DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Individual Photograph Discussion >> Adding ND Gradient Filters to Landscapes
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 23 of 23, (reverse)
AuthorThread
01/06/2015 10:00:13 AM · #1
I am going through some tutorials about editing landscaping, what I had found interesting is the fact that this work flow includes adding ND Gradient filters to the top and the bottom of each of the photos even though he had them on his lenses in the first place.

I have added a couple on mine as well but this seems to be the norm to every picture he edits..

Does your editing work flow for landscape photos always include gradient filters for the top and bottom???

Also, when it came to waters and making it smooth, he uses a brush on light room and smooths it out by lowering the clarity if he doesn't want any rough parts..

How many of you do that as well?

I just found it interesting on these work flow processes and the fact of it is, how much to add as well, but it makes more sense somewhat.

01/06/2015 10:24:59 AM · #2
it depends.

if one part of the scene is lighter or darker a gradient filter will help even it out. i use radial filter all the time in lightroom to draw interest to the face. its something you need to figure out if you want or not. the eye is usually drawn to lighter areas of the image so adjusting the tones of certain areas will help you control how the viewers eye travels in your image.

for water, i prefer to go into photoshop duplicate the layer and apply a linear motion blur to water to smooth it out and then adjust the opacity of the layer and mask out everything but the water, using clarity alone in lightroom can get funky because it doesn't always paint the mask correctly.

Message edited by author 2015-01-06 10:26:38.
01/06/2015 10:31:32 AM · #3
I use them often (but not always) for landscapes, but also for any other pictures where the lighting is uneven. Look at my "How'd they do that?" article "River Bend" for an example. You can also check the quick edit I did to Bear_Music's house panoramic picture in the "Photo a week 2015" thread -- both of our edits are posted there for comparison.

ETA: I don't actually use a "graduated ND filter" in software -- I create a gradient mask and use it to mask a Curves adjustment layer.

Message edited by author 2015-01-06 11:51:58.
01/06/2015 10:38:34 AM · #4
another approach is to bracket your exposure with a tripod and instead of doing a hdr combination, you can combine the images and adjust the layer opacities and blend modes and use masks to get the same effect but with less noise generated from the software.
01/06/2015 12:03:22 PM · #5
^^ THAT.
For most landscape images, I would vastly prefer to bracket the shot and do a manual blend in post. That way I am not trapped in the strength, position and sharpness of my gradient due to the physical filter used; I can choose all of these in post. This is particularly useful when the horizon is not straight. For an example of this technique in an extreme contrast situation, see this image:

See the image details for specifics.
01/06/2015 12:04:34 PM · #6
I generally use a duplicated background layer in Multiply blend mode and tweak the opacity/fill settings, then create a mask with a white-to-black gradient.

Sometimes I combine that with a large-radius low-amount unsharp mask background layer copy as well, to make the sky pop a bit more.

When I get it resized to DPC size is when I will flatten it and do any spot editing, so having all the layers and opacity and stuff don't make it confusing. But I've never tried smoothing out water, I just leave it be.
01/06/2015 12:32:04 PM · #7
I have found soft grad ND filters (physical kind) helpful at the time of image capture, especially when the dynamic range is 10 stops of light or more. Images captured in RAW format have more potential for retaining shadows and highlights. It would be a rare event for to use faster than ISO 100 for landscape shots, which helps a lot on the electronic noise. Also, stopping down less than tiniest aperture size is helpful for image quality. f/16 is okay. f/22 is not okay. f/8 or f/11 is usually the best for most scenes.

Additionally, I almost always bracket exposures (constant aperture) for potential HDR use. In Nik Software's HDR Efex Pro 2, there is also a graduated neutral density filter (software) that is often helpful.

Whether HDR blend, or not, Nik Software's Color Efex Pro 4 has a grad ND filter (software). Finally, Nik software's Viveza 2 allows control point technology to selectively fine tune a scene.

Regarding your silk water effect question: I have found the most eye-pleasing water flow to occur between 0.5s and 1.5s shutter length. Shorter shutter speed are rough. Longer shutter speeds can become too smooth.
01/07/2015 08:04:10 AM · #8
Thanks for the insight !!

I am just playing around with these techniques right now in the tutorials...

Also, for the landscaping they do spot highlighting like exposing more of certain buildings and they will add clarity/sharpening to these areas as well, as instead of adding it to the whole picture they will just add spot clarity/sharpness, or just spot highlighting in certain areas, they tended to use a brush a lot, dodging, burning, I have really not played around with that in lightroom at all, the feathering out certain areas... just these little tricks of lightroom makes a huge difference now in the workflow, I never knew it could do this much and I am finding out I am loving lightroom more and more as I learn these little things..kinda fun just re-learning the basics again

Now looking back on my older photos, its pretty scary LOL

Message edited by author 2015-01-07 08:08:56.
01/07/2015 09:02:41 AM · #9
lightroom has gotten pretty good with spot edits, photoshop isn't really needed anymore except for some really involved tasks.
01/07/2015 09:18:58 AM · #10
I am finding the only time I really use photoshop anymore is for re-sizing photos and if I am doing something and need layers..

One of the things I am not understanding in lightroom at the moment is the Adjustments for Chromatic Aberration...

