Blown highlights

[tobey bilek]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I`m getting way to many of these on shots I have done before on Leicas/film and they worked well. Is it because it is inherent with all digi cams or because I`m using a cheapo trying to learn on so maybe I`ll move "up?" Up is questionable.

 

I suspect it is the nature of the beast. I which case I will stay with scanning film.

 

The first was original exposure, foreground was fine, sky white, but I remember it as blue.

 

Second was to give less exposure to keep the sky

 

Third is a photoshop version of two where I did a sky select, added a blue gradient selected from the right side. Also inverted the selection to brighten the foreground and then a third selection to open the dark areas in the right side even more.

 

This is just too much screwing around for something that should be simple.

[phlogiston1]

There are many ways to recover highlights and to combine&merge images to achieve a satisfactory result with images that are shot in high contrast conditions. Digital just like film can only handle a certain dynamic range before the image is compromised. Film, digital no real difference, there is always a limit. You need to develop techniques to deal with these situations. This is one thing I really like about digital; the high dynamic range can be tamed, and I don't necessarily mean HDR.

[sean_reid]

Tony,

 

In short, there's a lot to learn to get the most from digital capture just as there is a lot to learn to work well in the darkroom. There's no free lunch in either medium. There is no such thing as *a* digital look, etc. just as there is no such thing as *a* film look. Different digital cameras respond differently to light as do different film cameras. If dynamic range is important to you, you will want to work in RAW and, likely, with a DRF or DSLR. I worked professionally with film for over twenty years and so I'm familiar with both mediums. One of the biggest and most common mistakes I see among photographers who are new to digital capture is over-generalizing based on limited experience. It's a new medium, different digital formats and cameras have their own characteristics. A serious photographer beginning with digital needs to read a lot, experiment, learn new skills and practice.

 

Does the M8 respond to light in the same way as the camera you used for these examples? Of course not.

 

There are various articles at The Luminous Landscape, for example, that may be useful to you as you start to learn about this medium.

 

Cheers,

[abrewer]

This is just too much screwing around for something that should be simple.

 

Yes, I agree with you.

 

The simple thing is to darken the whole image as a new layer (with levels or curves or one of the blending modes), put a mask over it, then paint the mask with varying opacities of black to reveal as much or as little of the overexposed original as you want.

 

Another trick with gradients is to remember that sky is always darker above and lighter around the horizons, and pick your gradient colors to suit.

 

Voila!

[wparsonsgisnet]

Allan,

 

Very nice, indeed. Would you detail the steps in your workflow for us, please.

 

Thanks.

[abrewer]

Sure BIll. I'm happy to share what I know, and it's pretty simple.

 

You need only one bit of technical understanding: a layer mask can be painted with varying shades of gray to reveal what is beneath.

 

Start with the image you want to alter opened in Photoshop.

 

Make a duplicate layer by hitting "Ctl J" on your PC.

 

Change the "Blend Mode" to "Multiple" of the new layer.

 

Apply a Layer Mask to the new layer.

 

Choose a foreground color near midgray, select the paintbrush from the toolbox, begin painting the mask and the overexposed layer beneath will start to show through. Keep painting until you have what you want.

 

If you go too far, hit "Ctl Z" and it takes you backwards through your work until you're happy again.

 

Try it. You can save a lot of images you otherwise might toss.

 

You can do the opposite (lighten an underexposed image) by selecting "Lighten" as the new layer's blend mode and repeating the steps above.

 

Thanks.

 

Allan

[jrgeoffrion]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This is just too much screwing around for something that should be simple.

 

As nuts as this seams, the easiest way to handle these situations (high contrast) would have been to use a graduated ND filter.

[sean_reid]

I`m getting way to many of these on shots I have done before on Leicas/film and they worked well. Is it because it is inherent with all digi cams or because I`m using a cheapo trying to learn on so maybe I`ll move "up?" Up is questionable..

 

There are useful posts on this thread with tips about post-processing options. A point I'd like to just emphasize, in addition, is that one must have the information on the "digital negative" in the first place if it is to be extracted. Digital cameras do not all make the same kinds of files and, again, a photographer who is concerned about preserving a wide dynamic range would do well to capture in RAW and choose a camera that, itself, has good dynamic range capability. Lens choice will also play a role in this. One can't generalize about about DMR file quality based on that of a budget small sensor camera, for example.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[abrewer]

Couldn't agree more with what JR and Sean have written above.

 

It's far, far more satisfying to take a good picture, on a good camera, and have a good image as the result than having to resort to all this Photoshop alchemy.

 

Even though I know how to do all this stuff, I still strive as a personal goal to make pictures that don't require it!

 

 

Thanks.

 

Allan