Landscape photography - processing

[smilyanp]

Hi,

I want to know of good resources on processing landscape photography and the fundamental things to look for when doing such photography.

But i am not a fan of overdone HDR photography and images that don't look natural. I want to take the natural in the moment, but give it more strength in the post-processing or to fix problems that occurred when taking the photograph.

Do you have any good resources, suggestions, articles?

Thanks

 

[garryknight]

The Luminous Landscape is worth a look.

 

[Yellowbelly]

The problem is, is that what works for one, willnot work for another. There are no rules when processing any shot, let alone landscapes. Shoot in RAW and process a shot in a number of different ways and see what floats your boat.

Just because one person hates it does not make it a poor shot, as another person will love it.

If there is one rule, it is find what works for you.

 

[GHP]

Do you have any software at the moment?
If so, what do you have? If you have Lightroom for example, you can import the raws into LR, make any number of virtual copies, and edit each of them to the point of being ruined !
That way you still have the original file.
In fact, Lightroom doesn't change the original image file at all, it simply writes all the changes/edits you make into a "side-car" file, which is attached to the original.

 

[jon ryan]

Is there a particular problem you're having? Best way is to post a couple of shots here. Bottom line, as ever, is - practice!

 

[smilyanp]

The problem is, is that what works for one, willnot work for another. There are no rules when processing any shot, let alone landscapes. Shoot in RAW and process a shot in a number of different ways and see what floats your boat.

Just because one person hates it does not make it a poor shot, as another person will love it.

If there is one rule, it is find what works for you.

Like your thinking and share it. However, "...process a shot in a number of different ways and see what floats your boat." - this is what i'm asking for - techniques for processing, not to qualify them so much as to find a resource with them, so that i can try them Thanks for the comment.

 

[smilyanp]

Do you have any software at the moment?
If so, what do you have? If you have Lightroom for example, you can import the raws into LR, make any number of virtual copies, and edit each of them to the point of being ruined !
That way you still have the original file.
In fact, Lightroom doesn't change the original image file at all, it simply writes all the changes/edits you make into a "side-car" file, which is attached to the original.

I have photoshop, with which i feel very comfortable after years of use for other things. However, i want to read on techniques and things to look at, just to get them in my mind when shooting, looking at others' work.

 

[smilyanp]

The Luminous Landscape is worth a look.

Thanks, i'll look at it.

 

[smilyanp]

Is there a particular problem you're having? Best way is to post a couple of shots here. Bottom line, as ever, is - practice!

I don't have a particular problem yet, since i don't have the time to go out and shoot. However, as i said before, i would like to get different techniques in my mind, since they're related to details and then i will be able to notice the details when i photograph. It's kind-a training, state of mind thing. And i agree, best practice is to shoot, but for me this is one way of doing it while not being able to go out. Not sure if this makes sense.

 

[smilyanp]

Ok, so i've gone out and had a chance to make few shots. Here's one example, which i would love to dissect together with you.

I've edit it it slightly by adding more vibrance to the colours and contrast.

Before:

After:

 

[redddraggon]

Here's quick edit. Gradient on the sky, lifted the shadows a little and darkened the highlights a little.

What do you use to edit your images?

 

[jon ryan]

First things that strike me are that it's a bit underexposed, and that it has no point of focus. My eye sort of slides around all over the place, rather than being led into the shot if that makes sense. I'd try cropping to eliminate one of the trees at the edges. Also, the horizon chops the shot in half. 'Rule of thirds' may be worth Googling if you haven't come across this. Doesn't always help, but here it may.

 

[simonkit]

The great thing about landscape photography is that if you spend time out in the right lighting then the need to process images is actually minimal...that would be my recommendation to start with anyway, concentrate on taking photos in good light and you'll be suprised how little you need to think about processing, just a few basic tweaks to the RAW file

Simon

 

[cargo]

Cool edit James. I'm not the best at this stuff but after reading your post I tried to achieve what you did.I got there but struggled with that gradiant layer.It goes over the trees. I got round it with the blend mode and a mask. Am I missing a trick when using the grad tool ?

