Exposure Blending
Discussion
Imagine the classic scenario where you are shooting a pyramid shaped mountain - darkish foreground with a bright sky behind. Filters would not work too well due to the uneven horizon so you take one shot exposed for the sky and another for the land.
All nice and easy so far but later when you are doing your pp how do you combine the two shots ?
There are a few methods I know of:
- HDR in something like Photomatix (easy but a bit marmite to say the least
)
- Cut and paste job in Photoshop (again easy enough but clumsy/inaccurate)
- Use layers/masking in Photoshop - think this is the 'best' way but how do you do it ?
I've tried luminosity masks but without much success (I'm on Photoshop Elements 11 - do I need to get full fat Photoshop?)
Any tips, instructions to share - what do you do?
Any wise words gratefully received!
TIA
All nice and easy so far but later when you are doing your pp how do you combine the two shots ?
There are a few methods I know of:
- HDR in something like Photomatix (easy but a bit marmite to say the least
)- Cut and paste job in Photoshop (again easy enough but clumsy/inaccurate)
- Use layers/masking in Photoshop - think this is the 'best' way but how do you do it ?
I've tried luminosity masks but without much success (I'm on Photoshop Elements 11 - do I need to get full fat Photoshop?)
Any tips, instructions to share - what do you do?
Any wise words gratefully received!
TIA
The way I do this is your option 3. One layer for the sky, one layer for the foreground. Put the foreground on the top layer, then use a "soft" eraser to delete the sky (this will then show through from the bottom layer). Depending on how complex the "join" is between foreground and sky the erasing can be a little tricky.
Once you have the two elements separated, play about with levels/curves until you get the look you want.
You can also use the adjustment brush in Adobe Camera Raw to change one area of your image (e.g. use the brush to create a mask over the sky and adjust this to the exposure you want).
Happy to have a play if you have a couple of images you are trying to composite?
Ian
Once you have the two elements separated, play about with levels/curves until you get the look you want.
You can also use the adjustment brush in Adobe Camera Raw to change one area of your image (e.g. use the brush to create a mask over the sky and adjust this to the exposure you want).
Happy to have a play if you have a couple of images you are trying to composite?
Ian
Thanks Ian
I have tried this method also but as you say the erasing can be fiddly and I've found it quite frustrating where the join between the layers is messy. It may be that I'm looking for a silver bullet for this which doesn't really exist but I just wondered what other folk were doing. The 'luminosity mask' seemed like it might be the way forward but I haven't sussed it out yet...
(I don't have a specific image in mind for this - just the principle)
I have tried this method also but as you say the erasing can be fiddly and I've found it quite frustrating where the join between the layers is messy. It may be that I'm looking for a silver bullet for this which doesn't really exist but I just wondered what other folk were doing. The 'luminosity mask' seemed like it might be the way forward but I haven't sussed it out yet...
(I don't have a specific image in mind for this - just the principle)
It all depends on the camera too. I'm not a landscape photographer but for my needs with shots like this I just crank up the shadows to 11 and darken the highlights. With maybe some touching up with adjustment brush to up the exposure in particularly dark spots.
Shooting RAW and with good dynamic range on full frame there's a lot you can do with a photo.
and darken the highlights. With maybe some touching up with adjustment brush to up the exposure in particularly dark spots. Shooting RAW and with good dynamic range on full frame there's a lot you can do with a photo.
I use a mixture of options 1 and 3. Photomatix on its own, as you say, can be a bit marmite. I try to go for a fairly neutralist type of setting there which gets what I want but does not look obviously OTT HDR. Then I have my decently exposed foreground and the Photomatix as layers in Photoshop and then blend between the two using a soft brush and multiple passes with a low flow (I go for around 15%).
I think you are being a bit harsh on Photomatix which would do the job perfectly well and is infinitely adjustable - you don't have to make grungy surreal concoctions! Otherwise it looks like you will have to use layer masks and adjust levels and opacity in PE11 - I don't know how much exposure correction you can do with that program.And if it is just the sky that is the problem you can always import one from somewhere else!
I would try both 1 and 3
I use the merge HDR within photoshop (not sure if it is in elements) and then refine the resultant image in photoshop
Have the sky as the lower layer, mountain as the upper layer then do a selection on the mountain layer using one of the selection tools. Use 'refine edges' to paint around the mountain which should give a graduated selection. Copy the refined selection as a layer mask to to the mountain layer to reveal the sky from the lower layer.
