Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: How do I recover interior photography blown out?  (Read 13010 times)
sniper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 571


« Reply #40 on: September 19, 2007, 02:29:59 AM »
ReplyReply

For heavens sake! the guy was an assistant on the shoot, he never claimed to be a pro, we don't know how much experience he has.  
He came here for advice and help, and apart from a few helpfull posts all he got was a crit on his abilities followed by people arguing.

Wayne
Logged
mistybreeze
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 177


« Reply #41 on: September 19, 2007, 07:56:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You can argue about the tone of Johnathan's reply and about whether it was reasonable to use the word incompetent, but to blow highlights like that is an error.
Hogwash. I pity the poor artist whose mind is so closed.

When an art director or client tells me he doesn't care about window detail (because the view is ugly or the window paint is chipping or the drapes are torn...) I give him "ethereal" windows. Travel magazines (with no budget for lights and crews) offer this style of (hotel/restaurant) interior photos all the time. When the published images are small, it doesn't matter.

Sun-filled windows are always a challenge for interior images. The quality and direction of the outdoor light in GLuijk's photo does not compare to couleur's. I've seen many cases where photographers "over-burn" the window/view in a wide dynamic range image and, to my eye, it looks fake. Couleur's image is a good one for a Photoshop class assignment, entitled "How far is too far."

You can proffer you don't appreciate the look and suggest methods that might satisfy your eye but, without knowing all the details, judging incompetence is nothing more than ego and hubris. (Notice no apology from poster supposedly having a bad day.) I'm no fan of Katrin Eismann's art but I wouldn't call her incompetent.
« Last Edit: September 19, 2007, 07:58:46 AM by mistybreeze » Logged
kikashi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3684



« Reply #42 on: September 19, 2007, 09:14:40 AM »
ReplyReply

I wrote:

You can argue about the tone of Johnathan's reply and about whether it was reasonable to use the word incompetent, but to blow highlights like that is an error.

Quote
Hogwash. I pity the poor artist whose mind is so closed.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140388\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well, I can live with your pity. The chap made a mistake (otherwise known as an error). He realises he did, which is why he asked for help.

I make mistakes. We all (well, perhaps not you) make mistakes. That's how we learn ("clever people learn from their mistakes; really clever people learn from other people's mistakes"). To pretend that something which was a mistake wasn't is simply silly.

As Glujik pointed out,
Quote
The only thing you need to prevent the windows from blowing, is not to blow them. It sounds obvious, but it's the only trick.

Jeremy
« Last Edit: September 19, 2007, 10:44:33 AM by kikashi » Logged
mistybreeze
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 177


« Reply #43 on: September 19, 2007, 10:14:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The chap made a mistake (otherwise known as an error). He realises he did, which is why he asked for help.
As far as I can tell, "the chap" didn't take the photo ("Recently I was working as an assistant"). Your suppositions are presumptuous and your mistakes are noted.
Logged
Kirk Gittings
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1533


WWW
« Reply #44 on: September 19, 2007, 10:21:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
As far as I can tell, "the chap" didn't take the photo ("Recently I was working as an assistant"). Your suppositions are presumptuous and your mistakes are noted.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140431\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


He said......
Quote
I took a few different exposures just to ensure nothing goes wrong, but I did not make a HDR.


This discussion is getting out of hand. I can't believe the way this poor guy has been treated here. This is a demo for how not to treat someone who asks an innocent, honest question. Hopefully he can sift thru all the animosity and get to actually helpful comments like those of BDK, Schewe or Smith.
« Last Edit: September 19, 2007, 10:25:16 AM by Kirk Gittings » Logged

Thanks,
Kirk

Kirk Gittings
Architecture and Landscape Photography
WWW.GITTINGSPHOTO.COM

LIGHT+SPACE+STRUCTURE (blog)
mistybreeze
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 177


« Reply #45 on: September 19, 2007, 10:37:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
He said......
"I took a few different exposures just to ensure nothing goes wrong, but I did not make a HDR."
Background info isn't clear, for sure, but it really doesn't matter whether the OP is a lower-tiered photographer for a company or a digital assistant who manned the shutter for whatever reason. As far as I'm concerned, couleur did not deserve to be called incompetent. And that's my final offer.  
Logged
kikashi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3684



« Reply #46 on: September 19, 2007, 10:45:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
As far as I can tell, "the chap" didn't take the photo ("Recently I was working as an assistant"). Your suppositions are presumptuous and your mistakes are noted.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140431\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Oh, don't be so ridiculously pompous.
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5257


WWW
« Reply #47 on: September 19, 2007, 11:57:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Oh, don't be so ridiculously pompous.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140444\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Both of you yahoos go stand in the friggin' corner...it doesn't surprise me that OP hasn't returned...

If you don't have something useful to say, keep your friggin' fingers off the keyboard.
Logged
Philmar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 341


WWW
« Reply #48 on: September 19, 2007, 04:17:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Both of you yahoos go stand in the friggin' corner...it doesn't surprise me that OP hasn't returned...

If you don't have something useful to say, keep your friggin' fingers off the keyboard.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140467\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
When Jeff barks, people listen....even on matters unrelated to Photoshop.

THAT'S why you refer to yourself and your cohorts as the PixelMafia  
Logged

An office drone pension administrator by day and a photo-enthusiast by night, week-end and on vacation who carries his camera when traveling the world:
Please have a chew on my photos:
http://www.fluidr.com/photos/phil_marion/sets
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3648



WWW
« Reply #49 on: September 19, 2007, 04:28:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Jonathan- with all due respect, you are simply incorrect. I did not use highlight recovery, I used the method that Jeff Schewe and Kevin Smith describe in their posts. I have used it with great success on far worse shots than the original example.  If you care to learn about how to do this easily in Photoshop please feel free to sign up for my class at ICP here in NYC, as I incorporate these methods as part of my course on digital architectural photography.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140223\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Do post details about your course !

Edmund
Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
sinc
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 28



WWW
« Reply #50 on: September 19, 2007, 05:11:26 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't know if the below is acceptable, but it's just a quick try at ameliorating the blow out with the Shadow/Highlight function in Photoshop.

[attachment=3330:attachment]
Logged

Joseph T. Sinclair, Author
Kirk Gittings
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1533


WWW
« Reply #51 on: September 19, 2007, 05:57:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I don't know if the below is acceptable, but it's just a quick try at ameliorating the blow out with the Shadow/Highlight function in Photoshop.

[attachment=3330:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140542\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


That doesn't really solve the problem as there is no detail on any of the channels in the window or window reflection to recreate or enhance. The result is a darkening of the bright areas around the blown out window and refection, but that is not the problem. The suggestions above about highlight recovery from bracketed exposures works well, though my preference would be to simply light the room properly to balance it with the exterior, which would take me less time than doing the recovery in PS and personally I would rather spend more time shooting than sitting in front of the damn computer.
Logged

Thanks,
Kirk

Kirk Gittings
Architecture and Landscape Photography
WWW.GITTINGSPHOTO.COM

LIGHT+SPACE+STRUCTURE (blog)
Kevin W Smith
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 51


WWW
« Reply #52 on: September 21, 2007, 01:32:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
That doesn't really solve the problem as there is no detail on any of the channels in the window or window reflection to recreate or enhance. The result is a darkening of the bright areas around the blown out window and refection, but that is not the problem. The suggestions above about highlight recovery from bracketed exposures works well, though my preference would be to simply light the room properly to balance it with the exterior, which would take me less time than doing the recovery in PS and personally I would rather spend more time shooting than sitting in front of the damn computer.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140550\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You're right, it didn't work.

FWIW, I try to use natural and/or installed lighting as much as possible, supplemental lighting is only a last resort to get the shot with one exposure. Heck, that image of the tiny living room could probably have been lighted with a single on-camera flash bounced off the ceiling to bring it's light value closer to the window, but what about a huge commercial space? Sometimes, it's just impossible to light a whole room so you have to use what's there, which is when these techniques come in handy.

I suspect though by looking at your (very nice) work that you know this, I'm just mentioning it because it needed to be said.

BTW, I still shoot 4x5 as much as possible and have a number of high power strobe packs, so I have a pretty good idea of what you can and can't accomplish with supplemental lighting. 95% of the time all those powerful lights stay in the back of my car. It's like the umbrella paradox: carry an umbrella if there's a chance of rain and it probably won't, but if you leave it at home it's gonna pour!

BTW, have you ever seen Adrian Wilson's work? (www.interiorphotography.net). He doesn't own a single light, doesn't believe in them, and shot 6x7 film for 20 years before recently buying a 39MP digital system. Point being that it's not always necessary to either light an interior or do any exposure blending - Adrian built a lucrative career as an interior specialist without using either.
Logged
stefan marquardt
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 142


WWW
« Reply #53 on: September 21, 2007, 02:57:48 AM »
ReplyReply

if you cant get any real info out of the overexposed file anymore, create some info, so that the totaly blown areas at least dont read 255. 255. 255.
I would create a new layer. in that layer stamp some of the surounding areas into the blown areas (stamp set to 10-30% or so). plus I would create some additional film grain (photoshop filter) in those areas. now use the rubber on the top layer and make the bottom layer with the newly created highlights shine through. dont overdo it. filmgrain in the overexposed areas makes it look a bit more like film.

now, this is something I dont tend to do. its only a very last resort.

stefan
Logged

stefan marquardt
stefanmarquardt.de
architecture & interior photography
www.stefanmarquardt-architekturbild.de
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad