The Cooperative of Photography, better known as COOPH, has shared ‘Droneception,’ a quick tutorial video that breaks down how to create ‘mind-bending’ drone images using two-shot, three-shot and more advanced multi-shot methods.
The video is three-and-a-half minutes long with only visuals and text overlays for instructions, but it’s succinct and manages to effectively convey the steps required to get the shots and make the final compositions. These methods should work with nearly any drone, so whether you’re using the newest DJI or a few year old no-name brand, the magic happens with the creative thinking ahead of time and the post-processing done afterwards.
For more videos, head over and subscribe to COOPH’s YouTube Channel.
Astronauts have been taking cameras into space Soviet cosmonaut Gherman Titov orbited the Earth aboard the Vostok 2 in 1961. Since then, astronauts have used cameras to capture some of the most iconic photos of space exploration and created important memories for countless people back on terra firma.
As Scott Manley points out in his new video, How Astronauts Captured Iconic Space Photos – A History of Cameras in Space, although cameras are often modified for space flight, not every camera has been special. In fact, John Glenn bought a standard Ansco Autoset camera on his own, likely to avoid delays if he had gone through the standard government acquisitions process. NASA engineers modified the camera to make it easier to use while in space, including the addition of a pistol grip and an additional viewfinder that could be used with the suit helmet closed. You can learn more about Glenn’s Ansco Autoset in this article from the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum. A second camera on board Glenn’s first orbital flight was a special Leica camera which had been modified to capture wide-spectrum images of stars.
Walter Schirra, pictured above second from the left, took a Hasselblad 500C camera aboard the Mercury Sigma-7 spacecraft. Schirra was a photography enthusiast himself and had asked professional photographers who had been following the space program for advice. On their advice, Schirra purchased the medium format Hasselblad and after it was modified for improved usability and performance, he used it to capture images during six orbits of Earth. The resulting images were very detailed and as Manley says in the video below, established a new standard for images captured in space.
Schirra’s Hasselblad camera was later used in the final Mercury mission by Gordon Cooper and was eventually sold at auction for $ 275,000 USD. If you would like to own a working replica of this same Hasselblad, Cole Rise makes replicas of space cameras, including the Hasselblad 500C. You can learn more about Rise’s cameras at Space Camera Co.
Thanks in large part to Schirra’s photography in space, Hasselblad cameras became important cargo aboard subsequent space exploration missions as part of the Gemini and Apollo missions. Hasselblad cameras were used outside of spacecraft as well, capturing many iconic images. One of these iconic images was of Edward White during his spacewalk in 1965. By this point, Hasselblad had begun working directly with NASA to develop cameras for space and had outfitted NASA with a custom-built Hasselblad 500EL data camera, complete with a silver finish for thermal control, special low-distortion lens and Reseau plate.
This custom-build Hasselblad data camera was used on Apollo 8, 9, 10 and 11 missions. Image credit: Hasselblad
Hasselblad has an informative website dedicated to its history in space, it is well worth checking out.
Near the end of the Apollo program, Nikon began working work NASA to outfit astronauts with customized 35mm SLR cameras. Nikon cameras are still used in space to this day. Some of the modifications made to make Nikon cameras suitable for space include different soldering standards, vacuum-safe lubricants and a more robust metal construction. You can learn more about Nikon’s history, including the use of its cameras in space, by clicking here. Manley also references Timm Chapman, a photographer who owns many Nikon space cameras. Chapman has written extensively about Nikon’s space cameras, including fascinating details on how they were modified.
Screenshot from Nikon’s dedicated history website. Click to enlarge.
To learn more about a history of cameras in space, including the beginning of the digital age in space, watch Scott Manley’s full video above. To see additional videos from Manley, head to his YouTube channel.
For many years, photography was strictly a monochromatic medium. While images offered people detailed depictions of people and places, without color, some people found photographs to be incomplete. In a new video, Vox shares the history of colorized photos and the important role Japan played in the colorization of black and white images.
Japan’s role in the international economy throughout the 18th and 19th centuries was tumultuous, at best. For over 200 years, Japan had closed itself off from the rest of the world, forbidding many from entering the island country. However, a United States naval expedition of warships arrived on Japanese coasts in 1854 and the US forced Japan to open its ports to foreign enterprise and visitors. Travelers and enterprising individuals from around the world traveled to Japan to visit and open businesses. As Vox notes, photography became a burgeoning industry.
Foreign photographers such as Felice Beato and Baron Raimund von Stillfried opened photo studio operations in Japan. Rather than sell customers monochrome images, which were all they could produce with their cameras of the day, photographers like Beato and von Stillfried hired local artists from the ukiyo-e woodblock industry to apply watercolors to black and white prints. Eventually, some of these artists branched out their own.
Time doesn’t stand still, and photography technology became more affordable and amateurs were able to capture their own images, leading to a downturn in the Japanese souvenir photo industry. However, the hand-colored photos from 19th century Japan have had a long-lasting impact. In the video below, Vox shares insight into the history of colorized photos in Japan and shows off beautiful examples that highlight what made, and continues to make, colorized images from Japan so desirable but also potentially problematic in informing a complicated understanding of Japan in the 19th century.
