Gradient Smoothing

[Shanghait]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I took this shot today and was not really pleased with the way the blue gradients in the sky turned out. Both some layering and some weird patterns when I look close.

Was this an ISO problem? simply my screen ( on a macbook air atm )

 

Was shot at 1.4 ISO 500

 

Any ideas on how to improve this ?

 

Thanks for your help.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Jeff S]

 

Any ideas on how to improve this ?

 

 

Start by making prints.

 

Jeff

[sanyasi]

I am have been improving my Photoshop skills as of late. One thing you might consider is selective color under adjustments. You need to experiment with it because there are lots of combinations, but I would suggest selecting Blue and then try removing black on the slider below. That is a hunch, but that could lighten the sky a bit if that is what is bothering you.

 

 

Jack Siegel

[Ellie]

I have seen similar pattern when saving as jpeg with lower quality than 85%. Sometimes even 85% is too low.

[pgk]

Without knowing your workflow it is impossible to say. There are an awful lot of variables. Deep blues can be tricky on any camera especially if there is any degree of underexposure. Personally to minimise banding/artifacting in deep blues I would maximise exposure to just retain the required highlights, shoot raw and work in max bit depth prior to finalising the output file. If you are doing all this then you are probably at the limit of what is currently possible.

[honcho]

 

Was shot at 1.4 ISO 500

 

Any ideas on how to improve this ?

 

Thanks for your help.

.

 

It was taken on an M9 with a 21mm Summilux set at f2 at 1/350th sec at 500 iso using aperture priority. The basic centre weighted metering of the M9 has exposed for the highlight area of the horizon and the result is predictable: heavy underexposure has accentuated the normal vignetting effect that you would expect from this lens.

 

A different lens and/or a series of lighter exposures might have been a better choice at the taking stage if you are not happy with the result here.

 

I assume you intended a silhouette, you can try reducing the vignette but anything you do from here will very likely create other issues and be equally aesthetically subjective as the original.

[Shanghait]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Without knowing your workflow it is impossible to say. There are an awful lot of variables. Deep blues can be tricky on any camera especially if there is any degree of underexposure. Personally to minimise banding/artifacting in deep blues I would maximise exposure to just retain the required highlights, shoot raw and work in max bit depth prior to finalising the output file. If you are doing all this then you are probably at the limit of what is currently possible.

 

thanks! This makes sense. I bumped both brightness and contrast on this in LR. +25 each.

[Shanghait]

.

 

It was taken on an M9 with a 21mm Summilux set at f2 at 1/350th sec at 500 iso using aperture priority. The basic centre weighted metering of the M9 has exposed for the highlight area of the horizon and the result is predictable: heavy underexposure has accentuated the normal vignetting effect that you would expect from this lens.

 

A different lens and/or a series of lighter exposures might have been a better choice at the taking stage if you are not happy with the result here.

 

I assume you intended a silhouette, you can try reducing the vignette but anything you do from here will very likely create other issues and be equally aesthetically subjective as the original.

 

Thanks for the helpful feedback.

 

If I used lighter exposures when taking the shot, then I manipulate the image in LR to bring

back the silouette?

 

When you say a different lens....what kind were you thinking?

[honcho]

Thanks for the helpful feedback.

 

If I used lighter exposures when taking the shot, then I manipulate the image in LR to bring

back the silouette?

 

When you say a different lens....what kind were you thinking?

 

Depends on the effect you are looking for. All wide angle lenses have light fall-off at the corners, the wider angle, the greater the vignette effect and a 21mm lens is a very wide angle of view on 3:2 ratio. At f2 most wide to normal focal lengths will show some fall off. You can compensate by using a centre nd grad of a suitable strength, but that may be an unacceptable expense for the use it will get. As you are using LR, how about combining exposures to achieve the result you are wanting in the sky area?

 

With the type of shot you have uploaded here, I think the vignette can be a pleasing effect. How strong the vignette is really down to personal taste. To make a shot like this work well for you, it is often far better to control the exposure in camera rather than try to create something in post processing.

[jaapv]

Are you in CS processing in 8 bits? You should convert raw to 16 bits.

[Shanghait]

Are you in CS processing in 8 bits? You should convert raw to 16 bits.

 

Assuming you mean when processing the exported file...I was exporting Jpegs. I tried a 16 bit Tiff just now, but same issue. Its the banding that I'm not really liking.

 

As to the vignetting/lens choice mentioned above. Vignetting is intended...so Im not sure another lens would have helped in this situation.