Stormy vista

[PeterD]

My dog and I wanted to go out, him for a walk and me with my camera but have been trapped in-doors because of the stormy weather.

Luckily, we have had a few breaks in the downpours so we went on the hill. Being a chalk hill, the moisure soaks in quickly and we can avoid too much mud.

The sun was shining on the hill top but it was a different story over Portsmouth and the Isle of Wight as these images show.


This is a composite of 21 (yes 21) portrait format images stitched together. I set the exposure in the brightest area first to try and avoid burn-out of the highlights. The camera was set to manual as usual and all shots were hand-held with the Bigma set at 50mm. I wanted to capture the sharp contrast in the weather with blue sky to the right and driving rain to the left.


I then zoomed in on the dock area of Portsmouth. There was no chance of the beautiful detail one normally gets but I think this image reflects things exactly as they were. The colours are washed out by the conditions and replaced by hues. This was not anything to do with photoshop this really was as it appeared.


I would welcome any comments

[catkins]

Re: Stormy vista

Well you've had fun with this one!

Technically, the panorama looks as though it has a slight lean to one side, so this should be fairly easy to check and correct with your stitching software.
The difficulty with such a wide distant image as this is that there is little detail to see without the benefit of Gigapan type means of display (as noted previously). So the initial 'view' is that the lower part of the panorama is rather dark and does not have much of interest.
However, as shown in your detail / close up image, the real interest in the panorama is in the more distant landscape area which contains Portsmouth to the left and the hills (presumably the Isle of Wight) to the right. This level of detail contains loads of interest and the detailed photo has lots to explore. I don't know whether you could get to lighten the foreground to show more but for me the best way to display this type of image is by uploading to the gigapan site where I could then enjoy exploring the detail contained within.
It's a potentially good panorama with lovely lighting in the background, so if you do upload it to Gigapan or similar, let us know, then I for one will enjoy seeing the best bits close up!!
Chris

[Zuiko]

Re: Stormy vista

I love the sky on the first one, Peter, especially those threatening curtains of rain. Just a little more of the base of the clouds would have been even better. Not so sure about the land. It needed to be dark to reflect the menace and mood of the sky but to my eye it seems just a little too dark.

The second one has an atmosphere of foreboding and the tension of waiting for something to happen. It has that ominous look of the calm before the storm. It's a shame about the intruding branches in the lower rifgt but there probably wasn't much you could do about them.

Two great examples of rewarding shots in bad weather.

[PeterD]

Re: Stormy vista

Well you've had fun with this one!

Technically, the panorama looks as though it has a slight lean to one side, so this should be fairly easy to check and correct with your stitching software.
The difficulty with such a wide distant image as this is that there is little detail to see without the benefit of Gigapan type means of display (as noted previously). So the initial 'view' is that the lower part of the panorama is rather dark and does not have much of interest.
However, as shown in your detail / close up image, the real interest in the panorama is in the more distant landscape area which contains Portsmouth to the left and the hills (presumably the Isle of Wight) to the right. This level of detail contains loads of interest and the detailed photo has lots to explore. I don't know whether you could get to lighten the foreground to show more but for me the best way to display this type of image is by uploading to the gigapan site where I could then enjoy exploring the detail contained within.
It's a potentially good panorama with lovely lighting in the background, so if you do upload it to Gigapan or similar, let us know, then I for one will enjoy seeing the best bits close up!!
Chris

Thanks Chris. I have a feeling that the conditions when I took this shot would not enable any great detail to be drawn out of the image. I have looked at the website you indicated. I have tried to straighten the image slightly and lightened the foreground. The problem is that the dynamic range of tones is very wide on this image and it is difficult to obtain a balance across the complete spectrum lights-darks. This is the best I can come up with. Bear in mind that the forground was truly dark from the thick clouds overhead.

I love the sky on the first one, Peter, especially those threatening curtains of rain. Just a little more of the base of the clouds would have been even better. Not so sure about the land. It needed to be dark to reflect the menace and mood of the sky but to my eye it seems just a little too dark.

The second one has an atmosphere of foreboding and the tension of waiting for something to happen. It has that ominous look of the calm before the storm. It's a shame about the intruding branches in the lower rifgt but there probably wasn't much you could do about them.

Two great examples of rewarding shots in bad weather.

