Playing with the 10-20mm----sunset.

[Steve S]

This is the first time i tried to combine several images. This was 6 tiff images overlayed in layers with gimp. 3 for the sky and 3 for the land. Shot with sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 lens at 10mm, f/9,iso 100---2 sets of -2 to +2 bracked exposures. Any critique is most appreciated. Especially since i have no clue what i'm doing with this wide angle This lens is tough to get the hang of.

[agaace]

I love the composition and colors, and the light on the trees in the foreground. The sky is awesome! Big congrats!
I'd just try to reduce the little amount of white halo you've got from blending (at the edge of the sky and the trees). I'd also try to slightly brighten the foreground trees (but that might be just my lousy laptop screen).

[Colin Southern]

Hi Steve,

Looks good, although I've found that often a hint of detail in the foreground adds a lot to an image. I've given it a Photoshop 30 Second Makeover (TM!) for you - what do you think?

[Yan Zhang]

I like Colin's version, especial the color, and some details of the fence and background.

[Colin Southern]

Actually - I just twigged on to something - Steve said "sunset" in the thread title, but the time said "sunrise" in the Exif data.

Sounds like the camera time might be set incorrectly if it is indeed a sunset.

[Steve S]

Actually - I just twigged on to something - Steve said "sunset" in the thread title, but the time said "sunrise" in the Exif data.

Sounds like the camera time might be set incorrectly if it is indeed a sunset.

Thanks colin. It was a sunset, the camera is off by 12 hours. I'm just too lazy to change it.

It looks like you boosted the vibrance and saturation in your version?

[Steve S]

I got bored at work, and did a little re-edit. I slectively added some saturation and contrast using layers. This computer screen sux, so i can't tell if it is ok, or too much. What do you think?

[Colin Southern]

Thanks colin. It was a sunset, the camera is off by 12 hours. I'm just too lazy to change it.

It looks like you boosted the vibrance and saturation in your version?

Yeah - then wiped the sky with the saturation brush, and the opposite with some of the greenery. Bit of hand dodging/burning as well.

I like your last edit best of all - well done.

[arith]

Looks like a lot of work to me, I wouldn't know where to start with Gimp. But since you can take photo's in bad light, how do you do your colour balance? I went out into the dark for the first time the other day and found myself a bit confused as to exactly fix the right colour balance.

Normally I use an off white card but was not sure if there was going to be low light from the sun 30 mins before sunrise or the weak tungsten I wanted captured.

[Colin Southern]

how do you do your colour balance? I went out into the dark for the first time the other day and found myself a bit confused as to exactly fix the right colour balance.

Hi Arith,

I think that it helps to take a step back and take a look at just what one is trying to achieve in white balancing ...

It's really just an adjustment to ensure that the colour of key objects isn't tainted by the colour of the light that's illuminating them, but it's not always that "cut and dried";

- In the case of a photo of a couple enjoying a candle light dinner you wouldn't expect to have accurate skin tones - you'd expect to see a yellow cast from the candle. And in fact "correct" white balancing in this situation looks completely unnatural.

- In the case of a silhouette shot (perhaps a sunset with silhouetted mountains) your not trying to preserve the colour of any foreground objects - so "correct" white balancing becomes a case of "whatever makes the sunset look the way you want it to look" - again, if you "correctly" white balanced a sunset (technically impossible) you'd end up with essentially a greyscale image (with no colour) - not what you'd usually want.

- In the case of shots like Steves, it really just a case of changing the WB until the memory colours (in this case the grass) looks like you want it to look. You CAN WB to a grey card, but it's really only good as a starting point - you'd probably want to add extra warmth because you wouldn't expect things to look like they would at high noon in a sunset shot.

So to answer the question, the short answer is "just tweak it so it looks right" -- often temporarily upping the saturation to an extreme level helps (because it magnifies any deviation from the ideal).

Hope this helps

[Steve S]

Looks like a lot of work to me, I wouldn't know where to start with Gimp. But since you can take photo's in bad light, how do you do your colour balance? I went out into the dark for the first time the other day and found myself a bit confused as to exactly fix the right colour balance.

Normally I use an off white card but was not sure if there was going to be low light from the sun 30 mins before sunrise or the weak tungsten I wanted captured.

Hi arith, first let me say sun rise and sun set is not bad light, it's the VERY BEST LIGHT. It may be low light, but the best .

As far as color balance, i shoot in RAW and use auto WB in the mornings and evenings. Auto WB works very well in the morning and evening, and by shooting in RAW, you can tweek it if needed.

In harder light of the afternoon ; indoors; or with mult. light sources ; i use a manual WB, set with an expo disc.