As the video above showcases, when Japanese apprentices branched out from foreign-owned photography studios, some opted to create elaborate depictions of historic Japanese culture to sell to foreigners. One of these apprentices that started his own photography operation was Kusakabe Kimbei. In his work, it’s clear how meticulously crafted some images were, with Kimbei even going so far as to simulate rain using scratches on glass plates and pinning a subject’s clothing to the background to create the appearance of wind. These techniques and resulting images draw on various tropes in traditional Japanese fine art. There are many similarities in composition and subject matter between traditional ukiyo-e woodblock prints and 19th century colorized photos.
The topic brings to light a very interesting discussion on how photography shapes the understanding of a place and time. People often think about photos as realistic representation, whereas a painting doesn’t carry the same weight nor birth the same expectations. However, the early era of the Japanese photo industry was, of course, a for-profit endeavor. Photographers, both foreign and Japanese, wanted to sell a certain idea of Japan to outsiders, and this meant staging scenes, relying on outdated dress and even capitalizing on stereotypes.
If you’d like to learn more about this intriguing topic, Vox offers suggested reading. A Good Type: Tourism and Science in Early Japanese Photographs by David Odo. Sites of ‘Disconnectedness’: The Port City of Yokohama, Souvenir Photograph, and its Audience by Mio Wakita-Elis. Photography in Japan 1853-1912 by Terry Bennett. To view more videos from Vox, including other videos in their ‘Darkroom’ series which shares insight into the history of photography, click here.
Google has released an updated version of the Google Photos app for Android, bringing with it a few new features, including an after-capture Portrait Light mode, a one-tap editing feature and a slightly revamped editing interface.
As Google briefly demonstrated during yesterday’s Pixel 5 event, the new Portrait Light mode will edit the image to appear as though there’s light coming from a light source not actually in the image. While limited to Google’s new Pixel 4a 5G and Pixel 5 devices for the time being, this feature lets you apply ‘lighting’ in post-production by editing the image to appear as though it’s coming from a specific direction.
As noted by PetaPixel, it’s possible this new adjustable lighting technology is derived from a research project Google participated in back in 2019. Google says this feature will be coming to other Pixel devices, but doesn’t specify which ones or a definitive timeframe.
Also included in this Google Photos update is a one-tap editing feature that uses ‘machine learning to give you suggestions that are tailored to the specific photo you’re editing.’ In its current form, only three suggestions are available: Black and White, color Pop and Enhance, but Google says more options for landscapes, portraits and more will be available ‘in the coming months.’
Google has also changed the user interface (UI) of the manual editing tools. There’s now a scrollable toolbar at the bottom with round buttons and icons, akin to the interface of Apple’s Photo app, VSCO and others. This updated interface, in theory, makes it easier to quickly find the settings you need and make the appropriate adjustments.
This update will go live in the Google Play Store this week. If you don’t already have the Google Photos app, you can download it for free; if you do, be sure to keep an eye out for updates. Google hasn’t specified whether or not we’ll see these new features and redesign make their way to the iOS version of the app.
Macro photography has captured the imagination of many-a photographer looking to get out of a creative slump. It’s an eye-opening experience to see otherwise uninteresting subjects revealed in an entirely new way. Even better, it’s pretty cheap to experiment with macro by picking up some inexpensive macro tubes that will work with your existing gear.
DPR contributor Chris Foreman recently shared his experience getting back into macro photography, and detailed his unique approach using focus stacking and a motorized slider. Take a look at his images above for some inspiration and get all the details if you want to give it a try yourself.
A Sony a6300 and an Edelkrone motorized slider: interesting marriage of technique and technology?
Like a lot of people, I’ve always had an interest in macro photography, which unfortunately never really developed into anything more than the odd shot of a flower or two. Then a couple of years ago I sold my seldom used 100mm F2.8 Sony macro lens when I moved from Sony A- to Sony E-mount. At the time I thought my macro shooting days were behind me.
But then I became interested in focus stacking, which is a technique used to blend several images focused at different points so that the depth of field can be increased beyond that of a single image. It can be used for multiple types of shots, but is typically used with close-ups or macro images.
This watch shot was comprised of 50 images taken with a Sony a6300 and 18-55mm lens at F7.1. The camera was a set to 1/25th at ISO 100. The images were blended in Helicon Focus.
About 18 months ago I bought a set of budget Neewer extension tubes to use with my Sony a7 III and Sony a6300. While not really specifically meant for 1:1 macro work, they come in handy when shooting product shots as they let you focus a lot closer to the product (as opposed to without them).
This pile of screws was shot 1:1 with the 7 Artisans 60mm Macro ( F8 at 1/60th and ISO 800). The 30 frames were then blended in Helicon focus.
The other part of this equation is that I’ve been using Edelkrone equipment for a couple of years now and I’ve always been intrigued by the fact their small motorized slider (SliderOne V2 $ 499) has a minimum travel distance of 0.222 ?m. Could this be used for focus stacking in combination with a time lapse sequence?
Using a slider for focus stacking does present some potential problems. For starters, moving the entire camera could introduce errors with perspective and isometric distortion. However, I’m never one for the easy way out, so I decided to investigate further.
