Another view of Mt. Hood from Dalles Mt. Road. Shortly after sunrise last weekend.
I was thinking that this time of year, with the sun at it's northernmost point, would be good at sunrise for casting light across the hills. It kind of worked but it turns out the sun was more straight behind me than I pictured. It would probably be better later in the year, perhaps November when the sun is further South although there won't be as much color.
For people that have taken this shot, do you prefer sunrise or sunset and why?
Thanks.
F9, 1/160, 75mm
Posted by Jack Graham on June 28, 2008 at 11:11 PM
Some how the colors in the mid hills look strange. I've been on this road but hadn't shot any keepers yet so someone else will have to help with the time of day question. I'd definitely recheck those colors ( the brownish-orange ones) and also probable crop out the green grassy forgrounds ( not sharp).
JG
Posted by Larry Gloth on June 29, 2008 at 12:50 AM
Thanks for the feedback though I didn't mess with the colors in the hills except to increase the saturation a small amount throughout. The difference is the result of waiting for the sun to illuminate the midground while keeping the foreground shaded. The grass in the foreground is much longer than the grass on the hills as a result of it's being down in the valley. This gives it the softer appearance that I like in contrast to the short brown grass that is exposed on the hillside.
Posted by Darren White on June 29, 2008 at 1:21 AM
The mountain is a tad yellow and the foreground hills are a little too contrasty to make this image work.....the comp is nice...
Great light on that midsection, and the mountain behind with those clouds are really nice. I agree with Jack a bit on the color, this reminds me a bit of your last post from this area in how the colors seem to plug a bit in part of the photo? Do you process the photos in sRGB?
Posted by Larry Gloth on June 29, 2008 at 11:25 PM
John,
Yeah this is processed in sRGB. Up until now I haven't been doing much printing and I'm still relatively new to the whole processing aspect. As soon as I upgrade some equipment I'm going to change my workflow and hopefully get more consistent color.
I like the comp a lot, but I think you'll be a lot happier when you can process in a different color space. Sure doesn't "feel" like sunrise glow just beginning to kiss the landscape... Looks harsh and off-color. I hope you'll reprocess this and repost it some time later.
Hi Larry - I'm pretty much in agreement with the comments so far. Since you mentioned that you're relatively new to the processing aspect... a question and a suggestion or two relating to your post-capture work:
Did you shoot this in RAW, or jpg only? If RAW, can you save that as a .jpg without making any edits so we can see what you started with? Also, what program are you using to process?
Just backing off the contrast and saturation adjustments would be a good start, but if we can see the original file, you might pick up some more specific suggestions that will be helpful for future images as well. If you're using global adjustments such as the contrast slider or saturation slider, those can create problems quickly. Curves, levels and selective color/saturation adjustments will lend greater control to your process.
Rick-
Thanks for the help. I think I know where the problems with this one came from as I went too heavy on the contrast, particularly in the top third which sent it out of balance. Though I didn't do very much to the bottom 2/3rds, I understand that the colors seem odd.
In regards to contrast/saturation, am I correct in understanding that you only increase saturation in the individual channels and contrast with curves and levels?
Larry - every shot is different, which is why being able to see the unaltered original can make for better, more specific advice.
A RAW shot will look horrible unedited - low contrast, flat colors, poor saturation, etc. But that's why it's so valuable to shoot in RAW - all the info is there and you can better control the final image. If you start with the jpg (and i have no idea if you have here), the camera has already altered the image greatly; additional adjustments have to be made with great care.
So, when I start with my RAW file, I may boost contrast and saturation with the global sliders (adjusting the whole image) just to get it in the ballpark, then additional adjustments are made with the more refined and precise controls of curves, levels and saturation/hue on a specific channel.
Similar to sanding wood with 40-grit to get started, and finishing with 250-grit to make it all look smooth. Each has its purpose; you can start with 250-grit, but you'll be working all day long, and if you try to use nothing but 40-grit, you'll never get a finished product.
Keep an eye on your histograms, too. The colors histogram can tell you if any specific color is getting clipped or blown; the RGB histogram can warn you of excessive contrast. These are things that can obviously be seen with your own eyes, but after staring at an image on a screen for a while, the brain does funky stuff and it's easy to lose your objectivity.
Thanks again Rick. The colors histogram checking sounds like a great idea and has come up before. I am using a Canon 350D which doesn't have the individual channels on the histogram but my next camera will. I always check the RGB histogram and bracket shots.
This was shot in RAW and I have been given advice previously not to mess with global adjustments in the RAW converter and do all contrast and saturation adjustments in Photoshop. Perhaps it depends on which RAW processing software you use? Or perhaps I received inaccurate advice. I currently use DPP for RAW processing. I don't have the lightroom/CS3 setup that it seems is very popular here.
Contrast is one of the trickier areas to know just what is attractive and what is overboard. As I am trying to develop an eye for it I am playing with the boundaries and pushed it too far here. That is what is great about this forum, so many experienced eyes willing to point out what is good and what not.
