False Kiva

This was taken in canyonlands during a workshop I attended over the Memorial Day weekend. I had originally done this as a blended image, but went back and worked a little in ACR and came up with a single exposure version that I think I like better.

dan

This is one of the best images from False Kiva that day. The background looks a bit washed out on my monitor. But you might be able to fix that by just darkening the image overall or darkening the background only with a mask. I think you could get a little better results if you spend a lot of time blending the images just right. But if you don't do that just right you can get an image that looks a little overworked and fake. And the new recovery and fill light sliders that Adobe has added do make it possible to get pretty good results with images like this without combining the exposures. This definitely requires less effort than processing two images properly and creating a precise mask to avoid any halo (but with any wider dynamic range, that would be about your only option other than good HDR software).

Hi Grant - thanks for the comments. I had done this blended (the version I sent you), and this was an experiment to see if I could use the new controls in ACR to pull it together from a single exposure. I agree that the background is a little light, and am playing with a few things to try to correct that. If sucessful I'll post an updated version. Overall though I'm excited that I was able to get this close fairly easily, as I had spent a lot of time on the blended version. If this had any wider DR, this method would not have worked

dan.

I like your results, Dan. It is very instructive to see what can be done with blending vs.adjustments to a single image. With the new ACR/Lightroom I find myself blending fewer and fewer images.

Once you get on the right trail, is the Kiva location hard to find?
I've got it on my must visit list for my next trip to Canyonlands.

Dan,
Nice start. You might try a luminosity mask to isolate just the tones you want to work on without having to mess with precise selections and possible halos. Check Tony Kuyper's site if this type of mask is new. The recovery and fill light sliders in LR and ACR/CS3 are great but they're global adjustments.

Show us what you come up with!

I like it, but would reccomend darkening the upper half. This is a little different than the usual shot you see from this spot, where the cave on the left is included.

In photoshop I do all my adjustments with curves & layer masks. Do the new tools, fill light, recovery, etc., do anything special that can't be done with curves? Or are these just ways of making the curves-type adjustments easier?

Tony,
I'm sure that you could duplicate what fill light and recovery do with curves and masks but it would be MUCH more difficult. Fill light basically works in the 2nd quarter tone region and highlight recovery works in the 4th quarter tone region. But not exclusively, they employ dampening or fading functions (probably wrong term) to spread the effect over a reasonable range but limit and prevent clipping shadows or highlights. Much simpler than a point curve but effective. Of course they can be over-applied. Combined with the parametric curve in LR/ACR, the four exposure related adjustment, exposure, highlight recovery, fill light, and blacks/shadows provide easy, remarkably effective global adjustments.

The really cool thing for me lately is these controls can be used in LR (and ACR) on tiffs. I've been scanning 4x5 transparencies and adjusting them (non-destrictively) with LR to great effect!

There is an article on LL about curves that discusses a lot of the new controls in a detailed manner. Check it out too.

Tony, I'm not an expert here, but I believe one of the advantages of the fill and recovery is that you're doing it on the RAW data. If you convert the image to a TIFF and then do a curves adjustment, I believe it will already have thrown out some of the data in the shadows and highlights. So by doing this as part of the RAW conversion, you're getting as much detail as you can out of the shadows and highlights.

Okay, I went back to the drawing board and reconverted. The capture was with a Nikon D80, Tokina 12-24 at 24mm, ISO 100, 1/10sec, f16. ACR settings I used were WB: 4800K, exposure -1.2, fill +80, blacks +15, vibrance +10. Used curves to enhance contrast, a blue gradient layer in multiply mode, 30% opacity to punch up the sky a little.

Kalin: I've been playing with the luminosity masks a la Kuyper's site, and have been having trouble with a loss of contrast when used on pixel based layers. I've got some ideas, but nothing concrete yet.

Tony: Grant's on the button, it looks like you can pick up a couple of stops using fill, exposure compensation and recovery in ACR. The curves adjustments are using the baked in data, and you always lose something somewhere.

dan

I think I like how the top one looks better, expecially the FG.

Thanks Tony, maybe the third time will be the one. I built a mask using Tony Kuyper's luminosity method & brought up the foreground a little. You guys are really making me learn PS! I like this one the best, it looks like I remember it.

I really like the last image the best - nice job!

I agree, I really like the last one.

Nice balance in the last one. Good job! Ah the magic of PS.

I got a kick out reading a couple of photographers bios recently in a couple of galleries. They went out of their way to state that they don't employ any manipulation of the scene or light (implied) in the field or the computer - that their prints were true to the transparencies. I thought it was a little dis-ingenuous to imply that they wouldn't use a GND in the field or digitally sharpen and color correct a scanned transparency. Even getting a scan to visually match a transparency usually takes a fair bit of 'manipulation', let alone how we saw the scene or any other artistic interpretation. Maybe I'm not being fair and taking their statements too literally. But to the unknowing buyer you'd think their prints may be superior because they were not 'photoshoped'. I've seen other statements that explain the realities of digital photography and printing while staying true to the intent of nature photography. I know I'm preaching to the crowd here.

Anyway (off soap-box) good job sticking with it, incorporating advice, trying something different, and coming out with a great image!

Hey Dan - this is a beautiful shot. It really comes together in version # 3 and I can imagine that is right on with how you saw the scene. Thanks for giving some detail on how your progress of adjustments as I need to beef up my PS skills and there are some good info/tips in the thread!

After looking at Tony's luminosity masks, I would HIGHLY recommend these to anyone who finds themselves doing adjustments in highlights or shadows often...I just bought the actions and those masks will save me hours of trying to futz with contrast masking and feathering to get problem areas under control. Well worth a small donation to Tony K for the effort. And he's a good guy to boot.

-D

I like both 2nd and 3rd versions. My eye moves around the photos differently, but I'd be hard pressed to select one over the other.

The people who say they don't use the computer to work on a print are like a runner who proudly says he only uses one leg. The brain and eye are the most amazing 'computerized' camera system ever designed. Photoshop lets us create an image that BEGINS to look like the image the eye and the brain combined to create. Besides, would they fault a painter for creating a painting that doesn’t 'accurately' and slavishly portray a particular view of the subject?

A photography instructor I had while in college said “a photograph is it’s own reality.”

Yeah, the third image is right on IMO. Maybe that's not your style, but if this were my photo, I'd saturate the colors more. Thanks for posting.

Thirds times the charm Dan. I love the view from this place. I gotta see it for myself one of these days. Would've been nice if you coulda gone wide enough to get all ofthe False Kiva in the shot.

Sweet photo and a good processing tutorial. The third one is definitely the more appealing to my eyes.