What's new
By:
Photoshop Gurus Forum

Welcome to Photoshop Gurus forum. Register a free account today to become a member! It's completely free. Once signed in, you'll enjoy an ad-free experience and be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Fun website for photographers and Photoshop users


Lee, your work looks like HDR. Is it?... I'm becoming a born again Photoshopper since I've
discovered HDR. So.... I have a few questions; 1) do you bracket your shots a full 2 stops as a rule of thumb
or do you have some way of calculating your bracket per shot? 2) do you change any settings in the merge to hdr dialog?
and 3) do you generally work with camera raw and 3 exposures OR! are there no rules?

P.S. I like the photos you posted a lot Maybe we can get a dialog going on this subject.
 
Thanks, Gaus.


Hey Ron,
I'd be happy to help any way I can. I've been shooting for almost 40 years. Most as a hobbyist and 15 as an advertising photographer in Atlanta and ALL of it before the wonderful age of digital photography (unfortunately). I just started teaching myself Photoshop when I joined this forum 3(ish) years ago. I know what High Dynamic Range (HDR) is but have never used it....yet. The images you see here were processed in PS - both the original image and the "elements" that were added later.

1. A few tips when shooting landscape. Unless the sun is over your shoulder you should ALWAYS bracket your exposures. It was even more important in film photography as transparence film has MUCH less latitude then color neg. so your brackets were smaller. Rule of thumb - I bracket two stops over and two stops under the the meters recommended exposure in 1 stop increments when shooting color neg. or digital. One half stop when shooting transparency film (some pros even recommend one third stop). Back when I began shooting you had to do all that manually. Today, as you know, most good cameras have a bracketing option built in and it makes it soooo much easier.

2. Always use a tripod when you have that option no matter what shutter speed.

3. Use a polarizing filter. It works best when you are shooting at right angles to the sun but it still works great as a neutral density filter otherwise.

4. If you have the luxury of time on your side put the camera on a tripod and make two exposures. One just exposing the sky metered correctly and one of the ground (foreground) metered correctly then merry the two in PS. So many amateur photographers just make one meter reading and that's usually of the foreground (or foreground and sky combined). When they get their image back the sky is blown-out if it was a sunny day. You can fix some of that in PS but not all and it shows in the final image. It is SO important in a landscape image to have the sky exposed correctly.

5. Lastly, there are no rules, Ron. Use the general guidelines of whatever procedure you are learning and then just do what works best for you. As you know, it's the same in Photoshop as many times there are different ways to accomplish the same task. You may find some photographers who are "hard and fast" with their rules and recommend everyone else should follow them to the letter. Personally, I think these folks are wound a little too tight but to each his own. It IS important that you learn the basics of what ever procedure you want to use and then experiment and see what works best for you.

If you have any other questions let me know.

L
 
Thanks for replying lee, I'm off to pick up an 'Italian made' tripod that I found on 'craigslist', Here's the ironic thing. I live in a remote location in northern California. Turns out that this guy is only 15 min. away.
After muy time checking mid-range digital cams out I settled into a 'Lumix' DMC FZ8 7.2 MP with a Leica lens.
It's all a bit confusing at this point, having just moved over from film. So I'm shooting in 'auto' mode and Photoshopping. So far, I love 'camera raw', and I'm really enamored with HDR
 
Sounds like you're on the right track, Ron. The lens is the most important part of a camera. You're always MUCH better taking a mid range camera body and a first class lens (sometimes referred to as "the glass") and Leica is noted for their top of the line cameras and lenses. I am not familiar with Lunix DMC, however.

Can't believe you found someone so close for the tripod. My luck is always that the person lives in East Istanbul somewhere and my freight is twice what the object is worth. :bustagut: Another great thing about learning digital photography for you is that there is not any film, processing or printing costs. You can go out and shoot until you can't stand anymore and then download to the comuter learn what to do with the images in PS. Should be great fun.

If I can help in any way let me know.

L
 
Hey Ron,
Sorry, I forgot to suggest that you always use a cable release when possible. The camera on a tripod and a cable release will assure you that your images will be tack sharp.