Thanks John. I have to admit I did not notice the branches . I had little opportunity to avoid them as the bushes are all over the hillside I was on.
As I said above, I have tried to lighten the first image.
Strictly speaking, I could, and perhaps should, have concentrated more on the sky in the first image and lost some of the forground. The problem was that I did not have my tripod with me and with so many overlapping images taken to construct this I had to use a horizon object to ensure alignment. I actually used the IOW with the AF Targets to ensure I was level. I was particularly pleased that there was very little alignment error image to image.

Still, I enjoyed the shoot.

Revised image 1

[Zuiko]

Re: Stormy vista

You did all that without a tripod? That's amazing!

[PeterD]

Re: Stormy vista

You did all that without a tripod? That's amazing!

No John. It was largely the E3 with a little help from me

Thanks for your comment

[catkins]

Re: Stormy vista

Revised image 1

I think that to have got the photo in the first place deserves a credit, and much of the comment is really talking from the ideal that clearly wasn't available because of the prevailing conditions!
I think where there is such a range of contrast in lightness and darkness, it is difficult to come up with an image that will suit all. I think if we disect the image then it is easy to say that the horizon is the key part of the panorama in this case and the foreground is of little interest. However the prevailing conditions also mean that the mid-ground is tonally difficult to find an ideal for.

So, as a means of illustrating some of my points, I have had a play with your image (which obviously will suffer a bit because of the small file size and resulting pixellation).
So first of all; there is some detail in the water around Portsmouth harbour and so I have tried to alter it to see what can be pulled out in terms of added detail and light. I have used 'Lighting . . . Light EQ/Tone Bands' within ACDSee Pro 3.
2/. This then highlights the twigs and vegetation that visually disect the water areas and some of the Isle of Wight - so I have (quickly & crudely) cloned just some of these out to show how this reduces their distractions.
3/. I then have cropped out the lower part of the image that mainly shows the industrial and housing area around Porchester.
4/. I then removed all colour to keep the interest in the tones of white, grey and black

The result is then probably closer to your original image so that, in theory with the full size image, you should still interesting detail around the docks, more interest in the harbour/water, and yet still retain interesting and dramatic cloud details. Obviously if using the original images the result will be far better than my posted version, but I hope that it at least shows the potential!

[PeterD]

Re: Stormy vista

Thank you catkins.

You have produced a very good edit using a small image size but have illustrated your points very well. I shall have another go using the original images and your ideas and see how it comes out. I think I shall have to use the optimum file size to be able to properly edit it - I hope I have enough memory on board

I am no expert in photoshop so cloning out might be difficult but you have given me the inspiration to try.

[PeterD]

Re: Stormy vista

Well I have had another go. I tried to use the optimum size but was far too ambitious. The optimum size being 22022x2784 px. So I compromised at 12000x 1507 still giving me a huge file size.
Editing the new image was far easier and plenty of detail was popping out. I cropped as was suggested and I think that was right because the sky no longer looks compressed. I have managed to lighten the harbour area without affecting the other areas but I do not yet know how to split an image into layers. Maybe this will allow more control. Tried the cropping but that was a disaster - lack of confidence and or skill. I jave therefore had to leave the image untouched in those areas.




What do you think?

[catkins]

Re: Stormy vista

Well I have had another go. I tried to use the optimum size but was far too ambitious. The optimum size being 22022x2784 px. So I compromised at 12000x 1507 still giving me a huge file size.
Editing the new image was far easier and plenty of detail was popping out. I cropped as was suggested and I think that was right because the sky no longer looks compressed. I have managed to lighten the harbour area without affecting the other areas but I do not yet know how to split an image into layers. Maybe this will allow more control. Tried the cropping but that was a disaster - lack of confidence and or skill. I jave therefore had to leave the image untouched in those areas.




What do you think?

It's getting there but I think that a lot will now be down to gaining confidence with some of the tonal controls that some software has, as well as practice with cloning (I think you meant this at the end of your last thread?).
Obviously the other way around cloning is to choose a location that has an unimpeded view, but in this case to have done that could have meant missing the dramatic clouds - again, the ideal is fine but the reality often isn't quite that simple!

