Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more
Can't Access your Account?
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Not much to say about the photo. I saw the sun shone through from the other side of the church, brightened the dark side.It's beautiful...
Hope that you like it as well
All comments and criticisms are welcome.maybe it's too dark againThank you.
Lovely capture with the light shining through.. Peter
It is a lovely gentle image but as you say perhaps just a little dark. Nice moody shot Well done
Lovely image, Jasmine! It must be the same church. I love it - it is different from the usual seeing the light from inside coming from the outside.
What light trough yonder window.
Well seen and taken.
nice idea Jasmine,you have been busy at the church.
Well seen and nicely framed, Ithink the slightly darker stonework contrasts well with the light through the window, good shot.
Gorgeous shot. Stunning composition.
Artistic & excellent capture, Jasmine, with fine color, clarity, & composition. Well done.
Nice colours on the window Jasmine. Might have cropped a bit tighter on the left to omit the other door or structure? Like the added green in the fg. Think that helps to introduce additional colour. If you felt inclined you might run it through PS and lighten the shadows slightly. Nice one through. Good detail. Paul
Thank you Paul. I did give a further crop on the top, left and bottom later.I like light, but also have problem with it, as the privious one, maybe I should brighten it up and also increase the contrast on this one as well.
Thank you all for your kind commments and support.
For me, the interest here is purely the window so I've have cropped in very tight on it. To avoid any perspective distortion, I'd want to point the camera straight at the wall, not turned to the side and, if possible, not angled upwards, either. Of course, the last one isn't always possible.
Thank you very much Dave.
There is technical question here.
I just had a check.The AF point is on the third line of left centre(Partial metering; half grey and half bright).If I pointed straight at the wall,how can I control the bright part of the glass not to be 'blown out'?If I use "-" stops, will the wall be too dark?
The photo was taken from a distance across the road.I tried to avoid the perspective problem by not going to in front of the window, as you said 'angled upwards'.I couldn't take the photo in front of the church, because the 11:51:48am's sun straight shone in to the camera. I had to move to the right, take the advantage of the spaire which blocked the light.
Interesting discussion. Thank you again
Shooting from a distance to avoid having to tilt the camera up so much is an excellent way to keep the perspective under control.
To control the brighter parts, first try negative exposure compensation -- you might find it doesn't make the walls too dark, in which case that's all you need to do. If it does make the walls too dark, you have a couple of choices. One is to accept that you can't always have the photo you want and to choose the exposure that best balances blowing out the window and under-exposing the frame. Another is to come back a little earlier or a little later and hope that the light through the window is a little darker and the light on the wall a little brighter. Finally, if you have a tripod, you can take a photo exposed for the window and one exposed for the wall and merge them in your image editor. No need to use HDR for something so simple -- just paste them as layers in the same image and use a mask to erase the 'bad' parts of the top image to let the other one show through. Put the one on top that needs least erasing, to save on work. Don Smith has a tutorial on his website.
Wow...Great!Thank you soooo ..ooo much Dave.I couldn't quite follow the tutorial simply by reading it.I need to try it myself...I don't know how to use mask, I know how to do copy and paste on PSP.
I haven't quite undersatood the privious comments yet(Light&shadow).I'm foreign and 101 years old. I promise, I'll try, and do another MOD.according to your critique.
I do think about HDR sometimes, I learned a great deal from "Woolation Hall" photo, but It's hard for me to carry tripod about, I take photos aimlessly.This is my problem with HDR.When people talk about HRD, it always involves with tripod, bracketing..etc.I have a question here:
What about simply use one single photo,process it at different stops in software, and then merge them together or as Don Smith did.What the difference would be?
I tried my way,but never had a chance to have a discussion with anybody,(Thank you for giving me the chance) also, I never really use tripod to take photos, all the photos I put on EPZ are hand held.I wonder if the very short time changing (using tripod or bracketing) will make the merged image better(or wores?I don't know ,never tried).I think the benefit of single image, should be more clear,shouldn't it?Too technical for me too work out, just a though to avoid using tripod.I tried bracketing with fujifinepix8000 in an indoodr conditon once,light wasn't good.The slow shutter speed made it blur(it's hard to held the camera that long, without moving).It is impossible to use them to merge HDR,if I intended to.
Thank you very much again, great pleasure to talk to you.
Masks are quite simple -- they control which parts of a layer are visible. Suppose you have a background layer and another layer on top of it. Normally, the top layer is 100% visible and it hides everything behind it. You could erase parts of that layer to let the background show through but the problem is that if you accidentally erase too much, it's hard to get back the bits you want. You can try to use undo but it takes a long time to find out which erase action you need to undo and then redo all the other ones.