L
 
Here's the frustration Lee, I've always used a cable release on the 'ol Nikon. As well as the 'depth of field' preview.....My digital has neither feature, and I can't seem to be able to 'auto bracket' when shooting
camera raw??????? So I am using the timer for stability when shooting static scenes. Seems to work fine. Keep in mind, I didn't go out and buy one of those $1k + Digital SLR's. It's just a very good 'point and shoot.
Once I get a hang of digital, I'll probably get a Nikon digital that will allow me to interchange with my film camera. ( lenses, filters etc.).
By the way, the tripod is a Bogen, it was full of dust and missing the quick mount plate. Once I cleaned it up, it was brand new and I can manufacture the plate in my shop easily enough... I may post some 'experimental' stuff this weekend...in a new thread
Thanks RM
 
A timer is just as good, Ron. Like you said, if you stay with this you'll have all those goodies when you get the Nikon.

Bogen is a great name in tripods. You done good, son. :)

L
 
ronmatt said:
Once I get a hang of digital, I'll probably get a Nikon digital that will allow me to interchange with my film camera. ( lenses, filters etc.).
Click to expand...

Be careful with this... while it's technically possible to slap a lot of old skool lenses on a DSLR body... you will often find the results to be less than what you'd get from the film camera. The reason is how the focal elements line up with the sensor in the body. Since most DSLR sensors are not full frame (eg, they're smaller than film cells) the way the image is focused can cause vignetting or distortion around the edges. Often this isn't an issue, but it's something to consider. Also, double check your specific glass against what is known to work with whatever body you're looking into. Some work better than others in compatibility.

Lee said:
The lens is the most important part of a camera. You're always MUCH better taking a mid range camera body and a first class lens
Click to expand...

While I would have probably agreed 100% talking about chem-emulsion SLR cameras, you do have to pay some attention to sensors and electronics on modern DSLR cameras. Not all sensors and processors are created equal. Good glass doesn't do you any good if it's being recorded onto a sensor that can't handle the information... or more likely being passed through post processing by the camera's filtering algorithms that destroys your image quality.

A good example would be something like this. The Panasonic Lumix cameras use Leica glass. It's hard to beat Leica glass for quality. But the sensors that record the images create too much signal noise. This isn't an issue for prints, but for people that work almost exclusively digitally (like myself) it is certainly a hindrance. A common complaint about Nikon DSLRs is that they are undersaturated. While this might cause problems for someone that just wants to shoot and print, for someone that works with extensive post processing, it's often good to not have colors be over saturated (I'm looking at you canon) because bleeding between pixels on a digital sensor is harder to correct than it is to simply post process the colors. YYMV.

Lee said:
One just exposing the sky metered correctly and one of the ground (foreground) metered correctly then merry the two in PS.
Click to expand...

I'm curious, do you find yourself having to do this a lot when using a ND filter? I'd been looking into getting a Cokin ND to try to alleviate some of the need for multiple metering.

Lee said:
It IS important that you learn the basics of what ever procedure you want to use and then experiment and see what works best for you.
Click to expand...

Best advice ever. This is the advice I would give to anyone trying to learn any artistic technique.

$0.02
 
You're right about the lenses, mindbender. I suppose it would be like trying to put a Porche engine in VW.
I'll just learn the digital and upgrade within it's format capabilities.
In the meantime. I spent some time with a sunset in a nearby canyon. ( I drive past this scene 3 times a week and really never saw it until last night ).
This was bracketed 2 up and 2 back, shot as jpeg. Then I used the merge to HDR in PSCS3, followed by some post work to the result. THEN the final was brought into Artizen HDR and applied the Stochham effect with some minor adjustments.
 
VERY nice image, Ron. You're on your way. :righton:

The only thing that bothers me is the "blueish" color in the middle of the foreground. What's that? Maybe too much hue/saturation or HDR?

L
 
I know, the blue is just there and the hdr process seems to 'bring it out'. Trying to remove it only makes it more evident and I haven't tried 'selective editing' yet, I don't even know if that's a possibility. Please check out the other thread.

http://www.photoshopgurus.com/forum/index.php?topic=8336.0
 
Nice shot ronmatt... I really like the horizon colors and the color detail on the foreground trees.
 
OK Lee, here you go. The first is directly out of the camera. The second has been 'tampered' with. First in
Artezin where I added luminescence and contrast then that was taken into PSCS3 and really tweaked. It's very saturated but I'm pleased with the almost surreal feel of it.
 
Back
Top