I use the merge HDR within photoshop (not sure if it is in elements) and then refine the resultant image in photoshop
Have the sky as the lower layer, mountain as the upper layer then do a selection on the mountain layer using one of the selection tools. Use 'refine edges' to paint around the mountain which should give a graduated selection. Copy the refined selection as a layer mask to to the mountain layer to reveal the sky from the lower layer.
Thanks for all the replies Gents 
Seems like it's horses for courses:
1. HDR using Photomatix (or Photoshop etc) - it's been rightly pointed out that this is a perfectly acceptable method if done properly!
2. Cut and paste - bit clunky and not widely used it seems
3. Layers and Masking - quite widely used but the fiddly bit is how to do the selection (either for the mask or to erase the area of the layer you don't want)
4. The 'don't bother' method (as per chat with Paul B) - shoot in RAW and 'expose to the right' - ie overexpose a bit (check histogram to avoid clipping highlights) then recover the sky and shadows by adjusting sliders in the standard way. There's so much dynamic range in a good DSLR that you can do a huge amount this way.
I usually do No. 4 but without the ETTR bit - have tried 2 and 3 but they can be so fiddly to get the selection right that it's put me off a bit. Have also tried No.1 but usually ends up looking like an acid trip and I get flamed!
Interesting that nobody is using the luminosity mask thing - it seemed like a silver bullet but I guess not widely used.
Any more methods not mentioned so far?
Seems like it's horses for courses:
1. HDR using Photomatix (or Photoshop etc) - it's been rightly pointed out that this is a perfectly acceptable method if done properly!
2. Cut and paste - bit clunky and not widely used it seems
3. Layers and Masking - quite widely used but the fiddly bit is how to do the selection (either for the mask or to erase the area of the layer you don't want)
4. The 'don't bother' method (as per chat with Paul B) - shoot in RAW and 'expose to the right' - ie overexpose a bit (check histogram to avoid clipping highlights) then recover the sky and shadows by adjusting sliders in the standard way. There's so much dynamic range in a good DSLR that you can do a huge amount this way.
I usually do No. 4 but without the ETTR bit - have tried 2 and 3 but they can be so fiddly to get the selection right that it's put me off a bit. Have also tried No.1 but usually ends up looking like an acid trip and I get flamed!
Interesting that nobody is using the luminosity mask thing - it seemed like a silver bullet but I guess not widely used.
Any more methods not mentioned so far?
Very much an amateur approach, but I had a play about using layers in Elements (I know SFA about masks) and found that just layering two images, normal overlay, opacity about 40% got me close enough to re-ship into LR and work on as normal - it just took the edge off a shot where dynamic range really was too far to just push normally.
But having played with Photomatix, I'm sorely tempted to shell out and get a copy. I still need to run the shots through LR afterwards but I'm happier with the results than with the amount of fettling I had to do before (the 400D isn't famed for it's dynamic range.)
Of the two below you've got my original effort through LR - poorly processed I'll grant you, and relying upon a grad the adjustment brush, the second is the Photomatix effort - with another 30 seconds in LR after for basic processing, but no major changes.
Exposure Blending - Lightroom Equivalent by tenohfive^, on Flickr
Exposure Blending - Photomatix Effort by tenohfive^, on Flickr
Quite enjoyed messing around with the different options either way, but I do think from my brief play that Photomatix is worth investing in.
But having played with Photomatix, I'm sorely tempted to shell out and get a copy. I still need to run the shots through LR afterwards but I'm happier with the results than with the amount of fettling I had to do before (the 400D isn't famed for it's dynamic range.)
Of the two below you've got my original effort through LR - poorly processed I'll grant you, and relying upon a grad the adjustment brush, the second is the Photomatix effort - with another 30 seconds in LR after for basic processing, but no major changes.
Exposure Blending - Lightroom Equivalent by tenohfive^, on Flickr
Exposure Blending - Photomatix Effort by tenohfive^, on Flickr
Quite enjoyed messing around with the different options either way, but I do think from my brief play that Photomatix is worth investing in.
tenohfive said:
I do think from my brief play that Photomatix is worth investing in.
Agreed - *if used properly* it can produce 'realistic' results (meaning as it would appear to the human eye - which I believe can see 6 stops of dynamic range!). As per my comments in 'random' we see in HDR so for true realism it's the only way 
This was a 5 shot HDR - I tried to make it match what I could see.
Scottish Parliament by Dibbly Dobbler, on FlickrGlad you posted this DD because it's been bothering me too. I had been using your option 3 (layers and masking) but getting the selection right was a massive pain in the arse when you have trees or someone's hair to cut round. Your HDR shot above looks fine, it's definitely better than a lot of the ones you see estate agents use, so I may give it a whirl next time.