It's better to apply a mask to the top layer. A mask is a black and white layer that's joined to the layer you want to control. Where the mask is white, the layer it controls is 100% visible; where it's black, it's completely invisible; where it's grey, the controlled layer is partly visible. So now, you erase by painting black onto the mask layer, without touching the controlled layer. If you erase too much, just overpaint with white and the controlled layer comes back. Paint with a soft brush and you'll get a nice blend at the edges.
Single-shot HDR and merges are of very limited use. Remember that the purpose of HDR is to allow you to capture an image that has a greater range of brightness than your sensor can deal with, by using multiple images, each of which covers one part of the range. So what happens if you just use one shot? Well, if the full brightness range is recorded in that one photo, you don't need to use HDR because you already have all the information you need in that one shot. If the full brightness range isn't recorded (i.e., the dark parts have become pure black and/or the bright parts have become pure white) then it doesn't matter how you process it -- those areas are lost and cannot be recovered.
Single shot HDRs are an easy way to give the 'HDR look' to a photograph that wasn't originally taken with HDR in mind. So, if you like that look, go ahead and use the technique. They can also be a convenient way of processing a shot where different areas require different kinds of adjustment. For example, if you have a shot where the land's too dark and the sky's too bright but no detail has been lost, it can be quite time consuming to make separate adjustments to the land and the sky. Instead, you make the land adjustment to the whole photo, which destroys the sky. You then make the sky adjustment to the whole photo and that destroys the land. HDR software will then do a good job of quickly combining the two versions, keeping the good parts of each. So, single-shot HDR does have some value but it doesn't do what HDR is designed to do because that, by definition, requires multiple shots.
If you are combining multiple exposures, either manually or with HDR software, a tripod is very helpful. Burst mode with exposure bracketing is better than nothing but still not ideal. With a tripod, especially using a remote release, the versions of the photograph should match up almost to the pixel. If you're hand-holding the camera, it will move enough between exposures that the shots won't quite line up -- the camera will move left or right, up or down and, worse, rotate between the shots and everything will be five or ten or more pixels out of alignment. HDR software is usually pretty good at sorting that out and will automatically align the shots for you, as long as they're reasonably close. Doing it yourself is much more tedious.
I realise that carrying a tripod around is often inconvenient and I normally only use mine when I'm out on my own. If I'm with friends or family, they don't want to have to hang around for a few minutes while I take a photo. Sometimes, you can improvise, by resting the camera against a wall or holding it tight against a lamp-post or something like that, especially if you're using burst-mode bracketing so you don't have to adjust the camera's controls between the shots. Really, though, it's hard to combine multiple exposures without one. Of course, you can still try to do it without a tripod and the results may well be better than what you could get with a single shot, especially with the automatic alignment done by HDR software.
You mention a time where you were indoors. If it's too dark to get a sharp hand-held photo then combining hand-held exposures isn't going to work, either, as all the individual shots will be shaky. That's a case where no tripod tends to mean no shot.
Thank you so much Dave for your MASSIVE information.It is wonderful to learn it all..really great!
I actually tried single shot "HDR" once.I wonder if I made myself clear or not. I don't know the technical jargon,I call it "single shot HDR", maybe it means something else in photography.Sorry about my English. I learned from "Woolation Hall" photo, that I need wide range of the brightness and darkness.What I meant the single shot is :
When I process the RAW image on the software, the image can be brightened up range from -2 stops, to +2 stops and plus the original shot, I could have 5 images accordingly to merge. I thought that I got the range,not necessaryly -2 and +2,but in betwween the range. I thought that it was just like bracketing or tripod wrok,wasn't it? This is my version of "single shot HDR", Does it make any sense at all?
I just found the photo I did,I will put them under the "Railway ducks" photo for you to have a look. I can't remember what stops I used, I only wanted a little change, not dramatically, I didn't want it look like HDR.From the original I warmed it up a bit, as I saw.
Tripod, yes. That's why I only do snaps,it's a bit pain to keep others waiting..
Thank you so much again for your time and kind help.
Yeah, I'm thinking that I'll have a monopod one day,still thinking....
A very good evening to you, and a great thanks again.
Coming home from work all through last summer, I noticed a church on my way had the sun shining through windows from end to end at about the time I was getting there. I kept thinking to myself "I must bring my camera one day". Perhaps this summer I will. You've inspired me.
Thank you Dave for your compliment.We saw the same view, I was just slightly lucky than you were, I had camera in hands.
I'll be looking forward to seeing your church window photo then.It won't be long, spring is on its way, summer will be coming soon
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
You must be a member to leave a comment
Get the latest photography news straight from ePHOTOzine in your email every month and win prizes!
1st January 2015 - 31st January 2015
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
View January's Photo Month Calendar