PH: Langland Bay Sunset

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

The separate foreground exposure not only improves
the quality, It also brings out the colour more;
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/watermist.jpg

Very nice, and not a figure in sight!.
What was the difference in the exposures?
I'd be interested to see the whole picture as exposed for the sky.

Happy New Year

Tony Simpkins

Hi Paul,

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Just a couple of shots from day two of 2005.

SNIP

Quoted message said:

And now for something completely different... Langland Bay Sunset, or
should I say twiight? This was the one where I found myself up to my
knees in water. This is two shots blended using layer masking, one for
the sky and one for the foreground (rather like using a grad only far
more controllable). The separate foreground exposure not only improves
the quality, It also brings out the colour more;
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/watermist.jpg

I'm interested in this type of technique (I'm now migrating from slides to
digital - and I'll need to create my composite images in photoshop, rather
than via 6 projectors as I do currently!) What proportion is the
sky/foreground in the final composite, and did you use a tripod for accurate
registration.

Many thanks,

Glenn

Web site: http://www.andromeda-park.demon.co.uk
Speleo Vercors: http://www.speleo-vercors.org

Tony Simpkins said:

Very nice, and not a figure in sight!.

Oh there were plenty of figures around, but they'd probably all gone
home by that time. And I'd done a bit of rock hopping to get to a more
inaccessible area anyway, away from the crowds.

Here's one;
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/figure.jpg

And here's lots;
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/surfers.jpg

Quoted message said:

What was the difference in the exposures?

2 stops. One was 8 seconds, the other 30 seconds, both at f8. The
contrast range wasn't that great to be honest, I could easily have got a
very similar end result from a single exposure by making a duplicate
layer, lightening one layer then applying a layer mask, but layer
masking does give slightly better quality. In very high contrast scenes
it gives much better quality.

Quoted message said:

I'd be interested to see the whole picture as exposed for the sky.

Here's both, without any processing. The deeper blue in the finished
picture came from boosting the contrast (in each image separately), not
the saturation. Contrast and saturation go hand in hand, which is why
Velvia has lots of both.
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/watermist_dark_light.jpg

This is another shot that I've processed two different ways. The one on
the left is two shots blended using layer masking, the one on the right
is a single shot (the darker one) processed using contrast masking to
lighten the foreground. I processed each one separately, I didn't try
to match them. I think you'll agree that the layer masked shot is
slightly better.
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/rocks_lm_cm.jpg

One interesting effect of the contrast masking is that it's flattened
the brightness levels in the sky, so the blue is more uniform. At first
glance the shot on the left may appear to be suffering from vignetting,
but it isn't. The darker corners really are darker, due to the circular
glow from the set sun. This first became apparent to me when I took a
panoramic photograph in a similar situation a couple of years ago, and
the circular glow was very obvious with such a wide field of view. I
really should have taken an ultrawide shot of the sky to capture this
effect, but it didn't occur to me at the time.

Quoted message said:

Happy New Year

And you.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk

Glenn said:

Quoted message said:

This is two shots blended using layer masking,
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/watermist.jpg

Quoted message said:

I'm interested in this type of technique (I'm now migrating from
slides to digital - and I'll need to create my composite images in
photoshop, rather than via 6 projectors as I do currently!)

Six!!!

Quoted message said:

What
proportion is the sky/foreground in the final composite,

This image will probably illustrate it best.
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/watermist_layers.jpg

First I created a layer mask (by making a copy of the blue channel and
using the Levels control to convert it to black and white, then using
the paintbrush to finish it off). The mask can be seen in the top left
of the image.

I then selected the mask (by left clicking on it whilst holding the
control key), then applied a layer mask using the "reveal selection"
setting. Turning off the background layer gave the result in the top
right of the image (actually the mask isn't aligned properly since I
rotated the image after blending the layers - the mask originally
matched perfectly).

I then applied Gaussian blur to the mask to create a smooth blend. I
experimented with a number of values and chose a value of 100 for this
image (I often use 250). Looking at each layer separately with the
blurred mask gave the results seen in the lower left and lower right of
the image. These are the two images that were blended together.

Quoted message said:

and did you
use a tripod for accurate registration.

Oh yes, I doubt I could have hand-held a 30 second exposure!

Using a tripod is just as important in bright sunshine though. I've
tried blending hand held shots unsuccessfully. Even slight differences
in position are very hard to correct, particularly with wide angle shots
(due to parts of the image being distorted differently).

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk

Glenn said:

Quoted message said:

This is two shots blended using layer masking,
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/watermist.jpg

Quoted message said:

I'm interested in this type of technique (I'm now migrating from
slides to digital - and I'll need to create my composite images in
photoshop, rather than via 6 projectors as I do currently!)

Six!!!

Quoted message said:

What
proportion is the sky/foreground in the final composite,

This image will probably illustrate it best.
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/watermist_layers.jpg

First I created a layer mask (by making a copy of the blue channel and
using the Levels control to convert it to black and white, then using
the paintbrush to finish it off). The mask can be seen in the top left
of the image.

