Photographic Imagining

Here is an image I created in Raja Ampat one evening while sweating through my sheets on the MV Palagian (that's another story I posted on wetpixel's travel section)

I first took a series of 9 images at 3/4 EV of a sunrise and combined them into an HDR image, then tonemapped the HDR and saved the result as a TIFF file so it was usable. The image below is a re-creation as the tonemapped HDR is 32mb, even as a small jpeg.

I then found an image of a coral head, made the color space, size and bit depth the same as the tonemapped TIFF file, then added the coral image as a layer onto the sunrise file.

I then created a mask in the first image and "painted" the corals into the clouds using a black brush. If I made a mistake such as overshooting a cloud, I would use a white brush to hide that section of the layer (black reveals, white conceals).

I then reduced the opacity of the corals until I got the feel I wanted.

I like the image overall just two comments: I would like to see the original HDR final image before painting in the coral. I would also like to see the 'best' original sunrise image. Unfortunately the HDR has not succeeded in bringing out any detail in the island.

Before:

After:

The color shifts are done in curves using selective layers with masks for adjustment of specific areas. I added a global gaussian blur on a separate layer, bumped up the brightness to blow out the coral tips, fin area and background coral (which took a significant brightness hit during the curves play) then painted in the areas I wanted to blow out and accentuate.

I like the image overall just two comments: I would like to see the original HDR final image before painting in the coral. I would also like to see the 'best' original sunrise image. Unfortunately the HDR has not succeeded in bringing out any detail in the island.

I'll see if I can get the tonemapped HRD down to a size which I can upload here and still have some detail, although the space alloted here is pretty limited. Also, keep in mind that the shot was taken before the sun rose, and is behind the island making for an almost black western side of the island. Even the 9th step shot where the sky is completely blown out shows very little detail of western side of the island. I did do a series with 1 EV steps, and while I did get some detail in the island, it had that blown out look (spill-over) one gets when digital sensors become over-saturated (see below).

Shot with Nikon D3- 1/30sec, f7.1, ISO 400, Nikkor 17-35 @ 35mm

Here is an experiment. I wanted to re-create a zoom effect.

Here is the original shot:

I used a slightly stretched second image on a layer and painted it in radially (is that a word?) added in a glow effect and brought down the gamma to de-accentuate some of the darker tones. I'm not sure if that was a mistake, but it seemed to focus the eye more on the "rush" of the zoom. Also, the fish up top seem a bit washed out from the "glow" but I'm not sure I don't like it.

Like the colour shifted fish and the zoom effect - which is fairly subtle.

The HDR does not do much for me - it doesn't look like a typical HDR somehow - which should work in it's favour as I find they tend to look quite false, maybe at better res than we have here it would work.

Good stuff though. Thanks for sharing them.

Paul C

Like the colour shifted fish and the zoom effect - which is fairly subtle.

 

The HDR does not do much for me - it doesn't look like a typical HDR somehow - which should work in it's favour as I find they tend to look quite false, maybe at better res than we have here it would work.

 

Good stuff though. Thanks for sharing them.

 

Paul C

I have found that tonemapping, like color correcting require a light hand. I always want to push to get that "wow" factor but usually I just end up with an extremely busy end product. Once I finish, I let the shot sit for a day and then re-visit it, usually dialing down the tonal spread a great deal. I just started playing with HDRI two months ago so I have a lot still to learn.

Thanks for the input. Quite valuable.

I first took a series of 9 images at 3/4 EV

In my brief experience with HDR imagery, I think it pays to use fewer images with more exposure spread between each.

I try and have at least 1.5-2.0 stops between the different exposures ... no harm in shooting 9 closer together, but when you combine them into the HDR, try and find a combination of 3-5 with 1.5-2.0 stops between each and you'll get a better effect. Just my two cents ...

Here's some more photoshop "craptastic" photography ...

AFTER:

BEFORE:

median blur, watercolor effect, sandstone background.

In a lot of ways, going 'crazy' in photoshop on some of these has taught me how to avoid over-processing on the 'real' ones.

I printed this one on canvas - along a three others - and they hang over my son's bed. He is "creature crazy" and loves them. They are all very colorful and printing them on stretched canvas gives them an interesting look and feel.