Gaz

 

[smilyanp]

Thank you all for the contributions.

redddraggon - I use photoshop. However, would you mind giving me more information on how exactly you did your editing and where i can find some resources for these king of things?
I like your edit, especially the sky, but am not sure if the grass at the nearest point looks unnatural or just lid by the sun. Anyway, thanks for the help! I will try to reproduce it for learning purposes at least.

jon ryan - I can agree with you that it looks a bit underexposes, but i kind-a tend to prefer that to overexposed images and i think i default to always underexpose mine. Good point though.

About the focus - i can see what you mean, will post some other images i did that day with an example of the 'Rule of thirds' in practice, but will keep it more conscious in mind next time.

simonkit - I absolutely agree with you - that is what i want - to be able to create the photograph without much editing. However, I believe i might need some filters to do that more successfully maybe. Agree?

 

[TheDrift-]

I only worked of the small jpeg so its started to band a bit, you should have no probs with the original.. my approach was:

Brightened foreground (masked curve)
added detail
increased brightness contrast hills in middle, then increased vibrance
added slight vignette
moved some light about with a masked cure layer
added another curve layer tweaked a bit (individual colour channels)
exposure adjustment
another vibrance adjustment masked
Another masked brightness/contrast adjustment
selective colour layer
and another masked vibrance layer
final HP sharpen layer
cropped

my main approach was to brighten the image up a bit and increase the hills in the middle, they were getting a bit lost, with a bit more time I would have done some dodge and burn and maybe looked at those stones in the middle of the foreground...would be a nice way to lead people into the picture more

If you want anything explaining just ask, oh and great shot btw

 

[smilyanp]

Thanks for the comments all.

Here i have another image, of night photography, long exposure. It hasn't been edited at all. What would you do to it and why? How would you improve it?

Thanks.

 

[Pookeyhead]

There's practically no shadow detail left in there. You could pull it back but it would be so full of noise it would look crap. At this image file size it may be OK, but it would affectionately be useless for anything else.

Delete it. There's not really anything of any great interest in the image any way.

You can't fix everything in processing.

 

[DayDreamer]

There's practically no shadow detail left in there. You could pull it back but it would be so full of noise it would look crap. At this image file size it may be OK, but it would affectionately be useless for anything else.

Delete it. There's not really anything of any great interest in the image any way.

You can't fix everything in processing.

Bit harsh yet you have given so much good advice some of which I have been grateful for so I am perplexed

It boils down to what is the purpose of a photograph? In my case it is to catch a moment in life which I can check out at points in the future & which will evoke that days memory. So I am sure not a pixel peeper & keepers don't always have to be technically perfect. In fact my most memory provoking image for a very long time was taken from my hospital bed some months ago. On an IPhone 3 with crap composition & everything else was crap but a day that perhaps I should forget but I never will.

 

[markmullen]

I'm afraid I'm with Pookeyhead on that one, not a vast amount you can do with it without making it noise hell, the shadows are so so dark. It is difficult with a scene like that trying to get it all in one shot, you'll either blow the hell out of the streetlights in the village, or, like you have, underexpose the foreground. In times like that a touch of HDR or exposure blending is the way.

Composition wise too there is little to focus on, and the branches top left are OOF (not enough DoF, or some very slight movement in the branches during the exposure, I'm guessing the former).

It boils down to what is the purpose of a photograph? In my case it is to catch a moment in life which I can check out at points in the future & which will evoke that days memory. So I am sure not a pixel peeper & keepers don't always have to be technically perfect..

That is what separates a snap from a photograph though isn't it, you can snap away all day and get images that remind you of a place but to an outsider they'll mean nothing. If you're shooting landscapes as art, as appears here, they need to be focussed, to be exposed correctly etc so that the viewer can connect with it and get a feel for the place.

I was up at Castlerigg Stone Circle yesterday morning and tried to capture the stillness and tranquility of the place at dawn, I could have just snapped a quick grab shot of the stones as a record but that wasn't why I was there, I wanted to share the feeling with the viewer so I concentrated on exposures and compositions that would give the viewer sat at a monitor, or in an exhibition miles away, an idea of what it was like at that time of day on that particular frosty moonlit morning.

 

[DorsetDude]

That is what separates a snap from a photograph though isn't it, you can snap away all day and get images that remind you of a place but to an outsider they'll mean nothing. If you're shooting landscapes as art, as appears here, they need to be focussed, to be exposed correctly etc so that the viewer can connect with it and get a feel for the place.

I was up at Castlerigg Stone Circle yesterday morning and tried to capture the stillness and tranquility of the place at dawn, I could have just snapped a quick grab shot of the stones as a record but that wasn't why I was there, I wanted to share the feeling with the viewer so I concentrated on exposures and compositions that would give the viewer sat at a monitor, or in an exhibition miles away, an idea of what it was like at that time of day on that particular frosty moonlit morning.

Great post.

 

[smilyanp]

I'm afraid I'm with Pookeyhead on that one, not a vast amount you can do with it without making it noise hell, the shadows are so so dark. It is difficult with a scene like that trying to get it all in one shot, you'll either blow the hell out of the streetlights in the village, or, like you have, underexpose the foreground. In times like that a touch of HDR or exposure blending is the way.

Composition wise too there is little to focus on, and the branches top left are OOF (not enough DoF, or some very slight movement in the branches during the exposure, I'm guessing the former).



That is what separates a snap from a photograph though isn't it, you can snap away all day and get images that remind you of a place but to an outsider they'll mean nothing. If you're shooting landscapes as art, as appears here, they need to be focussed, to be exposed correctly etc so that the viewer can connect with it and get a feel for the place.

I was up at Castlerigg Stone Circle yesterday morning and tried to capture the stillness and tranquility of the place at dawn, I could have just snapped a quick grab shot of the stones as a record but that wasn't why I was there, I wanted to share the feeling with the viewer so I concentrated on exposures and compositions that would give the viewer sat at a monitor, or in an exhibition miles away, an idea of what it was like at that time of day on that particular frosty moonlit morning.

Thanks a lot for the help, to you and everyone else. I am not ashamed of the photographs i make and post, since the main purpose is to learn and your comment helps me to do exactly that.

I would like to read more on composition. Do you have any "good" resources, from your experience, on that?

Thank you again, for the help/comments.

 

[Pookeyhead]

Bit harsh yet you have given so much good advice some of which I have been grateful for so I am perplexed

Why is it harsh? It's pretty much beyond rescuing. Save it if you want, but I've no idea why.

You can't keep expecting to fix things post processing. You should be concentrating on finding ways to keep your post processing to a minimum, not the other way around. You can't underexpose shadows that much and even hope of doing anything with them.

 

[DayDreamer]

I am not ashamed of the photographs i make and post, since the main purpose is to learn and your comment helps me to do exactly that.

And nor should you be

Keep on posting as I for one enjoy all photographs whether they be 'snaps' or 'professionally' shot. Not all of us take them for the pleasure of others as we may wish to look ourselves for our personal pleasure. To my mind this forum covers a very very diverse range of people, using many different cameras from a few hundreds of pounds worth of equipment to tens of thousands of pounds worth.

I thoroughly enjoy PP and spend substantially more time doing it as I am in very poor health and even though I bought a new camera last November I've only been able to get out once with it in all these months. And that's in my wheelchair.

It takes all sorts and that is the spirit of this forum.

 

[ZoneV]

Must say that I agree with Pookeyhead.

When I started taking pictures I used to think "I've taken this picture, how can I make it look nice?". I'd spend ages polishing those turds in PS wondering why I couldn't get the look I wanted. I still do sometimes - it can be hard to accept that a shot isn't what you want it to be - but now I can judge a scene a bit better before lifting the camera my mindset has shifted more towards "why does this scene look nice enough to photograph?".

 

[smilyanp]

DayDream thank you!

Pookeyhead - thank you for the comment. I won't delete the picture, since it reminds me of a moment, however i will take your point from a photographer's point of view and will ignore the image from it.

I'm doing all this from the position of "i don't know", so it all helps.

Here is another photo, that i'm not sure if you put in the "landscape" photography, but want to know what you think about it.

I've cropped it slightly and changed the contrast, but not big changes.

However, i thought that the trees on the background don't help to strengthen the moment, so i quickly removed them to see the result.

And i prefer the picture without them. The moment seems more intimate and all the focus goes to the guy standing there and you, as a viewer, wondering what is he looking at. Whereas the trees remove part of the "wondering".

Again, comments, criticisms welcomed!

 

[smilyanp]

Yesterday i went to the Peak District and tried some long exposure on running water. I took (or tried to) some of your advises on composition. As well i read few articles.

Here's the result:

 

[DorsetDude]

You could do with reducing the size of the images so that they appear in full without needing to scroll round the screen. Not sure what the recommended size is for here but 1024 long side prob ok.

 

[DayDreamer]

You could do with reducing the size of the images so that they appear in full without needing to scroll round the screen. Not sure what the recommended size is for here but 1024 long side prob ok.

I wonder if this is something to do with whoever hosts them? I use Photobucket & upload full size but they only ever appear on here 1024 longest side. So I wonder

 

[DayDreamer]

Yesterday i went to the Peak District and tried some long exposure on running water. I took (or tried to) some of your advises on composition. As well i read few articles.

Here's the result:

Have you thought of putting on the 'Feedback & Critique' section? You may get more feedback but I feel your first shots were good with great potential as RedDragon & The Drift showed. The night shot was a snap really but if you felt it evoked an emotion in you worthy of keeping fine but the only was I could get more from it was with a good dollop of HDR. The snow shots I feel similar to the night shot. Snow is so attractive but fairly hard to photograph/PP well. The running water shot was good composition but was very flat but something was in there that could be brought out.

 

[Pookeyhead]

Pookeyhead - thank you for the comment. I won't delete the picture, since it reminds me of a moment,

Of course.. we all have a folder for images that are just images kept for personal reasons. I have thousands that are literally just images that recorded a moment or place that I have no serious use for. Not everything has to be perfect

 

[Unijak]

Cracking pic Smileyanp!

 

[smilyanp]

Cracking pic Smileyanp!

If it was me, and obviously this is personal taste, I'd focus on the branch a bit more:

Quick processing aside, I just straightened the waterfall tiers a bit and cropped in to bring the branch lower down.

Can you please let me know in more detail how you retouched the image? I want to learn.

And i love the crop effect! Thanks for the comments!

 

[Unijak]

Lol. I just deleted the image as in hindsight I thought it a bit cheeky to post my take on it pmsl.

Glad you liked it as I don't feel so cheeky now !

I enhanced the moss with Color Efex Pro 4's 'foliage' filter, and desaturated the water with Photoshop's 'sponge' tool. I added a Graduated Neutral Density filter at the top (again from Color Efex Pro 4) and then used the 'Pro Contrast' filter from....you guessed it lol. CEP4 !

You done a cracking job of capturing the silky water so everything was there already. Again, nice one Smilyanp!

 

[smilyanp]

Lol. I just deleted the image as in hindsight I thought it a bit cheeky to post my take on it pmsl.

Glad you liked it as I don't feel so cheeky now !

I enhanced the moss with Color Efex Pro 4's 'foliage' filter, and desaturated the water with Photoshop's 'sponge' tool. I added a Graduated Neutral Density filter at the top (again from Color Efex Pro 4) and then used the 'Pro Contrast' filter from....you guessed it lol. CEP4 !

You done a cracking job of capturing the silky water so everything was there already. Again, nice one Smilyanp!

Thanks, that helps!

 

[TheDrift-]

Yesterday i went to the Peak District and tried some long exposure on running water. I took (or tried to) some of your advises on composition. As well i read few articles.

Here's the result:

I had a quick bash at this, unfortunately the highlight left of the log is completely blown, (i only used the jpeg so might be recoverable in RAW)

 

[smilyanp]

I had a quick bash at this, unfortunately the highlight left of the log is completely blown, (i only used the jpeg so might be recoverable in RAW)

I really like the mood on your edit around the corners. It really brings everything back to the center, toward the log and the stream.

Notes on how you did it? Thanks for sharing!

 

[TheDrift-]

I really like the mood on your edit around the corners. It really brings everything back to the center, toward the log and the stream.

Notes on how you did it? Thanks for sharing!

Thanks

Cant remember the exact process but it was nothing to special used topaz to bring out the detail, then just masked curves to alter the light, dodge and burn vignette.

The orange in the water just came out when i burned it, i did add a little blue to the rock in front of the log, (just painted in on low opacity) vignette, might have added a little blue to the shadows via a curve as well. Desaturated it a bit, thats about all.

 

[Higgy]

tbh I preferred the trees being there in the third picture. If you want to evoke emotion in what the person is looking at then you should try it from the other side of the wall so the viewer can see his face and see him looking past the camera at an angle. Or try it from the side but closer up.
From the back from that distance really doesn't evoke any kind of wonderment. Maybe move a few feet closer and 10ft to the left so you can see more of the trees so there is a bit more to the picture?