This stack of 30 images (55mm F8, 1/60th, ISO 800) was blended in Helicon Focus taken under constant LED lighting.
What type of equipment is used, typically?
Strictly speaking, focus stacking doesn’t require complicated equipment like a slider. Many digital cameras, including a variety of Olympus and Panasonic models, even offer the ability to do all the focus stacking internally by automatically re-focusing the lens and blending the images in-camera. But the slider and dedicated post-processing software allow for a far greater degree of control over the final image.
Additionally, if you’re not using those Olympus and Panasonic cameras, you don’t necessarily need to use a dedicated macro lens; a standard kit lens and some extension tubes can work very well to get you started. You do, however, need to manually refocus the image every time you take a shot so that at least part of the image is in focus each time. Your results can be a bit hit-or-miss if you do it this way, and the software to assemble the images can cost you some money.
Details of technique and equipment
I tried a few different setups for my images, but all of them included the slider and a Sony a6300. Initially I did try using the Sony 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 with a set of Neewer extension tubes (NW-S-AF3A, 10 and 16mm $ 49.99) and some of the images can be seen here. I had to be a little more careful with the lighting when using these tubes as they don’t have internal felt flocking and can cause some lack of contrast and flare if not used carefully, due to internal reflections.
Inexpensive extension tubes can give you extra options for close up photography
While the subject image was relatively large compared to the sensor, it wasn’t quite at a 1:1 ratio, it ended up being ~1:1.1 using both tubes at the closest focus for this lens. In all cases the lens was set to manual focus as was the camera, a careful juggling act was performed to get the right balance of light level, aperture, shutter speed and ISO. After a bit of experimentation I found that I needed to use an aperture of F8; this gave enough sharp areas of focus for each exposure without the need to increase the number of shots.
After a bit of experimentation I found that I needed to use an aperture of F8; this gave enough sharp areas of focus for each exposure without the need to increase the number of shots
I then decided it was time so see how a different macro would work with my setup, so I picked up the low cost 7 Artisans 60mm F2.8 ($ 159.00) to experiment with. This is a true 1:1 ratio lens with a de-clicked iris and manual focus-only. It’s incredibly well constructed with a metal body and allows a close-focus distance of 26cm (about 10.25 inches). It has no communication with the camera body so EXIF iris data is not available. It allows a working distance of 14cm and you can unscrew the lens hood to allow more light in if required.
This set of 30 images was shot with 2 flashes, at (F8, 1/100th, ISO 200) at 52mm with extension tubes.
Of course setting up the shot is 90% of the work – aligning the camera and making sure the axis of movement is exactly perpendicular to the center of the object can take some time when you have a lot of axes of adjustment. Distortion can be mostly corrected for in post-production, but it also takes time.
Trying to eliminate dust, or at least as much of it as possible is also a major part of this sort of photography. I don’t mind the fix it in post attitude but I’d rather try and reduce the amount of work required.
This is about the maximum depth of field I could achieve as the tip of the key is close to exiting the frame. Blended in Photoshop, 60 images at F8, 1/60th, ISO 400.
Lighting is also a key component. I always like to keep things simple so some of my photos were only lit with a single light, and some with up to three. The shot of the key is an example of where more light sources were needed to give more interesting reflections. The lighting of course is crucial and this also took significant time to get right. In the end, I settled on using constant LED lighting rather than flashes as I found they gave me more control.
In the end I settled on using constant LED lighting rather than flashes
After a bit of trial and error I settled on 30-60 shots for each set of exposures. The number of shots was based around the amount of movement of the slider; if you are only traveling a few millimeters then you can get away with 30 shots, but for other scenes – like the watch – I needed 60. Initially I tried 15 shots per move but when the focal planes were blended in software I found too many out of focus areas.
This slightly odd shot of styling gel on a CD is another 60 image stack (F8, 1/60th, ISO 320) processed in Helicon Focus.
Processing the images
For post-processing I decided to try two different solutions: Photoshop, i.e. something that most people are familiar with, and Helicon Focus, a dedicated piece of software. I also chose to work with Raw files. My PC setup for this was by no means high end, I used a self-built Windows 10 PC with 32GB of RAM and a Ryzen 1700X CPU and stored the photos on a 500GB SATA SSD.
For post-processing I decided to try two different solutions: Photoshop, i.e. something that most people are familiar with and Helicon Focus, a dedicated piece of software
I started with Adobe Photoshop ($ 9.99 a month for a 12 month subscription). You can use Adobe Lightroom to apply adjustments to each Raw image globally and then import them as separate layers into Photoshop. I then aligned the images using the auto-align function and then I had to auto-blend all the layers into one. This was a few too many steps for my liking. It is possible to load Raw files directly as an image stack using the built-in script option, but then you still need to auto-blend the images and correct for any exposure changes you want to make.
It would take around 2-3 minutes to load 60 Raw images and align them it then took an additional 2-3 minutes to produce the final image. It was then possible to tweak layers that didn’t quite work by cloning data from layers above or below.
A set of 60 shots at F8, 1/160th at ISO 640 with the 7 Artisans 60mm 1:1 macro. The raw result from Photoshop, an uncropped image showing areas that couldn’t be blended without errors
The Raw Helicon focus result – auto cropped by the software, although this can be turned off.
