garyvot Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
RustyBug wrote:
I gotta disagree with ya on this one. While one certainly could take it in the direction of the silhouette (retaining the creative vibe) ... the information revealed from the lift is a game changer in the message it can convey to the viewer. I agree that a silhouette has it's place, but depending on the message you are trying to convey to your viewer, the direction you take your image can vary.
For shooting interior / exterior (such as this), I typically would bring some additional lighting into the interior space to better balance / narrow the gap in the exposure delta between interior vs. exterior. Alternatively, for static interiors, one can bracket. However, one doesn't always have the option to add lighting or bracket appropriately. When that occurs, we are faced with the prospect of blowing out the exterior, or lifting the interior.
I am of the opinion that there are better ways (i.e. lighting / bracketing, etc.) to yield the most optimal results ... but, there are times that optimal approaches aren't pragmatically available to us. I'm not a big fan of using lift the shadows to the max as a matter of routine, in lieu of other approaches (for optimal results), but I do acknowledge that as the ability to cleanly lift the shadows improves, the viability for doing so also improves.
I think someone wrote "better is better" ... which may not mean it is the holy grail of approach to optimal results (i.e. other methods), but it is kinda hard to refute (philosophically at least) "better is better" to the degree that it is at least welcome (if the penalty isn't increased), even if still isn't most ideal.
As to the image, I may not have pushed / lifted it quite that much, leaving the interior a slight be darker (conveys the diff between interior vs. exterior), yet still revealing the information that was previously hidden. But, I still think that the goal of the message being conveyed is what guides the direction (and original exposure) for processing....Show more →
My problem with that shot (and the ridiculous shadow lift) is that if the photographer had wanted to balance the exposure properly he or she should have used some kind of fill, as skilled photographers have been doing for decades.
In the *absence* of a secondary light source, pushing shadows a bit can help, but only if done subtly, so that the image matches the visual perception one would have of such a heavily backlit scene.
Trying to *create* a secondary fill light by pushing shadows (as the photographer has done here) creates horribly artificial results. I think dynamic range has become a kind of crutch for too many, sadly.
Edit: I suppose this sounds kind of harsh, not my usual style. For some reason though, this topic (and those who judge the worth of all cameras by the dynamic range of the sensor) sets me off. Sorry.
Edited on Jul 13, 2017 at 03:30 PM · View previous versions
|