Call for help....

Pads1980

Pads1980

Suspended / Banned
Messages
473
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
This image was taken using a wide angle, with Circ polarizer attached - I completely forgot about the uneven effect it can have when used with a wide angle and it didn't show up on the camera screen. Tried to hide it with a vignette, but it hasn't worked.

Wells Cathedral by Paul, on Flickr

Can anyone point me in the right direction to correct the dark patch in lightroom or photoshop, or is this a lost cause and re-shoot required?

Many thanks
 
Pads1980 said:
and it didn't show up on the camera screen
Click to expand...
It really did, Paul but you just did not see it cause
you were not expecting it.
Pads1980 said:
point me in the right direction to correct the dark patch
Click to expand...
Not with out long work. OTH, beside reshooting, there
is an alternative solution called sky replacement.

I this case, the image is very contrasty and saturated at
different places and the DR doesn't look natural no more.


I would reshoot.
 
Kodiak Qc said:
It really did, Paul but you just did not see it cause
you were not expecting it.

I'm sure you are correct on this.

Not with out long work. OTH, beside reshooting, there
is an alternative solution called sky replacement.

I this case, the image is very contrasty and saturated at
different places and the DR doesn't look natural no more.


I would reshoot.
Click to expand...

As I suspected, thanks for your reply.

I guess i'll need to take a shot with polarizer to get the reflection correct, and another without it affecting the sky, and then blend the images in layers.
 
Not quite sure what is the vignette you have applied and what is the original problem (I don't use polarizers so I don't understand the issue). So perhaps I have got hold of the wrong end of the stick. But are you looking for some sort of effect like this?


NOT MY IMAGE - PADS1980 Wells Cathedral LR-2 by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

To give me something a bit bigger to work on I use a screenshot of the 1600 x 1067 version over at Flickr. For some reason the screenshot (before I did anything to it) had some artefacts in the sky, some halos (not quite, but I don't know the word for it) on/near the boundary of the sky and the rest, and striations in the sky. Anyway, if this is any way similar to what you are looking for I'll let you know what I did (in Lightroom). If I've missed the point then just ignore this please.
 
GardenersHelper said:
Not quite sure what is the vignette you have applied and what is the original problem (I don't use polarizers so I don't understand the issue). So perhaps I have got hold of the wrong end of the stick. But are you looking for some sort of effect like this?


NOT MY IMAGE - PADS1980 Wells Cathedral LR-2 by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

To give me something a bit bigger to work on I use a screenshot of the 1600 x 1067 version over at Flickr. For some reason the screenshot (before I did anything to it) had some artefacts in the sky, some halos (not quite, but I don't know the word for it) on/near the boundary of the sky and the rest, and striations in the sky. Anyway, if this is any way similar to what you are looking for I'll let you know what I did (in Lightroom). If I've missed the point then just ignore this please.
Click to expand...

Thanks Nick, that is certainly an improvement and better than my PP efforts, but I am definitely going to re-shoot this one.
 
Pads1980 said:
or if there is a better way.
Click to expand...
•


Now, that's the right question!

The difficulty here is the very nature of the polarizer,
in the rather narrow (though dramatic) conditions its
magic will work. It will operate at best with 90° light
incidence and any change in that angle will be shown
as significant fall off of the said effect.

Consequently, I never use a polarizer on scene with
blue sky. I will reserve its use to scenes that are more
limited in FoV to defeat specular properties and render
an invisible image instead of a reflection.

Because of the same polarizing characteristic of that
filter, given levels of contrast and saturation are induced
and, consequently, resulting often in images that won't
look so natural.
Pads1980 said:
I'm not sure I understand… was just asking if my intended method is one that you would follow
Click to expand...
If it did't work in the first place, in the same conditions,
you will get the same non conclusive results. So, no I
would not.

In the posted scene, the reflection of the bell tower is an
important element in your picture composition, using a
polarizer is, for this reason too, contra productive.
 
Kodiak Qc said:
•


Now, that's the right question!

The difficulty here is the very nature of the polarizer,
in the rather narrow (though dramatic) conditions its
magic will work. It will operate at best with 90° light
incidence and any change in that angle will be shown
as significant fall off of the said effect.

Consequently, I never use a polarizer on scene with
blue sky. I will reserve its use to scenes that are more
limited in FoV to defeat specular properties and render
an invisible image instead of a reflection.

Because of the same polarizing characteristic of that
filter, given levels of contrast and saturation are induced
and, consequently, resulting often in images that won't
look so natural.

If it did't work in the first place, in the same conditions,
you will get the same non conclusive results. So, no I
would not.

In the posted scene, the reflection of the bell tower is an
important element in your picture composition, using a
polarizer is, for this reason too, contra productive.
Click to expand...

Now that's the right answer!! :)

Thank you for taking the time to make my next visit hopefully allot more productive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top