I also wanted to see what Helicon Focus could offer. The basic Lite package costs $ 30 per month or $ 115 for a lifetime license. It works a little differently than Photoshop. Loading the images can be done directly from the Raw files with basic development settings set up within Helicon Focus itself. I found that the time taken to load 30 Raw images was significantly reduced compared to Photoshop, around 5-10 seconds to load and 3-4 minutes to blend the final picture. After the initial compilation of the image it would then take only about 20-30 seconds to render any subsequent adjustments to the algorithms.
I found that the time taken to load 30 raw images into Helicon Focus was significantly reduced compared to PS
Helicon focus offers three ways of blending the images (weighted average, depth map and pyramid) and also a couple of sliders (radius and smoothing) to help tweak the final result. Helicon exposes to the user what it is doing as it draws a depth map from your images, something that was fascinating to watch, a bit like seeing images from a scanning electron microscope. Like Photoshop you can also clone data between image layers but I found that most of the time Helicon produced a better image or at least one that could be improved by adjusting the algorithm and some of the parameters without the need for cloning.
The depth map that Helicon Focus produces can be adjusted with the radius and smoothing sliders
It’s also very easy to compare the results from the three different algorithms as Helicon gives you a timeline at the bottom of the main window which allows you to look at your session history. You can then easily choose to view any of the versions you have created and see which one works best.
By default Helicon will automatically crop the final image (although this can be changed in the settings). Photoshop makes geometric adjustments and either leaves transparent areas of the image or gives you the option to content aware fill these areas.
Which software should you use? It comes down to what sort of photographer you are
Over all, I found that Helicon’s interpolation is better, and useful if you have fewer images – although it can’t work miracles. Although its Raw development options are limited, you can load images directly from Lightroom.
So which software should you use? I think it comes down to what sort of photographer you are. If you want to make minute adjustments to your image, then Helicon Focus is probably the tool for you, otherwise, Photoshop works fine.
General tips for success
The parts of the petals closest to the camera are causing blending problems here, that’s because they were never in focus.
As a whole, I found that I needed more setup time than I had originally thought. Working at this scale can introduce errors that I was not able to see initially in the viewfinder or on the rear LCD. My advice is to shoot a few frames and then process, to see what adjustments you might have to make, rather than shooting hundreds of images only to find that they won’t work. Below are five other tips from my adventure in macro photography:
Set up your slider for the farthest shot first as this will be the limiting factor to your framing.
Make sure you have a solid tripod and base for your subject. As you may end up with an exposure set that takes minutes to capture, any movement can ruin the resulting image.
Run at least two seconds between exposures, this gives time for the slider movement to settle down. If you plan to use flashes to light your subject you may need to increase this to allow for them to recycle. Use the silent shutter or electronic curtain if possible, this also reduces shake.
Set everything to manual, including white balance. Sometimes small shifts in white balance can cause issues when blending images.
Take more images than you think you need even if you don’t end up blending all of them. It can be very difficult to see what is in focus on your camera’s LCD even when using peaking or expanded focus.
How it worked and what I learned
The most important takeaway: shooting macro with a slider does work. It wasn’t perfect and I could definitely improve things, but it was a successful proof-of-concept.
Like anything, it takes time to get good results and this is achievable by careful setup combined with some experimentation. If you are thinking that focus stacking might be an area of interest for you, don’t think you need go off and purchase a motorized slider; manually changing your focus also works. However, you may find that the optical construction of some lenses (like the 7 Artisans 60mm) don’t allow manually re-focusing without the image size changing quite drastically thanks to focus breathing. If that is the case, a normal lens and some extension tubes may prove a better option.
As for me? I’ve been bitten by the macro bug again.
Chris’ macro gallery
$ (document).ready(function() { SampleGalleryV2({“containerId”:”embeddedSampleGallery_2283835564″,”galleryId”:”2283835564″,”isEmbeddedWidget”:true,”selectedImageIndex”:0,”isMobile”:false}) }); Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
Comments Off on How to: Shoot better macro photos using a slider and focus stacking
You have filled your iPhone with thousands and thousands of photos over the last few years. Its a nice catalog of memories but now its time to move on. You are looking for a quick and safe way to delete all the photos on your iPhone but dont know how. Don’t despair. In this article we will tell you the Continue Reading
The post How To Delete All Photos From iPhone Using iPhone, Mac or PC appeared first on Photodoto.
The post S’cuse Me While I Tweak the Sky: Tips for Dramatic Skies in Your Photos appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Rick Ohnsman.
Singing “Home on the Range,“ a cowboy might picture the perfect place where “the skies are not cloudy all day.”
A cloudless day might appeal to many people, but not to landscape photographers.
The so-called “bluebird day” generally makes for poor landscape photographs with a boring, featureless sky. Maybe you’ve also heard this: “When the weather gets bad, the photos get good.”
So what do you do when Mother Nature gives you few or no clouds to work with? Let’s look at some tips for dramatic skies.
There’s a good sky here, but it’s going to take some coaxing to bring it out. Canon 6D | Canon EF 24-105 f/4 | 1/4 sec | f/18 | ISO 200
In camera
If there are no clouds at all to work with, your options while shooting are pretty limited. You may want to compose your shot so that there is little, if any, sky. However, if you have even a few clouds to work with, here are some ways to make the most of them:
Use a polarizing filter
Polarizing filter effectiveness depends on the angle of your shot in relation to the angle of the sun. The strongest effect is with the sun 90 degrees to the direction your camera is pointing; you get varying degrees of effectiveness at other angles.
Look through the viewfinder, rotate the polarizer, and watch as the contrast between the sky and clouds changes. Sometimes this will be very dramatic, especially with white puffy clouds on a blue sky.
Adjust to your taste, backing off a bit if needed. There is such a thing as too much, however, so remember:
What you do with a polarizer when making the shot can’t easily be undone later in post-processing. Be careful when using a polarizing filter in combination with a wide-angle lens. Parts of the sky may darken more than others across the shot, giving an unusual look you probably won’t like, one that is tough to fix later.
A wide-angle lens (this shot was made at 17mm) plus a polarizer can be a bad combination. Note how the sky is darker in some places than others. This would have been better without the polarizer.
Use a graduated neutral density (GND) filter
Landscape photographers often deal with a wide dynamic range between a bright sky and a much darker foreground. Should you expose for the sky or the land, the highlights or the shadows?
A graduated ND filter that goes from a darker density at the top to clear at the bottom can help even out the exposure. The advent of digital editing tools that emulate this in editing has caused many photographers to dispense with using these filters.
One advantage to working without a GND is that you can change your mind later if you don’t want a GND effect. You can also better deal with scenes where the horizon isn’t perfectly straight across. Still, some photographers favor the traditional graduated ND filter in certain circumstances.
Bracket
Rather than use a graduated ND filter in the field to even-out a composition with a bright sky and dark foreground, take multiple bracketed shots while varying the shutter speed (but not the aperture).
Many cameras have this feature built-in, so you can make a series of bracketed shots with one press of the shutter button. Having a series of the same shot taken at varied exposures will give you the raw materials for some of the editing techniques we’re about to explore.
In edit
Sometimes you are able to capture an image that has clouds in the scene, but they are underwhelming and need some editing help to give them extra pizzazz. Let’s look at some tips for dramatic skies using standard editing techniques.
Basic sky editing
Lightroom is usually my editor of choice, and so the techniques I’ll mention next will use it as a reference. The concepts should translate fine to other editors, however, so if you grasp the ideas you’ll be able to implement the same changes, whether you use Capture One, ON1 Photo RAW, ACDSee, or something else.
Whatever you’re photographing, work to keep your exposure “in-bounds.” That is to say: Don’t blow out the highlights on the right side of the histogram or block up the shadows pushing them past the left side of the histogram. Whether working with a dark or light shot, or maybe an image with both light and dark extremes, if the entire histogram is “between the goalposts,” then you have an image that is workable.
That said, whenever possible, use the ETTR (expose-to-the-right) method. If you are not familiar with this, I suggest you read up on it. The greatest amount of data in a photo file is in the brighter tones. If you have a bright sky (and are trying to get some detail in the clouds) combined with a darker foreground, it is better to have to darken the image while editing. You can purposely expose for the highlights and get the sky correct in-camera, but then you may be later faced with trying to brighten up the shadows. A cleaner, less noisy image will result if you have to later bring down the highlights rather than if you drag up dark shadows “out of the mud.”
Also, we are talking about editing a RAW file, not a JPEG. If you are still shooting JPEGs then you have already limited what you can recover. If you don’t shoot RAW images, I suggest you stop here, learn why and how to shoot and work with RAW files, and then come back.
It’s maybe harsh, but if you want to be a more skilled editor and do things like recover cloudy skies, then learning how to work with RAW files is a prerequisite. ‘Nuff said.
Here is my standard workflow in Lightroom for just about any image. If there are clouds in the shot, it’s Step One that brings them alive.
Adjust the exposure slider. Don’t worry too much about making it just right. you’ll fine-tune again later.
Bring down the highlights. How much? Look at your image and watch the histogram as you work.
Open up the shadows. Move the slider to the right. Watch the image and the istogram.
Set your white point. There are several ways to do this. I like this method: Hold down the Alt key (Option on Mac). Click and hold the Whites slider. The image will turn black. Now while holding the key and the mouse button down, slowly move the slider to the right until you see a few specks of white on the image. Slide back left a bit if necessary. What you’re doing is making the points that you should into the brightest (whitest) points in the image. They will set the extreme right point on the histogram.
Set your black point. This technique is the same: Holding down the Alt/Option key, click the Blacks slider, hold, and drag left. The screen will go white until you reach a point where some black specks appear. I sometimes find I will allow a few more black specks (totally black) points to affect an image than white points, but that depends on the image.
Re-adjust your exposure and contrast. You may need to go back now and re-adjust your Exposure slider a bit and/or adjust the Contrast slider.
With just some basic Lightroom editing, the clouds look better already. Canon 6D | Canon EF 24-105 f/4 | 1/4 sec | f/18 | ISO 200
How much to adjust any of the sliders will depend on the image. In general, this simple workflow will get your image “in the ballpark” and likely help start bringing out detail in the sky.
You may want to move onto other global adjustments like Texture, Clarity, Dehaze, Vibrance, and Saturation, because you can adjust those to your taste. If, however, your sky needs special help, it’s time for some local adjustments.
Going local
It’s quite possible your sky will need some local adjustments to give it the look you seek. If you’re not familiar with Lightroom’s local adjustment tools and techniques, DPS writer Andrew S. Gibson has written a good article on that subject.
I will add a couple of things to try when using Lightroom’s local adjustment tools to help accentuate your sky and clouds:
Try the Range Masking tools to better select your sky. Used in combination with the Graduated Filter, the Radial Filter, and the Adjustment Brush, you’ll be able to apply your effects where you want them and not where you don’t.
Try using the Clarity and Dehaze sliders when seeking to tune the sky to achieve the look you want. Go easy, though. It’s easy to go way overboard, especially with the Dehaze slider.
Combine a Graduated Filter with the Luminance Range Mask in Lightroom to select the sky. Then use the sliders to get the look you seek.Now we’re talking! Compare this to the original image at the top of the article. Canon 6D | Canon EF 24-105 f/4 | 1/4 sec | f/18 | ISO 200
Multiple shots: HDR in Lightroom
I mentioned bracketing your shots while shooting high dynamic range subjects, such as with the bright-sky/dark-land combination you may often encounter.
When editing, having multiple bracketed images to work with will offer all kinds of possibilities. One of them is the ability to do HDR (high dynamic range) work within Lightroom. This is a whole lesson unto itself, and I suggest you learn it.
5 bracketed images are merged into a single HDR photo in Lightroom.
After producing an HDR image from multiple images merged in Lightroom, you’ll have a 32-bit file to work with, rather than the standard 24-bit single image files you are accustomed to dealing with.
The image will now have 10 stops of exposure adjustment (the Lightroom Exposure slider will go from a +/- 5 range to a +/- 10 range).
Make your bracketed shots so the darkest image captures all the bright sky detail and the brightest image picks up all the shadow detail. Combined into a single 32-bit HDR DNG image in Lightroom, you’ll have lots of adjustment possibilities to get a just-right exposure with good sky detail.
The 32-bit DNG file created after a merge-to-HDR routine in Lightroom gives a much larger exposure range to work with.
Moving to Photoshop
You can do a lot in Lightroom, but sometimes you need more control and more power. One of the things Photoshop offers that Lightroom doesn’t is layers. Here are some tips for dramatic skies using Photoshop for editing.
Blending
You will need at least two shots with different exposures for this technique. Let’s outline a very simple approach.
(You will need to use layers and masks in Photoshop, so if you’re not familiar with those, here’s your chance to learn.)
This will work best if you shoot from a tripod so your images are identical except for exposure. Shoot at least two shots, one exposed to capture all the bright details in the sky, the other exposed for the darker areas of the land.
If you’re coming from Lightroom, highlight both images, then click Photo>Edit In>Open as Layers in Photoshop. Have the lighter image on top.
To be sure the images are sized and aligned perfectly, select both layers in Photoshop (F7 turns on the layers palette), click the first layer, hold down Shift and click the second layer, and then from the top menu click Edit>Auto-Align Layers>OK.
Create a mask on the top layer. (With the top layer selected, click the Add Layer Mask icon, which looks like a rectangle with a circle in it).
Use the Brush Tool with the color set to Black. Click on the mask you just created. Now paint over the sky. As you do, you will reveal the darker sky layer underneath. Adjusting brush size, opacity, and brush softness will help you better control things.
One shot exposed for the sky, the other for the land. I then layered, aligned, and blended using a mask in Photoshop. Canon 6D | Canon EF 24-105 f/4
The multi-layer masking approach can also work well if you use Photoshop selections to choose what you will keep from one layer and use from the other layer. Selection techniques can be simple or very complex in Photoshop, depending on how complex a selection you need to make. I will point you to a good entry point for further study: this article by DPS writer Yacine Bessekhouad.
Here’s a different technique to try when you have a blue sky and not much additional blue in your shot. Use the Lightroom targeted adjustment tool in the HSL/Color panel to bring down the luminance level of the blue. You can go even further with a monochrome conversion. The look is similar to having used a polarizing filter.
Do some multiplying
Perhaps you only made one shot, didn’t bracket and, despite some of your editing techniques, the sky and clouds still seem a little wimpy. Never fear.
Here’s something else to in Photoshop:
Make a duplicate of the layer. (Ctrl/Cmd + J.) You will have two duplicate layers on top of each other.
Duplicate that copy again so you now have three duplicate copies. Temporarily turn off the bottommost layer (probably labeled “Background”) by clicking the eyeball icon.
Now, change the blend mode to Multiply. The detail and contrast in the clouds should be amplified.
Duplicate again for further amplification.
Repeat with additional duplicates; hit Ctrl/Cmd + J as desired to keep duplicating. until the sky turns the way you’d like. Don’t worry about the foreground just yet.
To reduce the duplicates into one layer, merge the visible layers: Layer>Merge Visible (or Ctrl/Cmd + Shift + E).
You will now have just two layers, the merged layers and the background layer. Turn the Background layer back on by clicking the eyeball again.
You will now need to use one of the selection and masking techniques to mask out (“erase”) the probably over-darkened land/foreground portion of the top layer.
Here I brought the shot into Photoshop, made a duplicate, and then applied the Multiply blend mode to the top layer. Bringing back the darker portion was easy here with a straight horizon line. This look is similar to what you might get with a traditional glass graduated ND filter.
S’cuse me while I switch the sky
In the rock classic “Purple Haze,” Jimi Hendrix sang, “S’cuse me while I kiss the sky.” Some people later thought the lyrics to be “kiss this guy;” that’s called a misheard song lyric or mondegreen. A website is devoted to them. As a photographer, I prefer to sing my own version: “S’cuse me while I switch the sky.”
Could this sky be any more boring? Let’s help it. Canon 6D | Canon EF 24-105 f/4 | 1/60 sec | f/8 | ISO 100
Sometimes when there’s no clouds at all, or a plain blue sky, a plain gray overcast sky, or maybe you blew out the sky and there’s nothing to recover, you’re left with no alternative. A sky replacement is needed.
Other times, you just want a different sky for a more dramatic effect.
Whatever the case, substituting skies is a great way to get some nice images and a really great way to polish your editing skills.
Now here’s a nice sunset. Let’s work a piece of this in. Canon 6D | Canon EF 24-105 f/4 | f/11 | ISO 200
With Photoshop
Put the clouds layer on top, then use a black brush on a white mask and paint to reveal the lower beach area again.Back in Lightroom for some more fine-tuning. Isn’t this a much nicer image than the original?
Sometimes sky replacement is an easy task, such as when you have a flat horizon or perhaps a hard-edged building against the sky.
Of course, if you have trees with leaves or intricate details to select, it can be much more challenging.
Some might have called this a perfect day when this historic train rolled into the Boise (Idaho) Union Pacific Depot. Not a cloud in the sky. Boring! At least with the hard, straight lines and continuous blue color, making a selection is easy.
My goal here is not to teach you the various techniques of sky replacement. There are many instructional articles and online tutorials for that. Here’s an example from DPS writer Simon Ringsmuth for basic level sky replacement. Here’s an online Youtube tutorial where a more detailed foreground tree is dealt with. Here’s yet another tutorial with different techniques.
As I said, sky replacement can be a deep dive into Photoshop tools and techniques. But what if there was a simpler way? We’re now beginning to see one-click tools that do a pretty good job of sky replacement.
Here’s a dramatic sky. But will it work?Impressive, but does it work? Might you question if this really was the sky that was present when the photo was taken?
With Luminar 4
Sky replacement software has been around for a few years, but it’s only been recently that it’s produced good results with relatively complex subjects. The use of artificial intelligence in applications has made a huge difference in the quality of the finished image.
The “king of the hill” at this writing may be Skylum’s Luminar 4.
This was an easy job for Luminar 4 and this stock sky looks pretty convincing.
Luminar 4 comes with a few dozen skies you can use as replacement, and you can add your own skies.
(If you’re serious about getting into sky replacement, I would strongly encourage you to start collecting sky images, snapping shots whenever you see an interesting sky and adding them to a folder for possible later use.)
Nice shot, but it would be better with a dramatic sky. Canon 6D | Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8 | 200mm | 1/30 sec | f/16 | ISO 100
Something to bear in mind when deciding whether to use the included skies or your own is resolution. The replacement sky should have a resolution at least as great or greater than the image to which you’ll be adding it. Using a low-res sky image with a higher-res original image will just look bad and degrade your shot.
This sunset sky in the Luminar 4 collection was just right for this shot. The program also let me tune the color balance of the original image to match more effectively.
A confession here:
I have only dabbled with sky replacements in Luminar 4 using the free demo version, so I don’t claim to be an expert. I am reasonably impressed with what I’ve seen so far. Even with a fairly complex subject, such as the harbor shot below with lots of sailboat masts and rigging extending into the sky, it did a very nice job.
Might you do better with Photoshop? I guess that would depend on your skill level. Artificial intelligence has not yet reached the level of human skills and intelligence. Then again, much will depend on your level of proficiency with Photoshop. Speaking for myself, I’m not sure I could currently do better than Luminar at this time.
And doing it with a few simple clicks? Good stuff, if you ask me!
With the masts and rigging extending into the sky, replacing the sky with Photoshop selection tools, layers, and masks would be challenging. With Luminar 4, it was done with a few clicks. Perfect? Maybe not, but impressive. It added the birds, too!
Other tools
Luminar isn’t the only program for doing sky replacements. I work on a PC and my tablet and phone are Android devices, so I’m not as familiar with what’s on the Apple side of this kind of software. I do know other forms of software are moving toward the use of AI and doing sky replacement.
I was pleased to stumble across an Android app that may not be as refined as Luminar. And for images you might shoot with your phone and want to do a sky replacement for the web, Enlighten’s Quickshot does an admirable job and is very easy to use, right on your phone. I see it is also available for iOS.
I replaced the sky in this shot right on my Android phone. I used Quickshot, a pretty good little app. For online work that will be posted on the web, it seems plenty capable.
Ethics of sky switching
So if you can, does that mean you should? If you can replace the sky in a photo, should you? When does the result stop being a photograph and become an art piece, a reflection of the skills of a photo editor and not those of a photographer? Would you enter an image in a photo contest where you had replaced the sky?
