Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

FM Forum Rules
Landscape Posting Guidelines
  

FM Forums | Landscape Photographer | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2014 · Sunset on the Pond

  
 
jonnyt5050
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Sunset on the Pond


These were taken on same day.

Image #1 was focus stacked (2 images) but no HDR.
Image #2 is 2 shot HDR but not focus stacked.

I'd be curious to know if anyone goes to trouble to focus stack AND HDR? In any event, I think the focus stacked produces more benefit than HDR in this particular scene as the one without focus stack definitely lacks crisp focus on the horizon.

C&Cs definitely welcome and encouraged.

These were taken with Nikon D610 w/14-24mm lens on tripod. ISO=100 on all. I don't have rest of exif on individual images handy but can provide if helpful.

1.
Sunset Solitude by Jaybird5050, on Flickr

2.
To Share a Sunset by Jaybird5050, on Flickr

Thanks for looking!



Jun 08, 2014 at 11:32 PM
stanparker
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Sunset on the Pond


I like #2 best. If that's HDR, you certainly used it well. The color is a little intense, but OK.


Jun 09, 2014 at 07:05 AM
jonnyt5050
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Sunset on the Pond



Thanks! I watched a recent youtube video from B&H on creating realistic HDR photos. (basically using HDR to get detail back that would have otherwise been lost due to dynamic range limitations of any camera).

Here's the link (it's a long video but I highly recommend).





Jun 09, 2014 at 10:08 AM
Ernie Aubert
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Sunset on the Pond


I agree that the second one is more appealing. But I do see what you mention about the distance. The concept of combining HDR and focus stacking has also occurred to me. I think that would be a really fun experiment, and I suspect it could produce some really good results.


Jun 09, 2014 at 11:50 AM
Timmeh
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Sunset on the Pond


The composition in #2 is much more pleasing to me than #1. I'd recommend cropping out the right side tree branches, and darkening up the reflections. It's physics-defying weird whenever the reflection is brighter than the real thing.

Tim



Jun 09, 2014 at 11:59 AM
Justin Grimm
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Sunset on the Pond


jonnyt5050 wrote:
These were taken on same day.

Image #1 was focus stacked (2 images) but no HDR.
Image #2 is 2 shot HDR but not focus stacked.

I'd be curious to know if anyone goes to trouble to focus stack AND HDR? In any event, I think the focus stacked produces more benefit than HDR in this particular scene as the one without focus stack definitely lacks crisp focus on the horizon



I dont do HDR but almost all my images are focus stacked, manual exposure blends. Sometimes even while doing a panorama (like a current image I'm working on). I love the combination of techniques like this, because it allows you to capture images impossible to do otherwise. Or at least, with much higher quality and range of details then any single frame.



Jun 09, 2014 at 12:10 PM
jonnyt5050
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Sunset on the Pond


Thank you for the comments! I completely agree about cropping right hand tree (I usually am careful to do that but missed this one).

I hadn't noticed it before but I do see the problem of reflection being brighter than sky. I'll take a look at it later but I think it was side effect of using graduated filter in LR5 to take down sky exposure just a bit (which stopped at the horizon).

Regarding exposure: When not using HDR, I generally have best luck exposing for the sky and then bringing up shadows 100% in LR5 to get details in grass/foreground. The Youtube video discusses this technique and says while one can do it that way, you're introducing a very noisy way to bring out those details. Personally, I haven't seen that much noise when bringing up the shadows. (But it's there and remains hidden to me since I'm slightly colorblind?). Let me know if anyone sees much noise in the grass/foreground area of image #1.

Thanks again!



Jun 09, 2014 at 12:35 PM
Justin Grimm
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Sunset on the Pond


jonnyt5050 wrote:
Thank you for the comments! I completely agree about cropping right hand tree (I usually am careful to do that but missed this one).

I hadn't noticed it before but I do see the problem of reflection being brighter than sky. I'll take a look at it later but I think it was side effect of using graduated filter in LR5 to take down sky exposure just a bit (which stopped at the horizon).

Regarding exposure: When not using HDR, I generally have best luck exposing for the sky and then bringing up shadows 100% in LR5 to get details in
...Show more


Well, you are using one of the best sensors available, especially for shadow recovery. You can still get noise, but you have to be very aggresive with your adjustments compared to older cameras. 100% shadow recovery seems like a lot so you might have introduced shadow noise, but it is impossible to tell minor flaws like that over web.



Jun 09, 2014 at 12:54 PM
JimFox
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Sunset on the Pond


Hi Jonny,

#2 is my favorite here.

As to focus stacking and HDR, I think you will find very few of us use HDR in here. Most of the serious people in here who have been shooting for any length of time will just use layer masks to blend shots and not HDR.

As for Focus stacking by itself, why? You have plenty of DOF to just use Hyper-focal focusing to get the whole image in focus. There are only 2 types of shots that I think can benefit from focus stacking.

1. Where the composition has the camera very close to a foreground object like a flower, rocks etc. Close, like as in a foot or two away.

2. Shooting in very tight slot canyons.

For all of the other shots, I see no reason to focus stack. I am not sure about your eyes, but generally speaking for most people when we look into the distance, it's not 100% tack sharp to our own eyes. So to present an image realistically to our viewers, there is nothing wrong with a little losing of sharpness in the far distance. Our brains expect it... So just a single shot, like in both of your compositions here will provide totally adequate sharpness.

My thinking, is why needlessly complicate things... Keep it Simple Stupid is a very good principle in all aspects of life...

Jim



Jun 09, 2014 at 01:51 PM
Wildcats_Fans
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Sunset on the Pond


#2 is my favorite and agree with cropping out the branches on the right side and possibly some of the rocks on the bottom.


Jun 09, 2014 at 03:24 PM
jonnyt5050
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Sunset on the Pond



Justin: Thank you. I think you may be right that the D610 sensor is allowing me to do what may not have been possible with many (most?) other cameras by bringing up shadows so severely.

JimFox: Thank you as well. I agree that I generally wouldn't focus stack on an ultra wide lens. But in this case, I think the foreground was close enough that I couldn't both get closest foreground AND horizon in crisp focus. So I think the focus stack made the first image marginally better than it would have been otherwise. Although, duly noted that should one need to choose, the background is less important to be in crisp focus.

Regarding HDR: I wonder if HDR has gotten a bad reputation from all of the ridiculous ways it's been used? After using the photomatix plugin from LR5, I can't imagine a simpler way to get a natural look that increases dynamic range of a photo. But I'm relatively new at this and I'm all about learning new/better techniques. Will masks & blending produce a more natural looking image or have some other benefit that makes it better than HDR?

Thanks again.



Jun 09, 2014 at 03:49 PM
Ernie Aubert
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Sunset on the Pond


It seems that there's HDR, and there's exposure blending. I've tried Photomatix a bit, and I have to say that I don't grasp all the variability involved in HDR and "tone mapping". But I like the way it does exposure blending way more than I like what Photoshop CS6 does.


Jun 09, 2014 at 04:04 PM
JimFox
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Sunset on the Pond


jonnyt5050 wrote:
Justin: Thank you. I think you may be right that the D610 sensor is allowing me to do what may not have been possible with many (most?) other cameras by bringing up shadows so severely.

JimFox: Thank you as well. I agree that I generally wouldn't focus stack on an ultra wide lens. But in this case, I think the foreground was close enough that I couldn't both get closest foreground AND horizon in crisp focus. So I think the focus stack made the first image marginally better than it would have been otherwise. Although, duly noted that should one need
...Show more

Hey Jonny,

In the end, it's all what ends up working best for you. And often it's an evolution of processing techniques anyway. Odds are no matter what you do now, a year or two as you continue to process and try new things, your processing methods or steps will change.

With HDR it was an ugly monster out of the gate, and I think in part it was meant to be. To create images that "popped" with false light. People tried to get the HDR program to give them more natural results. But out of the box, it sure didn't. Now, some people are using it with better results. And for many of us, in the end if the results look natural it doesn't really matter.

But for me, I am totally happy with just using layer masks. As our cameras improve and give us more dynamic range, like the D800 series of cameras, the amount of blending decreases significantly, because ACR does a great job with pulling detail out of the shadows with realistic results. It's not like it was 6 or 7 years ago when trying to pull detail out of shadow areas resulted in a horrible noisy mess. Now, with most of the newer cameras, the details are much cleaner in the shadows.

So again, it's what works best for you.

Jim



Jun 10, 2014 at 04:28 AM
Littlefield
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Sunset on the Pond


jonnyt5050 wrote:

Regarding HDR: I wonder if HDR has gotten a bad reputation from all of the ridiculous ways it's been used? After using the photomatix plugin from LR5, I can't imagine a simpler way to get a natural look that increases dynamic range of a photo. But I'm relatively new at this and I'm all about learning new/better techniques. Will masks & blending produce a more natural looking image or have some other benefit that makes it better than HDR?

Thanks again.

Jonny, I also like the second one best as well. With LR 5 LR/Enfuse plugin is another option.
Don
http://www.photographers-toolbox.com/products/lrenfuse.php



Jun 10, 2014 at 04:52 AM
Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Sunset on the Pond


jonnyt5050 wrote:
Will masks & blending produce a more natural looking image or have some other benefit that makes it better than HDR?


Yes and Yes. More natural looking, more power and less damage and artifacting. But it takes some time to get up to speed with various blending techniques. But that is good in a way. It keeps me in business!


Cool scenes.



Jun 10, 2014 at 09:03 PM
TrojanHorse
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Sunset on the Pond


jonnyt5050 wrote:
Regarding HDR: I wonder if HDR has gotten a bad reputation from all of the ridiculous ways it's been used? After using the photomatix plugin from LR5, I can't imagine a simpler way to get a natural look that increases dynamic range of a photo. But I'm relatively new at this and I'm all about learning new/better techniques. Will masks & blending produce a more natural looking image or have some other benefit that makes it better than HDR?


I agree with everything you wrote above. Manually blending is still technically an HDR technique, IMO.

The new version of photomatix has some more natural looking presets. It does take some effort to get results that don't make it obvious you're using photomatix but it *can* do a nice job. Watch out for your greens though, they look a little too yellow and that seems to be one of the side effects of using that particular plug in.



Jun 11, 2014 at 11:25 AM





FM Forums | Landscape Photographer | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.