Happy to help, Larry. I should've been more clear. I was referring to the individual channel histograms in the editing software only. I do check histograms on the camera, but usually only the combined one to make sure that I didn't lose highlights or shadows. I rarely look at the individual channel histograms on the camera. I pay closer attention to them once I start editing - particularly if using global adjustments as you may be focusing on blues in the sky as you increase saturation, but all the other colors get increased as well, and that's when it's easy to blow out a particular channel.
Techniques differ, but I frequently use global adjustments in the RAW converter software - these are my quick & rough adjustments to get the RAW image reasonably close to what I envision for the final product. I use CaptureOne LE and it works fine in this manner. I use my eye as my guide, but also watch all channels to make sure nothing gets inadvertenly blown. Once in PS, I rarely use global adjustments; the selective adjustments provide greater control and precision, but I still keep an eye on all channels.
Thanks for an insight into your workflow. I will be keeping a closer eye on the individual color channels during processing in the future and will experiment with adjustments in the RAW converter. I also intend to rework this image a bit and see what I come up with.
I appreciate your offer to look at the RAW file and offer some advice but in this case it might be difficult as when I looked back at the original I realized that this was a combination of two images from the same RAW file, one for the mountain and another for the foreground, which further complicated the contrast.
I also should get into the habit of breaking out the ND grad filters and not relying so much on Photoshop and combining images to achieve balanced dynamic range.
Discussion
12 repliesI was thinking that this time of year, with the sun at it's northernmost point, would be good at sunrise for casting light across the hills. It kind of worked but it turns out the sun was more straight behind me than I pictured. It would probably be better later in the year, perhaps November when the sun is further South although there won't be as much color.
For people that have taken this shot, do you prefer sunrise or sunset and why?
Thanks.
F9, 1/160, 75mm
JG
Yeah this is processed in sRGB. Up until now I haven't been doing much printing and I'm still relatively new to the whole processing aspect. As soon as I upgrade some equipment I'm going to change my workflow and hopefully get more consistent color.
Did you shoot this in RAW, or jpg only? If RAW, can you save that as a .jpg without making any edits so we can see what you started with? Also, what program are you using to process?
Just backing off the contrast and saturation adjustments would be a good start, but if we can see the original file, you might pick up some more specific suggestions that will be helpful for future images as well. If you're using global adjustments such as the contrast slider or saturation slider, those can create problems quickly. Curves, levels and selective color/saturation adjustments will lend greater control to your process.
Thanks for the help. I think I know where the problems with this one came from as I went too heavy on the contrast, particularly in the top third which sent it out of balance. Though I didn't do very much to the bottom 2/3rds, I understand that the colors seem odd.
In regards to contrast/saturation, am I correct in understanding that you only increase saturation in the individual channels and contrast with curves and levels?
A RAW shot will look horrible unedited - low contrast, flat colors, poor saturation, etc. But that's why it's so valuable to shoot in RAW - all the info is there and you can better control the final image. If you start with the jpg (and i have no idea if you have here), the camera has already altered the image greatly; additional adjustments have to be made with great care.
So, when I start with my RAW file, I may boost contrast and saturation with the global sliders (adjusting the whole image) just to get it in the ballpark, then additional adjustments are made with the more refined and precise controls of curves, levels and saturation/hue on a specific channel.
Similar to sanding wood with 40-grit to get started, and finishing with 250-grit to make it all look smooth. Each has its purpose; you can start with 250-grit, but you'll be working all day long, and if you try to use nothing but 40-grit, you'll never get a finished product.
Keep an eye on your histograms, too. The colors histogram can tell you if any specific color is getting clipped or blown; the RGB histogram can warn you of excessive contrast. These are things that can obviously be seen with your own eyes, but after staring at an image on a screen for a while, the brain does funky stuff and it's easy to lose your objectivity.
This was shot in RAW and I have been given advice previously not to mess with global adjustments in the RAW converter and do all contrast and saturation adjustments in Photoshop. Perhaps it depends on which RAW processing software you use? Or perhaps I received inaccurate advice. I currently use DPP for RAW processing. I don't have the lightroom/CS3 setup that it seems is very popular here.
Contrast is one of the trickier areas to know just what is attractive and what is overboard. As I am trying to develop an eye for it I am playing with the boundaries and pushed it too far here. That is what is great about this forum, so many experienced eyes willing to point out what is good and what not.
Techniques differ, but I frequently use global adjustments in the RAW converter software - these are my quick & rough adjustments to get the RAW image reasonably close to what I envision for the final product. I use CaptureOne LE and it works fine in this manner. I use my eye as my guide, but also watch all channels to make sure nothing gets inadvertenly blown. Once in PS, I rarely use global adjustments; the selective adjustments provide greater control and precision, but I still keep an eye on all channels.
I appreciate your offer to look at the RAW file and offer some advice but in this case it might be difficult as when I looked back at the original I realized that this was a combination of two images from the same RAW file, one for the mountain and another for the foreground, which further complicated the contrast.
I also should get into the habit of breaking out the ND grad filters and not relying so much on Photoshop and combining images to achieve balanced dynamic range.