To check your WB, you can view your RGB histograms . When the right side of all three histograms are even, the the WB is neutral. I usually like it slightly on the warm side, so i make the red and green just slightly to the right of the blue. Colin gave a very good explaination, and it is really up to personal taste of the photographer and what your trying to convey in the photo , as to where you should set it. So in other words, make it neutral---warm it up a bit --- then eyeball it to what looks good to you. If you have several photos in the same light, write the setting down so you make them all the same.

Oh yea, as far as gimp goes, i didn't know anything about it a year ago. It takes some time and effort to learn.................you can view over 100 tutorials on how to use it at meetthegimp.org . You can download gimp and ufRaw for free.

[Peter Ryan]

Good comments Colin and Steve.

I just came back from outback Australia where the earth and rocks are red and can throw off the white balance giving a cool cast to the shot.

If you colour correct by numbers you can take out all the warmth in a shot (especially early morning and late afternoon) so while you can technically correct a shot you cannot forget that we use light and all its nuisances to record our emotions so clinically bringing all shots back to a base element takes the emotion out of your shots.

Best regards,

[CNelson]

Good comments Colin and Steve.

If you colour correct by numbers you can take out all the warmth in a shot (especially early morning and late afternoon) so while you can technically correct a shot you cannot forget that we use light and all its nuisances to record our emotions so clinically bringing all shots back to a base element takes the emotion out of your shots.

Best regards,

I like the shot and especially as a little more detail is provided. I agree with the advice in that regard. I am especially in agreement with Peter's comments. My objective in a photograph is to please myself and hopefully evoke a response. Along with composition, contrast and other factors, color is very important. Being technically accurate in reproducing the exact color of the scene is secondary to evoking an aesthetic response in the viewer. With color, light and detail we always have to decide what is too much and too little but that's what makes each photograph a bit of self expression.

Chuck

[arith]

Hi arith, first let me say sun rise and sun set is not bad light, it's the VERY BEST LIGHT. It may be low light, but the best .

As far as color balance, i shoot in RAW and use auto WB in the mornings and evenings. Auto WB works very well in the morning and evening, and by shooting in RAW, you can tweek it if needed.

In harder light of the afternoon ; indoors; or with mult. light sources ; i use a manual WB, set with an expo disc.

To check your WB, you can view your RGB histograms . When the right side of all three histograms are even, the the WB is neutral. I usually like it slightly on the warm side, so i make the red and green just slightly to the right of the blue. Colin gave a very good explaination, and it is really up to personal taste of the photographer and what your trying to convey in the photo , as to where you should set it. So in other words, make it neutral---warm it up a bit --- then eyeball it to what looks good to you. If you have several photos in the same light, write the setting down so you make them all the same.

Oh yea, as far as gimp goes, i didn't know anything about it a year ago. It takes some time and effort to learn.................you can view over 100 tutorials on how to use it at meetthegimp.org . You can download gimp and ufRaw for free.

Thanks everybody; I must say I find the tutorials invaluable. I went out very early one morning a couple of days ago to take a panoramic HDRI of an old footbridge, and hoped to get it just before sunrise with its lights on, to get reflections and cobwebs. But just as I was about to shoot the lights went out.

So I changed the shot but noticed it was a bit blue, however now I know how to set colour balance using Helicon Filter, wher before I kept clicking on the wrong image.

I put the lights on with Gimp which I use for basic stuff only, I hope it isn't too bad.


It is about 0.5MB, so I hope it is ok.

[Steve S]

I think you have a nice shot there arith. I like it. The only thing i see is the 2 different effects to the lights. Shouldn't they look the same? Or is that the way they really did shine?

[arith]

No, there were two on when I was roughly a quarter of a mile away, when I got there only the rear one which was rather like the front one. But I didn't know how to do the effect where an apparently weak light bathes everything in a yellow cast; so it is exagerated. In any case it shouldn't look real because its not, but I suppose it is possible with a little more practice.

I can only use one mask, haven't figured out how to layer them; in fact I don't even know about colour burning and dodging but generally just try the options to see what happens.

Thank you very much.

[Colin Southern]

It is about 2.5MB, so I hope it is ok.

Hi Arith,

Sorry, but it's too big to leave here like that. Would be great if you could resize it down to no more than approx 1000 pixels wide so that the filesize pops up at around 300 - 450kb. Thanks

[arith]

Yes, that's alright. I'm just used to sending everything 100% to fotki, just in case I lose them from my harddrive.

[Colin Southern]

Yes, that's alright. I'm just used to sending everything 100% to fotki, just in case I lose them from my harddrive.

Thanks Arith,

Also, you might find that it looks a bit better if you bring the white clipping point in towards the right-hand end of the histogram and up the saturation a bit

[arith]

Thanks Arith,

Also, you might find that it looks a bit better if you bring the white clipping point in towards the right-hand end of the histogram and up the saturation a bit

Cheers, I just noticed the purple floor, which I have now changed and wished I didn't put a supa nova on the first light, but I don't fancy starting it all over.