AT Shot of the Day Thread

[CuriousMike]

Can you show examples of "good" skies vs "bad" ones?

If you look at my post above ( #1484 ), you'll see the 3 bottom shots of birds.
The sky color in the first bird (where he's crapping) looks muddy.
The second bird sky color looks artificially blue.
The last bird (back shot of wings) sky has a decent blue hue.

None of them have a crisp, "right" color.

 

[SwiftWind]

If you look at my post above ( #1484 ), you'll see the 3 bottom shots of birds.
The sky color in the first bird (where he's crapping) looks muddy.
The second bird sky color looks artificially blue.
The last bird (back shot of wings) sky has a decent blue hue.

None of them have a crisp, "right" color.

I see what you mean! I assume if this was a film camera and not digital, you wouldn't run into that, right?

 

[CuriousMike]

I see what you mean! I assume if this was a film camera and not digital, you wouldn't run into that, right?

I'm not sure - I presume film would have just as many color balance issues as digital. The difference is that I would be incapable of modifying my film print, where, with enough googling, I could fix the digital version.

 

[CuriousMike]

Golden Eagle

Moar waterfalls

 

[Nohr]

Cool waterfalls! The first one and the last one are my favorites.

 

[SwiftWind]

Gorgeous pictures

 

[EOM]

ISO 100, f/1.8, 1/400 shutter
D3200 w/ 35mm f/1.8 (52mm)

edit - it's supposed to be rotated 90 to the left.... tinypic rotated it... I'll go back and try and fix it in a bit.

 

[Anubis]

but?
fantastic scenery. Where is it?

CA, Hoover Lakes
I took that with my phone as i didnt feel like luigging my camera along with camping gear up over nearly 11k feet

http://www.hikingwalking.com/destinations/ca/ca_ses/lee_vining/virginia_lakes

 

[thestrangebrew1]

My niece. Took this shot yesterday and used lightroom to soften the clarity.

 

[EOM]

Playing with the new 85mm Micro DX f/3.5 I got on Wednesday. I REALLY like this lens. These are JPGs straight out of the camera, no lightroom, nothing.... so like i said in a previous thread, they're all 2/3 stop dark.

 

[CuriousMike]

Eight mile hike in and out to get to Berry Creek falls,

 

[Nohr]

Beautiful waterfall Mike, it looks very serene.

 

[CuriousMike]

On the hike to get to the falls, I passed thru some unbelievably tall redwood giants.
I didn't spend the time to bracket any shots during my hike, and I'm kicking myself.

 

[SwiftWind]

Bracket meaning what? Forgive my ignorance

 

[SwiftWind]

P.S. great photos!

 

[CuriousMike]

Bracket meaning what? Forgive my ignorance

Bracketing means "taking multiple photos with different exposure values and blending them together into a single image."

The problem with my photo above is that the bottom of the tree/forest is very dark, so the exposure needs to let a lot of light in so you can see the bottom of the tree.

However - while the camera is letting in a lot of light for the bottom of the forest, it's also letting in a lot of light for the sky - and the sky doesn't need as much light so it becomes too bright.

The idea with bracketing ( otherwise known as HDR, *high dynamic range ) is that you take multiple photos from the exact same spot, but each photo exposed differently.

My bracket may have been accomplished with two photos:
1. Take a photo so the bottom is exposed correctly ( but sky will be too bright )
2. Take a photo of the sky so it looks blue with clouds ( but forest will be too dark. )

The trick is using software to "blend" the two exposures into a single exposure where you have the dark forest floor looking bright, and the bright blue sky looking blue (and not over exposed ).

In my photo of the trees, if you click the "zoom" button and look at the full image, you'll notice the base of the tree's look good, but the top of the tree's looks funky = funky is extreme contrast between the fine needles of the tree and the blue sky. I tried to use my single exposure to pull the highlights of the sky down, but it also created the funky contrast for the needles. I end up with a still overexposed "bright" sky, but it also looks sorta gray and the needles of the treetops look overly sharp.

*dynamic range = the spectrum of dark to light that (in the case of cameras) you can attain in a single photo. HDR (high dynamic range) is simply the software technique I describe above that can create a single image with a greater dynamic range then is possible with a single exposure with todays technology.

 

[CuriousMike]

On a tripod ( ensuring the matter stays the same ), I "bracketed" five photos of the waterfall.
To notice: In the bright images, the dark part of the waterfall floor look bright and detailed... but the sky looks completely blown out. Complete detail of the upper trees is actually completely absent because of the overexposure.
Compare to the "darkest" images where you can see blue sky, and the fine detail of the upper trees is apparent.

I used these 5 images

And created the following image ( which I cropped ) - none of the individual images had enough dynamic range to create the final output

 

[SwiftWind]

Great explanation!!
I've heard of HDR before and never really understood what it really meant until you gave me the actual examples. It makes so much more sense now! That's a really neat trick because you're not really editing or modifying the photos you took, you're just "merging" them together. That makes it look very natural and clean.

I imagine you have to be extremely careful modifying the light exposure without moving the camera / tripod, unless you can do it via your phone? Maybe it's because I have a cheap tripod that I worry about this...

 

[CuriousMike]

I imagine you have to be extremely careful modifying the light exposure without moving the camera / tripod

Software can typically deal with a tiny amount of drift / camera movement when blending the exposures... but the best results come with rock solid tripod and remote release.

My camera has a built in "bracketing" mode, where I can tell it to take ( for example ) 5 exposures, each one 1/3 brighter/darker than the base exposure.

I use a wired remote to then trigger the camera (so I'm not even touching it) - and I hold the trigger button down, the camera takes the 5 photos in a row with the single hold-press.

The real question is - how does moving water hold up since it has to be moving during the exposures!

 

[SwiftWind]

I imagine that's not an issue since the water is always moving in the same direction and at the same speed. I'm guessing that the only catch is that the number of individual droplets multiply with each photo.

That would probably explain why waterfalls always look like "liquid" steam.

Am I right or am I way off??

 

[zCypher]

You can also use the Lightroom adjustment brush and/or masks to increase or lower the brightness/exposure/details out of highlights/shadows as needed from a single shot without messing up the areas you don't want affected. But, this technique can be very tedious too depending on the content of the photo.

 

[CuriousMike]

You can also use the Lightroom adjustment brush and/or masks to increase or lower the brightness/exposure/details out of highlights/shadows as needed from a single shot without messing up the areas you don't want affected. But, this technique can be very tedious too depending on the content of the photo.

I do this exact technique all the time.
But the examples of the trees and waterfalls, this just falls apart.
1. The range between the lows and the highs is too great. There's just no way to get any sort of sky pulling down exposure/highlights. The data t'ain't there.
2. Trying to do this amongst trees with fine leaves is a PITA... like, it's untenable. If you use LR's auto-mask, even fine-tuning it, it always leaves a pixel width of brightness around the extreme edges of leaves/needles creating a totally fake look.

 

[CuriousMike]

 

[repoman0]

Here's a couple from my first time seeing and trying to photograph the Aurora. I'm just getting back into photography after a long time away from it (and wasn't particularly good at it before ...) I think I got a handful of good shots my last trip though and am looking forward to getting back into it more and improving!

 

[repoman0]

Couple more

Question: what do you guys prefer for image hosting? I'd like to start a little portfolio for fun, something with good browsing capabilities. Maybe I'll use this as an excuse to learn to build a website or something.