I don’t claim to have the answers, but I have raised the ethical questions surrounding sky replacement before. Take a look at this article I wrote several years ago which dives deeper into that subject.
If you’re going to do magic…
Have you ever had the misfortune of watching a really bad magician? A show where it is clearly evident the performer really did have something up his sleeve or where there was no doubt about how the trick was done? I’d use that example as a lesson in what not to do if you decide to do sky replacement with your photos.
A shot where the light in the sky comes from one side while the subjects in the foreground are lit from the other side would be an example of “bad magic.” So would different light temperatures between land and sky or evident fringing where poor selection and masking was done. Rather than embarass yourself with a poorly executed sky replacement where even non-photographers can spot the fakery, practice your skills for yourself only. I believe only when you’re ready for “primetime” should you begin showing your sky replacement images.
Then, of course, you will face a new dilemma. Once people are aware you can produce shots with amazing skies, even when you do capture a photo in-camera with a gorgeous sky they will wonder, “Is that real or did you add it?”
If you’re going to “do magic” and replace skies, it had better be convincing. You tell me: Is this the original sky or not?
Conclusion
I hope you picked up some good tips for dramatic skies in this article. I also hope you’ll give consideration into not just when and how to implement these techniques, but if you should or shouldn’t.
Some people really don’t enjoy photo editing and would prefer to do everything in-camera as much as possible. For others, editing is part of the craft and no photo is complete until it has undergone an extensive edit session.
As I write this, the Covid-19 crisis lingers, and so maybe you have more time at home to work on your editing skills. Meanwhile, let me leave you with this sign-off used by Garrison Keillor, host of the radio show, “A Prairie Home Companion.”
“Be well, do good work, and keep in touch.”
The post S’cuse Me While I Tweak the Sky: Tips for Dramatic Skies in Your Photos appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Rick Ohnsman.
Posts with images get 650% more engagement than those without. For this simple reason, stock photos are in high demand and it’s unlikely that demand will be going away anytime soon — and that’s just content writers. Designers, artists, and other creatives always need new design assets and content for their work. This has given rise to a number of Continue Reading
The post How Does Adobe Stock Work: Successfully Selling Your Photos appeared first on Photodoto.
Skylum Software has increasingly utilized artificial intelligence in its editing software, including its flagship raw photo editing software, Luminar. Skylum has used AI for tasks such as automatically adjusting the color and exposure of an image and even replacing the entire sky in an image. With the newly-announced version of Luminar, aptly dubbed LuminarAI, Skylum has taken the implementation of AI even further.
Skylum has designed LuminarAI to automate as much of the photo editing process as possible while never removing the user from making creative decisions with their images. The idea is to streamline the process and make photo editing more accessible for beginners while offering even more powerful editing tools for experienced users. As Skylum puts it, LuminarAI uses artificial intelligence to remove ‘boring and complex tasks without sacrificing professional quality.’
Image credit: Skylum Software
Of LuminarAI, Skylum CPO Dima Sytnik says, ‘LuminarAI will bring an entirely new, non-conventional approach to the world of photo editing, focusing on the results instead of the process. We’ve designed LuminarAI from the ground up to change how people interact with their images. We’re really excited to see what LuminarAI can do for creatives everywhere.’
Artificial intelligence begins operating as soon as you select an image in LuminarAI. The software analyzes your image and recommends certain templates to help improve a specific image. Although AI is present throughout the entire process, you retain complete control over which edits are made and how they are applied.
LuminarAI can automatically crop and straighten your images via CompositionAI and automatically adjusts exposure and color via AccentAI, a feature longtime Luminar users will recognize. To add detail and texture to your image, LuminarAI includes StructureAI.
LuminarAI includes SkinAI to easily retouch skin and remove blemishes. There is also IrisAI, allowing the user to quickly enhance a subject’s eyes. Image credit: Skylum Software
The portrait retouching process includes numerous new AI-powered tools for photographers. If you’d like to change the shape or relative size of parts of the subject, you can utilize BodyAI and FaceAI to gently sculpt. If eyes are truly the window to the soul, you’ll want to use IrisAI to enhance a subject’s eyes. Skin retouching is often a time-consuming process in software such as Photoshop, but in LuminarAI, Skylum includes SkinAI to quickly remove imperfections and blemishes in the skin without making the subject look fake or unnatural.
Image credit: Skylum Software
Landscape photographers will be able to enhance the sky in their image with the existing Sky Enhancer feature, but there’s a new AtmosphereAI tool as well to add additional details to the sky. Of course, you will still be able to entirely replace the sky in your photo using SkyAI in LuminarAI. Within SkyAI, you can add warmth to the scene and even add rays of light.
LuminarAI includes numerous features aimed at enhancing landscape images. You can replace the sky, add rays of light, add warmth to the scene, enhance the sky and more. Image credit: Skylum Software
LuminarAI is releasing this holiday for macOS and Windows. The software will be available as both a standalone application and as a plug-in. To learn more about LuminarAI and to preorder via early-bird pricing, visit Skylum’s new LuminarAI page.
You must be logged in to post a comment.