The tutorial is showing me "how" to do it which is really cool and adds a lot of pop to the photos seeing the before and after, but I am not understanding exactly what it does, or what the difference is in using it or even why I have to use it, it is part of this tutorials normal workflow as well, I have never touched this part of lightroom yet. They just don't explain the details just tell me.. Do it LOL

I have everything written down but its just the understanding of this part of the section

Message edited by author 2015-01-07 09:22:45.
01/07/2015 09:36:48 AM · #11
Originally posted by jgirl57:

One of the things I am not understanding in lightroom at the moment is the Adjustments for Chromatic Aberration...


With many lenses, there will be some amount of CA that will show up in the corners of the image. When you see it, it will often look like a colored fringe at high-contrast edges. The color of the fringe can vary. Lr is pretty good at automatically correcting this, just check the "Remove Chromatic Aberration" box, et voila! Now, there are some fringing effects that will not be removed with this method, and for that you'll need the de-fringing adjustments. Mostly, this latter type of CA shows up with large-aperture lenses shot near wide open in high-contrast situations. I have not had to correct this often, and I can't remember the last time I had to do so.
01/07/2015 11:18:01 AM · #12
I wouldn't even know if you would have to adjust it, how can you tell, it sounds so simple, but I think I may be making this harder than what I am making it again LOL

Message edited by author 2015-01-07 11:19:35.
01/07/2015 11:41:00 AM · #13
as kirbic said you may not need this adjustment. if you have say some trees with no foliage against a bright sky, if you zoom in you may see some magenta or green fringing on the small limbs, checking this box will usually remove it, if not you can manually adjust it to remove it with the sliders.

i've never heard of using CA adjustments to add pop to an image. for it to automatically work, the proper lens profile needs to be picked up or you can select the lens yourself. this area should also remove some lens distortion and vignetting.

Message edited by author 2015-01-07 11:43:36.
01/07/2015 12:19:06 PM · #14
Originally posted by Mike:

.... for it to automatically work, the proper lens profile needs to be picked up or you can select the lens yourself. this area should also remove some lens distortion and vignetting.


Mike, here's an interesting tidbit: CA correction works even if there is no lens profile available. It's been that way at least since Lr 4, I use CA correction all the time with my microscope adapters @ work, and it corrects pretty darn well! What it will not do without a profile is correct lens distortions and peripheral illumination.
01/07/2015 01:37:46 PM · #15
thanks! that makes more sense!

I am sure I will have more questions to clarify as I work through this tutorial LOLOL
I was just going to ask that about the distortions too, so you just answered that question for me, thank you!
01/07/2015 06:48:36 PM · #16
Which tutorials are you watching? Jgirl57?
01/07/2015 10:19:15 PM · #17
If you're shooting with old and/or cheaper glass, CA correction can DEFINITELY "add pop" to an image, because excessive CA makes images look fuzzy...
01/07/2015 11:00:32 PM · #18
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

If you're shooting with old and/or cheaper glass, CA correction can DEFINITELY "add pop" to an image, because excessive CA makes images look fuzzy...


Well, the "old glass" in my eye sockets makes images look fuzzy too... :-P
01/08/2015 07:38:02 AM · #19
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

If you're shooting with old and/or cheaper glass, CA correction can DEFINITELY "add pop" to an image, because excessive CA makes images look fuzzy...

No, really? ;-)
01/08/2015 09:01:35 AM · #20
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

If you're shooting with old and/or cheaper glass, CA correction can DEFINITELY "add pop" to an image, because excessive CA makes images look fuzzy...


that makes sense, the way it initially sounded the tutorial used it as a tool solely to add pop and not to add pop as a function of removing a lens defect.
01/08/2015 09:50:50 AM · #21
I won a session called "Retouching Master Class" One of his many tutorials from Serge Ramelli.
He does have free ones on Utube, but these tutorials are way more in-depth.

I just really love his editing style and he is a master at taking landscaping photos, one of my favorites to learn from right now. I won it because I attended one of his live webinar seminars a few weeks ago, they randomely pulled a name and it was mine, out of 160ppl I never win anything, so it was pretty cool and I am learning alot. He learned from Kelby one, and I also do free tutorials there too.. What I love most about this tutorial is that he actually gives you his photos as a download so that way you can work side by side and do what he does that way you know how to work each detail he applies. I think it adds much more power punch learn which I desperatly need, not too many other tutorials give their photos away as examples like that I have found. I know what things are in lightroom, but I had no clue on why or what I needed to adjust something or even the fact how much to adjust things. I always have applied too much of everything or nothing at all on other things.
This is actually giving me somewhat of a workflow to follow and to test things now without just willy nilly doing things just beacause I can LOL
I have had this for two weeks now and still on the first lesson, just taking it slow to let it soak in. I want to know the whys, hows and whens
~~~~~~~
I will have to watch that again to see if it was a defect of the lens or a "pop" thing, I do not remember him saying anything about neither of it but he likes to add that tecnique a lot, I just did not know why anyone would mess with it. I will let you all know though either way.

I know I have an older lens on my nikon, I wonder if that would help all my photos now too because they like being fuzzy lol

Message edited by author 2015-01-08 10:10:51.
01/08/2015 11:12:31 AM · #22
adobe has youtube tutorials where they run through all of lightroom and explain pretty well what each does.
01/10/2015 10:47:04 PM · #23
Thank you, I have searched and saved them to run through them after I get done with this one. I appreciate you letting me know about them. I have not seen any of those yet.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 06:29:07 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 06:29:07 PM EDT.