Originally posted by Jewelltrail Now this is a secret--thank you. It troubles me a bit though when I think of the cost involved in using filters to obtain this effect. If you do not mind, how much and what version of this software are you refering to?
I used the beta version of the upcoming ACDSee Pro 3.0, which is actually freely usable during the beta period (next couple of months or so, I guess). The current product version is 2.5 and it costs $130; I'd expect the new version to be priced similarly. The "advanced lighting" tool I mentioned is available in both, but it *is* improved in 3.0.
I shouldn't do this, but here's the default conversion:
Need I say that my processed version is a lot closer to what I remember seeing? The AWB worked too well - it killed the color of the light, and the difference in value between the sky and ground just doesn't read right at all when reduced to the far more limited dynamic range our screens (and printers) can produce. If I expose for the ground, the sky is blown out, and if I expose for the sky as I did here, the ground is disappointingly dark. So I treated PP like I would a painting, trying to capture on a two dimensional surface the color and value relationships as they *felt* in real life. HDR-like, one might say, but using standard artists' techniques to make the light look believable.
Here's the complete list of what I did: set WB to the "Sunny" preset at 50% strength (to bring out the colors that the AWB had muted), set Fill Light = 10, Contrast = 20, and dragged up toward the left side and down toward the right side of the Advanced Lighting tool. Probably about 20 seconds of fiddling. In hindsight, I probably should have adjusted the white point on the curve tool as well.
FWIW, few of my posted images need such dramatic change to capture what I want.