I then selected the mask (by left clicking on it whilst holding the
control key), then applied a layer mask using the "reveal selection"
setting. Turning off the background layer gave the result in the top
right of the image (actually the mask isn't aligned properly since I
rotated the image after blending the layers - the mask originally
matched perfectly).

I then applied Gaussian blur to the mask to create a smooth blend. I
experimented with a number of values and chose a value of 100 for this
image (I often use 250). Looking at each layer separately with the
blurred mask gave the results seen in the lower left and lower right of
the image. These are the two images that were blended together.

Quoted message said:

and did you
use a tripod for accurate registration.

Oh yes, I doubt I could have hand-held a 30 second exposure!

Using a tripod is just as important in bright sunshine though. I've
tried blending hand held shots unsuccessfully. Even slight differences
in position are very hard to correct, particularly with wide angle shots
(due to parts of the image being distorted differently).

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk

Hi Paul,

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Glenn said:

Quoted message said:

This is two shots blended using layer masking,
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/watermist.jpg

Quoted message said:

I'm interested in this type of technique (I'm now migrating from
slides to digital - and I'll need to create my composite images in
photoshop, rather than via 6 projectors as I do currently!)

Six!!!

This article explains the sort of thing I do with projectors. Since I wrote
this article I have upgraded to 6 projectors, but have now decided to go
digital.

http://www.andromeda-park.demon.co.uk/andromeda-park.demon.co.uk/HE2001.htm

And this one for some background info:

http://www.andromeda-park.demon.co.uk/andromeda-park.demon.co.uk/avintro.htm

(I lost contact with my website when I upgraded from '95 to XP last year! My
main challenge for 2005 is to get it back!)

SNIP.

Many thanks for the useful info Paul.

Glenn

Web site: http://www.andromeda-park.demon.co.uk
Speleo Vercors: http://www.speleo-vercors.org

I noticed that Message-ID: <[email hidden]> from
Glenn contained the following:

Quoted message said:

This article explains the sort of thing I do with projectors. Since I wrote
this article I have upgraded to 6 projectors, but have now decided to go
digital.

My degree is in AV communication and I specialised in Audio Visual
Production. Biggest show I ever did used 18 SAV 2050s controlled by 6
AVL Doves and a PC with a Genesis card. Sound track from the ubiquitous
Teac 1/4 in 4 track machine. Did quite a few widescreen 9 projector
shows after that.

Unbeatable in terms of an experience IMV
--
Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/

Paul Saunders said:

Just a couple of shots from day two of 2005.

Clouds and sun's rays. Winter seems to be a very good time for this
type of shot for some reason. Maybe the clarity of the air?
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/cloudrays.jpg

N1

Quoted message said:

And now for something completely different... Langland Bay Sunset, or
should I say twiight? This was the one where I found myself up to my
knees in water. This is two shots blended using layer masking,

Quoted message said:

http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/watermist.jpg

A Most Excellent composition Paul, especialy like the effect on the
water.

Ethically speaking, how would you feel about "losing" the lights from
the houses on the headland?

SteveO
--
NE Climbers & walkers chat forum;
http://www.thenmc.org.uk/phpBB2/index.php

NMC website: http://www.thenmc.org.uk

Paul Saunders said:

Just a couple of shots from day two of 2005.

Clouds and sun's rays. Winter seems to be a very good time for this
type of shot for some reason. Maybe the clarity of the air?
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/cloudrays.jpg

N1

Quoted message said:

And now for something completely different... Langland Bay Sunset, or
should I say twiight? This was the one where I found myself up to my
knees in water. This is two shots blended using layer masking,

Quoted message said:

http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/watermist.jpg

A Most Excellent composition Paul, especialy like the effect on the
water.

Ethically speaking, how would you feel about "losing" the lights from
the houses on the headland?

SteveO
--
NE Climbers & walkers chat forum;
http://www.thenmc.org.uk/phpBB2/index.php

NMC website: http://www.thenmc.org.uk

Paul Saunders said:

Tony Simpkins said:

Very nice, and not a figure in sight!.

Quoted message said:

And here's lots;
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/surfers.jpg

Interesting colour and texture on this shot Paul, quite surreal.

SteveO
--
NE Climbers & walkers chat forum;
http://www.thenmc.org.uk/phpBB2/index.php

NMC website: http://www.thenmc.org.uk

Paul Saunders said:

Tony Simpkins said:

Very nice, and not a figure in sight!.

Quoted message said:

And here's lots;
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/surfers.jpg

Interesting colour and texture on this shot Paul, quite surreal.

SteveO
--
NE Climbers & walkers chat forum;
http://www.thenmc.org.uk/phpBB2/index.php

NMC website: http://www.thenmc.org.uk

In article <[email hidden]>, Tony Simpkins
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

The separate foreground exposure not only improves
the quality, It also brings out the colour more;
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/watermist.jpg

Very nice, and not a figure in sight!.
What was the difference in the exposures?
I'd be interested to see the whole picture as exposed for the sky.