No3 for me. I use a big, soft edged brush when it comes to trees as per the example below. And always use the layer masks as opposed to erase, never erase.
MX5 Sunset by PGDesigns.co.uk, on Flickr
MX5 Sunset by PGDesigns.co.uk, on FlickrPGD5 said:
No3 for me. I use a big, soft edged brush when it comes to trees as per the example below. And always use the layer masks as opposed to erase, never erase.
MX5 Sunset by PGDesigns.co.uk, on Flickr
Phil - can you be arsed giving any more detail on your process please? Eg how you select the areas to mask, how you combine the layers etc? If not, no worries! MX5 Sunset by PGDesigns.co.uk, on FlickrAs Morbid said in post 2 tbh. Layer the two exposures, create a layer mask on the top layer then paint out what you don't want to see with a large soft brush. With the basic mask in place you can then work into it with a smaller brush until your happy. Moderate the flow of the brush by dropping the pressure right down, I'll often paint with the brush at a low flow level of 4 or 5%.
That is pretty much it. Maybe you could post the image your looking at so we can see what your working with here.
That is pretty much it. Maybe you could post the image your looking at so we can see what your working with here.
DibblyDobbler said:
Thanks for all the replies Gents
Seems like it's horses for courses:
1. HDR using Photomatix (or Photoshop etc) - it's been rightly pointed out that this is a perfectly acceptable method if done properly!
2. Cut and paste - bit clunky and not widely used it seems
3. Layers and Masking - quite widely used but the fiddly bit is how to do the selection (either for the mask or to erase the area of the layer you don't want)
4. The 'don't bother' method (as per chat with Paul B) - shoot in RAW and 'expose to the right' - ie overexpose a bit (check histogram to avoid clipping highlights) then recover the sky and shadows by adjusting sliders in the standard way. There's so much dynamic range in a good DSLR that you can do a huge amount this way.
I usually do No. 4 but without the ETTR bit - have tried 2 and 3 but they can be so fiddly to get the selection right that it's put me off a bit. Have also tried No.1 but usually ends up looking like an acid trip and I get flamed!
Interesting that nobody is using the luminosity mask thing - it seemed like a silver bullet but I guess not widely used.
Any more methods not mentioned so far?
Buy a camera that does it for you? This was done using the HDR setting on my Nikon D7100. Seems like it's horses for courses:
1. HDR using Photomatix (or Photoshop etc) - it's been rightly pointed out that this is a perfectly acceptable method if done properly!
2. Cut and paste - bit clunky and not widely used it seems
3. Layers and Masking - quite widely used but the fiddly bit is how to do the selection (either for the mask or to erase the area of the layer you don't want)
4. The 'don't bother' method (as per chat with Paul B) - shoot in RAW and 'expose to the right' - ie overexpose a bit (check histogram to avoid clipping highlights) then recover the sky and shadows by adjusting sliders in the standard way. There's so much dynamic range in a good DSLR that you can do a huge amount this way.
I usually do No. 4 but without the ETTR bit - have tried 2 and 3 but they can be so fiddly to get the selection right that it's put me off a bit. Have also tried No.1 but usually ends up looking like an acid trip and I get flamed!
Interesting that nobody is using the luminosity mask thing - it seemed like a silver bullet but I guess not widely used.
Any more methods not mentioned so far?
Gaspode said:
Buy a camera that does it for you? This was done using the HDR setting on my Nikon D7100.
That isnt screaming Buy Me I'm afraid, the halo, the general lack of punch, softness(?)- maybe its not the best eg photo and you have another? Personal approach - layers in PS if I'm really bothered about it or heavy handed Recovery/Fill Light in LR if I'm not too fussed
Edited by andy-xr on Wednesday 21st January 18:33
andy-xr said:
That isnt screaming Buy Me I'm afraid, the halo, the general lack of punch, maybe its not the best eg photo and you have another?
Personal approach - layers in PS if I'm really bothered about it or heavy handed Recovery/Fill Light in LR if I'm not too fussed
I agree, the halo effect is a bit weird, and it's certainly not helped by it being a less-than stellar picture (although I quite like the compositional elements). I didn't even realise the body had the feature when I bought it. I included it purely because it is another way of approaching the issue, albeit not as good as 'proper' methods.Personal approach - layers in PS if I'm really bothered about it or heavy handed Recovery/Fill Light in LR if I'm not too fussed
It's not an effect I have really used, but a better example might be these two, the first was taken in full program mode, second has got HDR switched on
Edited by Gaspode on Wednesday 21st January 18:54
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff