Posted by David Clapp on January 3, 2008 at 8:24 PM
I know this is a nature forum but I thought I would share some outside the box thinking from my Xmas trip to show you an idea about why I blend images and how you can think yourself out of corners. If you PM me I can send you a copy of what I sent to Chris, its certainly no problem, a little basic but gets the point.
When it comes down to it blending it can be a very complicated affair, or very quick and simple, highly technical or totally easy, made up of lots of complex selections or none at all. I just finshed a shot of the Eiffel Tower that was a blend of two images that would have been totally impossible without the technique, so whether you love or hate the idea, its one I feel worth mastering as the possibilities are totally endless when you get the hang of it. I think in a travel landscape photography context it is so utterly vital to understand.
The Shot -
1st exposure -
This was two photos, one to capture the tower using ISO 400 f6.3 for 0.5secs, to isolate a few of the very fast flashing white lights that appear on the hour (and therefore stop turning the whole tower into a complete white blur) and of course to correctly expose the tower with complete diregard for its surroundings.
2nd exposure -
Then another shot at ISO 100 f11 10secs (f11 for lenses optimal performance) to correctly expose the sky and surroundings, stopping any excessive noise in the sky from using ISO 400 in the first shot.
Blending the two together manually recreates exactly what was going on. A single 10 secs exposure would have left a blown out tower, shimmering white with the thousands of lights, ghastly. On the other hand a correctly exposed tower would have been surrounded by black sky and featureless ground. This way I got all correctly exposed and the flashing lights to appear as a gesture rather than overpowering the shot.
It also gave me the possibility to compose the shot with two completely seperate white balances, one for the tower and one for the surroundings. A White balance set for the tower would turn the sky a weird blue, set it for the sky and the tower glows hideous orange. By combining shots with two seperate white balance colour tempuratures, 3200k and 3700k I achieve what the eye perceives.
Try that with a grad! Snap'em in'alf.
Sorry I have been a bit quiet by the way, havent done any nature shots recently, I have been in Paris and then sat here desperate to process all the shots before I start teaching the kids to rock next week, oh and getting pissed on country ales.
Stunning David, the glow around the tower is beautiful. Great example of blending, perfectly done and well explained. Would love a copy of that document also if possible as I've loads to learn here. Tristan
Posted by Andy Astbury on January 4, 2008 at 3:17 AM
Absolutely awesome David - what a wonderful result
Like Tristan I too would appreciate a copy - I can never have enough techniques in my arsenal
Posted by Chris Lloyd on January 4, 2008 at 4:18 AM
Hi Dave,
Thanks for the info you sent me. So in effect, the first two shots are blended together so that they become one, and then the 'second' shot is blended into that, would that be correct?
If it's not too cheeky, I wouldn't mind a copy of the technique too - my blending attempts are always pretty woeful!
Posted by Graeme Lee on January 5, 2008 at 4:18 PM
Can I too have the "much better" version David This is a superb shot. I can see now why you really have to think about the shot. I would have not had a clue about reduces the glare from all those lights. Thinking hurts..... but so does the next day after the country ales!!! Good to see you posting!
Posted by David Clapp on January 6, 2008 at 7:12 AM
Discussion
9 repliesWhen it comes down to it blending it can be a very complicated affair, or very quick and simple, highly technical or totally easy, made up of lots of complex selections or none at all. I just finshed a shot of the Eiffel Tower that was a blend of two images that would have been totally impossible without the technique, so whether you love or hate the idea, its one I feel worth mastering as the possibilities are totally endless when you get the hang of it. I think in a travel landscape photography context it is so utterly vital to understand.
The Shot -
1st exposure -
This was two photos, one to capture the tower using ISO 400 f6.3 for 0.5secs, to isolate a few of the very fast flashing white lights that appear on the hour (and therefore stop turning the whole tower into a complete white blur) and of course to correctly expose the tower with complete diregard for its surroundings.
2nd exposure -
Then another shot at ISO 100 f11 10secs (f11 for lenses optimal performance) to correctly expose the sky and surroundings, stopping any excessive noise in the sky from using ISO 400 in the first shot.
Blending the two together manually recreates exactly what was going on. A single 10 secs exposure would have left a blown out tower, shimmering white with the thousands of lights, ghastly. On the other hand a correctly exposed tower would have been surrounded by black sky and featureless ground. This way I got all correctly exposed and the flashing lights to appear as a gesture rather than overpowering the shot.
It also gave me the possibility to compose the shot with two completely seperate white balances, one for the tower and one for the surroundings. A White balance set for the tower would turn the sky a weird blue, set it for the sky and the tower glows hideous orange. By combining shots with two seperate white balance colour tempuratures, 3200k and 3700k I achieve what the eye perceives.
Try that with a grad! Snap'em in'alf.
Sorry I have been a bit quiet by the way, havent done any nature shots recently, I have been in Paris and then sat here desperate to process all the shots before I start teaching the kids to rock next week, oh and getting pissed on country ales.
Like Tristan I too would appreciate a copy - I can never have enough techniques in my arsenal
Thanks for the info you sent me. So in effect, the first two shots are blended together so that they become one, and then the 'second' shot is blended into that, would that be correct?
Chris.
Stunning image , technical perfection IMO
Regards
Andy...
If it's not too cheeky, I wouldn't mind a copy of the technique too - my blending attempts are always pretty woeful!