Author | Thread |
|
10/25/2006 10:02:37 PM · #1 |
This is a shot that I took of a little ice cream shop by the river in Clarksville, In. I was shooting the Louisville skyline and this was behind me so I too few while I was there.
My question is: What would you do to this shot? Is it even worth doing anything to?
Shot in raw, changed WB to tungsten, converted to jpeg, cropped, and rotated to straighten just a bit.
As you might be able to tell, I'm not very skilled in the post-processing department but I am trying real hard to learn.
Anyone have any input?
 |
|
|
10/25/2006 10:17:24 PM · #2 |
Tell me a little more about the picture Todd:
What made you want to stop and take this shot?
There are about a zillion ways to process the same image.
What are the important elements in this one to you?
|
|
|
10/25/2006 10:20:01 PM · #3 |
please fill in your exif info.... |
|
|
10/25/2006 10:24:11 PM · #4 |
I'm not sure why I wanted to shoot this. It just looks like a nice place for a family to stop for ice cream.
I really like the building itself, especially with the deep lue sky in the background. I also like the tree on the side.
|
|
|
10/25/2006 10:31:19 PM · #5 |
I filled in the info. I'm sorry to be such a newbie.
But, that's why I'm here...to learn as much as I can! |
|
|
10/25/2006 11:03:25 PM · #6 |
Hi Todd,
I like the architecture and the deep color of the sky.
It seems that the windows are a bit blown out (washed out or overexposed). You could try putting these areas in a layer and try dimming it down a bit (darken via levels or curves). Even doing so, won't produce the detail that is missing, but you may be able to clone some detail from the surrounding areas into these areas.
Did you "bracket" the exposure? Was 8 seconds absolutely necessary for exposure? Maybe a larger aperture, a shorter exposure, or higher ISO? You may not have had a choice.
Keep it up...the more photos you take, the better you'll get!
|
|
|
10/26/2006 12:01:54 AM · #7 |
Hey Todd,
Is it ok if I edit your shot and post it in here?
I like the shot quite a lot, but not for the same reasons you̢۪ve mentioned.
I like the architecture and the warmth of the lighting, but I want to see more detail in the shadows and in the highlights.
The picture reminds me of a gingerbread house or a warm and inviting place like a Christmas town or something from a Marty Bell painting. It̢۪s a great composition.
My first thought was if you had altered the sky to gain that color. I don̢۪t know if I like the strange blue color yet. And the tree?? I̢۪m afraid I̢۪d crop most of it out of the shot. That̢۪s just my opinion and it doesn̢۪t make it right or wrong. My work is generally far from main stream, so take that with a grain of salt.
I played with the shot for a short bit and ended up quite close to what you had to begin with. I did however pull some of the color from the roof to bring out the detail in the tiles and I darkened the sky to keep it from pulling attention from the house. I also cropped out some of the sky and the tree. I would like to add detail in the lightest highlight areas but I think it may be a little too blown out to soften it up.
Here̢۪s my adjusted version:
 |
|
|
10/26/2006 12:08:51 AM · #8 |
That is a shot worth retaking.
This is where CS2's HDR merge would really do wonders. A series of bracket shots, running as far as -4EV at least to up around +3EV then merge into a single HDR image, making the best of the highlights and shadows, yet retaining the mid-level tone & details.
I did a half-assed edit of it to
inspire you to go back and reshoot:
It involved lots or selective adjustments in layers, a couple shadow/highlight adjustments, erasing back out what I didn't want changed, some white balance adjustments in areas, a lot of selective desaturation with the sponge tool, painting over the wood shingle areas in overlay mode, selective desaturation of the purple glow, some burning in the desaturated areas. The overlay method of repainting works best if the area is destaurated, thus retaining the details, then when painted over, it's basically recoloring the neutrals to look natural.
Message edited by author 2006-10-26 00:15:53. |
|
|
10/26/2006 12:26:43 AM · #9 |
It̢۪s definitely worth re-shooting to gain the detail in the highlights.
It also makes a great black and white by-the-way.
(Nice rendering Brad)
|
|
|
10/26/2006 12:48:16 AM · #10 |
What Brad said; several, correctly-spaced exposures could be used to generate a nice HDRI image. But I took your original and converted it to 16-bit TIFF and did a quick-and-dirty single-image tone mapping on it. Wow! Where did that tree come from? :-)
Oh yeah, I used skew control also to straighten the verticals, and I got rid of most of the magenta...
Robt.
Message edited by author 2006-10-26 00:48:56. |
|
|
10/26/2006 01:04:30 AM · #11 |
Thank you everyone. As you can tell, I'm still pretty new to photography and I'm trying to develope an eye for composition and detail. When Gringo asked what made me want to take this picture I really had a tough time coming up with an answere. At this point all I know is that I see things and i know (or I think) there is a picture there that could be nice. I can't put into words what I see or why I like what I see. Hopefully, as I gain more experience, I'll be able to explain my shots, what i was trying to accomplish and why. Untill then, I'm haviing a blast with my camera and reading forums on here every single night. I may not post alot but I read almost everything!!! I've learned so much in just a few monthes and I really appreciate everyone here being so eager to help. In my opinion, everyone who uses a digital camera weather for family snapshots or whatever, should spend some time on DPChallenge. Thank you!!!!! |
|
|
10/26/2006 01:06:33 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by Gringo: It̢۪s definitely worth re-shooting to gain the detail in the highlights.
It also makes a great black and white by-the-way.
(Nice rendering Brad) |
Thanks.
I agree about the B&W too:
 |
|
|
10/26/2006 01:23:37 AM · #13 |
I was immediately drawn to the image, the original one with the yellow-orange lights because it reminds me of those old Santa village collections you set up on a mantle. All you need is some snow!
|
|
|
10/26/2006 01:39:34 AM · #14 |
My version >.> I didnt want to upload to my profile running out of space >.<
//i14.tinypic.com/2qdxzd2.jpg
Message edited by karmat - use thumbs or links in forums, please. |
|
|
10/26/2006 02:49:58 AM · #15 |
this is what happens when you ask "what would shanny do?"... especially late at night :) :) :) hehe!!! this was fun :)

|
|
|
10/26/2006 03:06:03 AM · #16 |
Nice picture!
Well there's a number of things you can do in the actual photoshoot to help things along. If you shoot in RAW and bring a grey card you can do a white balance either enter it in your camera and take the picture, or do it after at home with the help of programs like PhaseOne and the such.
You're a bit "over" or "hot" in some areas of the photo and that's entirely your choice to decide if you like it like that or not, but you can eliminate that by taking multiple exposures.
Last things, I'm not sure what time it was, but it looks a bit dark (the sky) to me... the best time (IMHO) for night shots is really dusk - the whole 15 minutes that it lasts! That perfect balance between day and night when the sky still has colour yet it's darker...
In the end, like it's been said before, it's all a question of what you like and what you want to communicate with your picture - you're the photographer after all! :P
|
|
|
10/26/2006 09:00:23 AM · #17 |
I don't have the editing skills that some have shown here, so I won't even try. But one very minor thing that I noticed, I like the use of framing with the tree but the branch coming down into the roof there is (just a little bit) distracting. When it merges into the subject it loses some of that special something. I think it would look better with a little space in between. Some creative cloning could take care of that, or if you were to reshoot it (and I agree with trying it at dusk as mentioned earlier and then you could stay around 'til dark) take a step or two closer so that the branch is a bit higher and doesn't intrude on the subject. Again, a very minor thing and my humble opinion for what it's worth. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/13/2025 05:57:30 PM EDT.