Posted by Steve Sieren on November 18, 2008 at 11:17 AM
I really like this one but it's a blend of exposures. It was a little too early and the sky was brighter than the scene. Long exposure lead to too much movement in the leaves. You might not be able to tell here but in a print you would see it. I wounder if a grad filter would have worked. Any of you guys do that with folliage shots? Any thoughts on how it could of been done better or processing nits would be appreciated.
Steve, another wonderful autumn scene. As near as I can tell at this size, from the angle of view or the lens used, the trees have a seemingly backward lean to them. A very unique perspective to the scene from this point of view.
I cannot comment at all on the blend per se, I have never tried any of that. I would say your question is easy enough to answer however, yes, I have used grads on similar scenes such as this. Not always easy or successful, especially with film shooting and not seeing results until processed. However, the need to attempt to use the filter outweighs the image being lost totally to blown highlights too. I would think shooting digital it would be a very good idea to take a few exposures both ways, with and without, to see which looks best overall. In this scene it appears that maybe a 2 stop soft edge grad would have helped out enough with the sky and as a result not required a blend. Although, as I say that I think I have seen comments from digital shooters stating the soft edges are not very effective or even work at all. You might check with the digital crowd on that. In most cases I think they reach for the hard grads. Personally, I use the hards mostly, but here with tree tops involved it might be too much with a hard edge IMO.
Posted by Steve Sieren on November 18, 2008 at 1:47 PM
Shoot! More converging lines. I keep missing that. If this was shot at around 24mm I should of used the T/S lens. Thanks for the feedback Paul. I think the grad might have helped.
Posted by Lon Overacker on November 18, 2008 at 2:31 PM
Steve,
Wonderful streamside autumn scene. I can see what Paul means about the backward lean of the trees (convergence,) but it doesn't bother me as the effect is minor.
Not sure I can help with the blend. I don't know that a grad would have been the solution as it would have darkened the aspen as well which may not have been a desired effect. And I'm still at a loss on blending and can't figure out how you could blend a darker sky and then paint all the intricacies of the leaves back in.
I'm not quite sure what you mean about "in a print you would see it." See the movement in the leaves? Or the blend? It does look good here though for sure.
I also like the clarity and translucense of the water.
Lon
Posted by Richard Wong on November 18, 2008 at 8:39 PM
Love the shot Steve. It is pretty unique for the subject matter. Great exposure too. What I like most is the water.
Posted by Steve Sieren on November 18, 2008 at 11:46 PM
Thanks Richard.
Thanks Lon, One good thing about digital is in a scene like this if there is no movement you can snap for the sky and one for the rest. Photoshop is going to create somewhat of a line that doesn't belong there if the scene only requires one shot for the sensor. So why not take advantage of exposure blending if you can't use an Nd grad for the scene. 3 stops of light seems to be a good limit. After that you might get acused of the Thomas Kinkade style photo. I could see how some might disagree with it but if some photographers are making a living doing landscape photography and using this method, I don't see why I wouldn't want to take advantage of it.
In a scene like this with lightweight leaves they move just enough to where they cause differences between both images making a bad blend in PS. That is the case here, you can't tell in the 720 pixels but in in a print. In the print you would see some dark edges and light edges where the movement occured. You can usually find this walking into any gallery of prints for an artist that does this.
Posted by Anil Rao on November 19, 2008 at 12:58 PM
Hi Steve,
Beautifully made! The colorful leaves resemble fireworks going off. The dark water adds a nice base for the composition and there is good balance overall.
Discussion
6 repliesThanks!
I cannot comment at all on the blend per se, I have never tried any of that. I would say your question is easy enough to answer however, yes, I have used grads on similar scenes such as this. Not always easy or successful, especially with film shooting and not seeing results until processed. However, the need to attempt to use the filter outweighs the image being lost totally to blown highlights too. I would think shooting digital it would be a very good idea to take a few exposures both ways, with and without, to see which looks best overall. In this scene it appears that maybe a 2 stop soft edge grad would have helped out enough with the sky and as a result not required a blend. Although, as I say that I think I have seen comments from digital shooters stating the soft edges are not very effective or even work at all. You might check with the digital crowd on that. In most cases I think they reach for the hard grads. Personally, I use the hards mostly, but here with tree tops involved it might be too much with a hard edge IMO.
Wonderful streamside autumn scene. I can see what Paul means about the backward lean of the trees (convergence,) but it doesn't bother me as the effect is minor.
Not sure I can help with the blend. I don't know that a grad would have been the solution as it would have darkened the aspen as well which may not have been a desired effect. And I'm still at a loss on blending and can't figure out how you could blend a darker sky and then paint all the intricacies of the leaves back in.
I'm not quite sure what you mean about "in a print you would see it." See the movement in the leaves? Or the blend? It does look good here though for sure.
I also like the clarity and translucense of the water.
Lon
Thanks Lon, One good thing about digital is in a scene like this if there is no movement you can snap for the sky and one for the rest. Photoshop is going to create somewhat of a line that doesn't belong there if the scene only requires one shot for the sensor. So why not take advantage of exposure blending if you can't use an Nd grad for the scene. 3 stops of light seems to be a good limit. After that you might get acused of the Thomas Kinkade style photo. I could see how some might disagree with it but if some photographers are making a living doing landscape photography and using this method, I don't see why I wouldn't want to take advantage of it.
In a scene like this with lightweight leaves they move just enough to where they cause differences between both images making a bad blend in PS. That is the case here, you can't tell in the 720 pixels but in in a print. In the print you would see some dark edges and light edges where the movement occured. You can usually find this walking into any gallery of prints for an artist that does this.
Beautifully made! The colorful leaves resemble fireworks going off. The dark water adds a nice base for the composition and there is good balance overall.