore. you need to retain some of that darkness to provide the sense of depth and perspective.
Max use of a RAW file :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: only noise reduction could improve MOO
I like it the way it is. It is quite a stunning shot. Huge dynamic range and the post work is very good. Like it.
SQUIRL033 wrote:
just my personal opinion, but the HDR seems a bit overdone. the areas that my brain tells me should be in deep shadow aren't, and it makes the image look flat. the shot was taken from a cave-like setting, yet the foreground, and the overhead areas, look almost as bright as the outside, and it robs the image of depth.
the trick with HDR is to bring out SOME detail in the shadow areas... brighten them enough to show what's there, but not so much that the shadows don't look like shadows anymore. you need to retain some of that darkness to provide the sense of depth and perspective.
just my personal opinion, but the HDR seems a bit ... (
show quote)
Thank you for your thoughts. As I mentioned, this was was from a single raw file and it was not a single exposure HDR. The tonality differences were handled with the tone curve and dodging and burning.
Photoman74 wrote:
Max use of a RAW file :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: only noise reduction could improve MOO
Thanks Phtoman. Considering the darkness of the stone in the original capture, I thought the camera handled the noise fairly well. With the new camera and improvements in LR, it may have not been an issue.
ebrunner wrote:
I like it the way it is. It is quite a stunning shot. Huge dynamic range and the post work is very good. Like it.
Thanks for the nice comment. Because I had concern about the dynamic range on the D300 in this situation, I had taken numerous sets of exposures. I didn't like any of the attempts at HDR
Bobwurman wrote:
Squirl033 nailed it!
Thanks for sharing your opinion.
My only problem is the rocks at the top are to bright and that becomes a distraction!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
jeanbug35 wrote:
Nice shot!
Thanks jeanbug.
I always smile when I see the bright green car and the red jacket.
Jim Carter wrote:
My only problem is the rocks at the top are to bright and that becomes a distraction!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks for looking and commenting.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.