Forum Moderators: wheatpenny
Photography F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2025 Feb 18 8:03 am)
"The happiness of a man in this life does not consist in the
absence but in the mastery of his passions."
Danny O'Byrne http://www.digitalartzone.co.uk/
"All the technique in the world doesn't compensate for the inability to notice" Eliott Erwitt
Danny O'Byrne http://www.digitalartzone.co.uk/
"All the technique in the world doesn't compensate for the inability to notice" Eliott Erwitt
If it is in RAW and you have PS CS2 if you embed another copy as a smart object you can then access the RAW exposure compensation and blend the 2 together with a mask.
And every one said, 'If we only live,
We too will go to sea in a Sieve,---
To the hills of the Chankly Bore!'
Far and few, far and few, Are the lands where the Jumblies
live;
Their heads are green, and their hands are blue, And they went to
sea in a Sieve.
Edward Lear
http://www.nonsenselit.org/Lear/ns/jumblies.html
Another, different way to compensate for the washed-out sky, without manipulation afterwards, is to take the image with a 'forced' fill-in flash. Of course the lighting of the subject will be a bit different then (maybe better, who knows), but you'll probably have your clouds there right on the spot ;-) Worth trying!
We do
not see things as they are. ǝɹɐ ǝʍ sɐ sƃuıɥʇ ǝǝs
ǝʍ
The fill flash should work just fine in many cases. If the camera or flash allows compensation on the flash output, that may be balanced with the bg to get what you want and still look pretty natural. If the statue had just shadow when the sky is properly exposed(for sky), the flash can fill that in just enough without looking artificial. Too much "straight on" flash and you will likely loose some of the neat depth of the statue. Sometimes a large white reflector will do fill light just fine but who carries that around with them! Good luck!
Sometimes I will let the cam expose for the sky, read the setting(if digital, just shoot a shot of the sky), then shoot another with the statue as the point of exposure. Then using manual settings somewhere inbetween those two "experiments" might work..sorta depends on the real difference in light and dark in the bg and object.
Once detail is lost in highlights recovery is not a simple process if at all. My 1/2 cent worth. The other folks can give more cents worth than can I.
Message edited on: 03/19/2006 12:33
Using RAW some lost detail is possible to recover, however even with RAW there are limits to this. Toms explanation for using fill flash is good, ok it wont help here but it will help you in the future. If you have a suitable background it is fairly easy to put one in, especially as there is a large difference in contrast between the statue and the sky. Using quick mask or the extract feature of Photoshop are good ways to remove a background, in this case even the magic wand or magic eraser may work to remove the background.
Promiselamb, I posted on "preventive" rather than corrective actions. There are many here with much more refined digital experience than me. You already have some really good advice! This is one reason I like 'rosity so much...good folks overall on the forum and willing to share. We all want to do our best and then do better. This IS a good place to get started in that. Best wishes. TomDart.
Kim Hawkins
Kim Hawkins Eastern Sierra Gallery
This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f852d/f852da34edecd8fb22e632486f88120cf456d1b2" alt="file_334750.jpg"
I shot this image in mexico at rocky point.. and for some reason the clouds did not show up in the shot... so I am thinking the image is kind of dull... is there any way to add the clouds back in? Thanks :-)