Happy New Year

Tony Simpkins

Agreed, the Watermist" is quite surreal - lovely. The cloudscape is
very powerful - be honest, is this PS or PS ?...:-)
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk

SteveO said:

Quoted message said:

Clouds and sun's rays. Winter seems to be a very good time for this
type of shot for some reason. Maybe the clarity of the air?
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/cloudrays.jpg

N1

N1?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/watermist.jpg

A Most Excellent composition Paul, especialy like the effect on the
water.

It almost looks placid, like a large pool of water, doesn't it? Whereas
in fact it was a series of fast moving waves. Most of the foreground
should have been rocks. I must have hit the wrong point in the wave
cycle, setting up the tripod during a lull then taking the photos as the
waves hit their peak, soaking the bottom of my trousers in the process.
I was expecting the waves to run between the rocks, not over them. The
rocks I was standing on were a couple of feet higher than the sand.
Good job I wasn't standing on the sand!

Quoted message said:

Ethically speaking, how would you feel about "losing" the lights from
the houses on the headland?

Glad you asked. That did cross my mind. Personally it wouldn't bother
me in the slightest, but would it bother anyone else?

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk

SteveO said:

Quoted message said:

http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/surfers.jpg

Interesting colour and texture on this shot Paul, quite surreal.

In the surfers shot? Are you sure you've got the right one? Don't you
mean the figure shot?

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk

W. D. Grey said:

Agreed, the Watermist" is quite surreal - lovely. The cloudscape is
very powerful - be honest, is this PS or PS ?...:-)

If it's possible to create that effect artificially in Photoshop, I'd
love to know how!

I've boosted the contrast and saturation a little, but that's no
different to using Velvia, and I have taken shots like that on Velvia.
It's mainly a matter of exposure, 1/1000th sec at f22 if I recall. It
was extremely bright to look at, all I've really done is darkened it a
lot. I did apply a contrast mask to lighten the edges of the photo
which were quite dark compared to the extremely bright middle, but
essentially it's a real photograph.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk

In Article <[email hidden]>,"Paul Saunders"

Quoted message said:

W. D. Grey said:

Agreed, the Watermist" is quite surreal - lovely. The cloudscape is
very powerful - be honest, is this PS or PS ?...:-)

If it's possible to create that effect artificially in Photoshop, I'd
love to know how!

The rays of light can be fabricated with the Polygonal Lasso Tool. Here's a
example of mine used to create a spotlight effect.
www.gosney.plus.com/Theatre.jpg

I doubt this tool would adequately re-create your cloudscape though.

Regards,
Richard G.

In Article <[email hidden]>,"Paul Saunders"

Quoted message said:

W. D. Grey said:

Agreed, the Watermist" is quite surreal - lovely. The cloudscape is
very powerful - be honest, is this PS or PS ?...:-)

If it's possible to create that effect artificially in Photoshop, I'd
love to know how!

The rays of light can be fabricated with the Polygonal Lasso Tool. Here's a
example of mine used to create a spotlight effect.
www.gosney.plus.com/Theatre.jpg

I doubt this tool would adequately re-create your cloudscape though.

Regards,
Richard G.

Paul Saunders said:

SteveO said:

N1

N1?

nice one ...abbreviated ;-)

Quoted message said:

soaking the bottom of my trousers in the process.
I was expecting the waves to run between the rocks, not over them. The
rocks I was standing on were a couple of feet higher than the sand.
Good job I wasn't standing on the sand!

You need some of those thur trendy walkin wellies!!
;-)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Ethically speaking, how would you feel about "losing" the lights from
the houses on the headland?

Glad you asked. That did cross my mind. Personally it wouldn't bother
me in the slightest, but would it bother anyone else?

It wouldn't bother me at all, I reckon it would improve the
composition and wouldn't hesitate... if it were a print from film then
you'd prolly try a bit of dark-room technique to lessen their impact
on the final work... same difference (for me) doing that with
Photoshop.

SteveO
--
NE Climbers & walkers chat forum;
http://www.thenmc.org.uk/phpBB2/index.php

NMC website: http://www.thenmc.org.uk

Paul Saunders said:

SteveO said:

Quoted message said:

http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/lbs/surfers.jpg

Interesting colour and texture on this shot Paul, quite surreal.

In the surfers shot? Are you sure you've got the right one? Don't you
mean the figure shot?

Yeah, I got the right one, you got the right one?? ;-)

Yup, t'is the surfers shot of wich I doth spake (the other one, the
one with the single figure is good... except I don't [personally] like
the way you can clearly see the geezers feet, but that's just me! ;-)
The colours and light in the single figure pic are good, but also
"seen before-ish", iyswim.

The surfers, otoh, there's a metallic look to the sea (metallic-blue
not the more "obvious" metallic-silver) and the surface of the waves
in the foreground look crusted... resembles something like
crusting/flaking/heaving lava in its texture... kinda like cold lava.

SteveO
--
NE Climbers & walkers chat forum;
http://www.thenmc.org.uk/phpBB2/index.php

NMC website: http://www.thenmc.org.uk