The reality for this panorama is partly a lesson in the highs and lows of digital photography - an enormous amount of information can be available within even what seems a dark image. But the way to recover this is through using the computer and photo editing software to help maximise the image, and this can take a lot of time and effort. So the type of editing software and the confidence you have in it will be very important - and most of us are probably self-taught through trial and lots of error!
So firstly, what editing software do you have? Most mainstream editing software (Adobe Photoshop / Photoshop Elements, Corel Paint Shop Pro, etc.) will allow the creation and use of layers which can be useful for a lot of editing work.
It's also worth taking the time to gain confidence with cloning but it can be very time consuming - it'll often come in handy initially for removing small 'flaws' if nothing else. Then as the confidence grows larger cloning projects could be tried.
With a panorama such as this it is better to stitch the images together and then do your cloning, as tidying the individual images could lead to differences between the various neighbouring / overlapping images.
Cloning in an image such as this panorama will often be quite time consuming, needing a fairly small cloning brush size. You will probably need to clone a particular 'flaw' from different locations constantly to minimise the visual signs of cloning - in my image you may notice signs of my cloning near Priddy's Hard (about a quarter way in from the right) - the repeating pattern of a copied building and some trees is often a sign of poor (or quick) cloning!
Most editing software will allow various settings for cloning and this can include altering brush size & shape, opacity, density, etc., and I've noted a few articles / tutorials below

http://www.pspug.org/tutorial/html/tut9eff/beg16-tls-clone_v9.htm

http://www.photokaboom.com/photography/learn/Photoshop_Elements/clone_stamp_tool/1_clone_stamp_tool_basics.htm

http://www.pcworld.com/article/142723/clone_away_your_problems.html

http://www.photoshopcstutorials.co.uk/html/the_clone_tool.html#startutorial

[PeterD]

Re: Stormy vista

Thanks catkins for your comments and the links. I normally use Lightroom for editing but do have CS4 which frightens the life of me

I have used the clone stamp tool on one of my images of the avocet in flight to remove two partial birds at the edge of the frame and it worked!

I thought I would start something that was relatively easy. I did not save the edit because I wanted to make sure I knew what I was doing before I permanently keep the changes. Must get my head around the RAW converter too. It is similar to Lightroom - but different. Once I have gained confidence, I shall move on and complete the editing. Great encouragement - thanks.

[catkins]

Re: Stormy vista

Thanks catkins for your comments and the links. I normally use Lightroom for editing but do have CS4 which frightens the life of me

I have used the clone stamp tool on one of my images of the avocet in flight to remove two partial birds at the edge of the frame and it worked!

I thought I would start something that was relatively easy. I did not save the edit because I wanted to make sure I knew what I was doing before I permanently keep the changes. Must get my head around the RAW converter too. It is similar to Lightroom - but different. Once I have gained confidence, I shall move on and complete the editing. Great encouragement - thanks.

I'm with you re CS4 - lots of technology but where's the simplicity? It's expensive unless you have a student to hand and for most of us Photoshop Elements or in my case Corel Paint Shop Pro seem to do as much as CS4 in most general editing & photo manipulation tasks, and with a certain element of simplicity. I also use free products such as Photoscape for some editing and even Google's Picasa (shock horror) - but the latter two don't allow the use of layers which are a useful option in a lot of detailed editing / manipulation.
Instead of Lightroom, which again is expensive, I have always used ACDSee Pro (now version 3) and have upgraded with every version due to its every increasing range of useful options that allow detailed cataloguing and image editing. ACDSee have always tended to run an offer that has made the product fairly good value. But both these programs offer very good RAW conversion without the need to use other RAW convertors, and certainly will make alteration of Lighting, Tone, Colour, White Balance, Detail & Geometry very easy and, dare I say it, nearly fun!
But compared to the fun of taking the photograph in the first place, editing does rather make the eyes go weak very quickly and time seems to pass very quickly to the detriment of all else! That's why I like any editing software that has a few simple buttons to push to get the effect I want, rather than fabulous technology that I am not competent to understand or use. (Bit like the days of Zenith cameras and the discussions then about which was better to learn on, Zenith E or Olympus OM-1? I started with the former and learnt but gosh I was pleased to move onto the more advanced and simpler cameras)
So have fun and enjoy relaxed editing - your images have a great deal going for them and I look forward to seeing the next one.

BTW: re trying a test cloning and not saving the edit - most recent editing software seems to now (I think) save the original (often in a hidden folder) so that you can always revert to the original if you do make a mistake or don't like the edit. Otherwise, just Save As your edited image under a new sequential name & number for example, so that your original image is retained unchanged.