In my brief experience with HDR imagery, I think it pays to use fewer images with more exposure spread between each.

Thanks! I read a book on HDRI which gave me a headache as chapter one was titled something like "what is light". An interesting read. I've always shot 1EV, 5 shots, but on this trip with sunrises I tried a greater amount of shots at smaller steps. I don't think there was much of a difference.

In a lot of ways, going 'crazy' in photoshop on some of these has taught me how to avoid over-processing on the 'real' ones.

Interesting. That has been my experience as well! My early P&S processing was "hot & crispy". I sometimes go back and look at those images just for a good laugh.

I'm going to try your T&S on an image tomorrow if I can find a suitable image. Thanks for posting that on your website!

I first took a series of 9 images at 3/4 EV of a sunrise and combined them into an HDR image, then tonemapped the HDR and saved the result as a TIFF file so it was usable. The image below is a re-creation as the tonemapped HDR is 32mb, even as a small jpeg.

Just curious, are you using Photomatix? http://www.hdrsoft.com/ ?

Just curious, are you using Photomatix? http://www.hdrsoft.com/ ?

I've used both Photomatix and the HDR feature in CS3 a bunch.

I prefer Photomatix.

Just curious, are you using Photomatix? http://www.hdrsoft.com/ ?

Like Jeremy, I use them both. Many of the sunrise/sunset shots I've taken are from the back of a boat where a tripod is not much better than handheld and photomatix has a bear of a time lining up those shots. CS3 has more control, but takes A LOT more work. CS4 will have a better HDR feature installed from what I have heard (their annual conference). But I do highly recommend Photomatix!

There's a nice Flickr page of HDR examples here:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/hdr/pool/

Like any post processing tool, it can be used to enhance realism, or to go beyond and create an 'effect'.

HDR is in many ways like sharpening (in fact part of the process is local area contrast enhancement), do it too much and it does not look real, which of course may be what the 'artist' is trying to achieve.

CS4 will have a better HDR

And Lightroom 2.0 will build-in the HDR feature, photostitching and multiple monitors (among other things).

Like any post processing tool, it can be used to enhance realism

Since I can't always wait around for the "perfect" light ... I have been trying to use HDR to get "more" out of brightly light scenes which I would otherwise have liked to have waited for the "magic hour" to shoot.

I'm more fond of the HDR images that look "good" without looking "unreal".

To be honest, I haven't been very successful to date. I haven't given up, but usually the "best" shot of the bunch (with a little work) turns out to be a better image than any HDR combo.

Matthew I do like what you have done in your image. My ambitions are a trifle simpler. I just want to do some of what the great photographers of yesteryear did in the dark room. Take my images and make them “better.†Here is one before and after Photoshop. The after Photoshop is just a little closer to what I wanted to come out of the camera in the first place. Which do you like more?

Matthew I do like what you have done in your image. My ambitions are a trifle simpler. I just want to do some of what the great photographers of yesteryear did in the dark room. Take my images and make them “better.†Here is one before and after Photoshop. The after Photoshop is just a little closer to what I wanted to come out of the camera in the first place. Which do you like more?

 

 

This is a beautiful image; shows what a little selective lightening and darkening (dodging and burning in the old darkroom) can do.

This is a beautiful image; shows what a little selective lightening and darkening (dodging and burning in the old darkroom) can do.

Thank you! Coming from a well known straight shooter like your self that mady my day.

Here is one before and after Photoshop. The after Photoshop is just a little closer to what I wanted to come out of the camera in the first place. Which do you like more?

Hi Don. Thank you for asking for my opinion but please keep in mind that I'm no photo "expert". With that said...

Are you sure image # 1 is pre-manipulation? Seems like you have some "healing brush gone wrong" on one of the tentacles. If that is in the original shot, it is a bit distracting. Also, I feel that your highlights in the second shot (tentacles) are out of balance with the rest of the anemone, bordering on "blown out". In this instance, your original is lit more evenly. There is very little separation between the foreground and background which makes for "flow" problems. That's more of a framing issue though. It is also throwing a lot of blue\green. There seems to be some neutral grey spots on the rock in the lower right/left of the image. You might try grey balancing against that in curves and see what happens.

What steps did you take in PS to get the lighting effect?

What camera\strobe(s) are you using?