[FantasticMrFox]

I suggest trying what is often called a midtone sharpening. I use unsharp mask filter and as a start values of: (amount) 15 to 60%, 12 Pixels, and (threshold) 0 levels. I do it for most of my photo's, and although they are generally theatre photo's, the above values would likely be a good starting point. You can follow up with a regular unsharp mask, or other vatiations of same.

The sharpening makes the picture "pop" and the particular one I give above makes the mid tones deep/saturate more. I picked it up from articles by ctein and Ken Rockwell. It can easily be overdone--and I think the examples you show are overdone (unnatural).

As Sandy and others said, patience for the right time, weather and luck. I live in Washington and wanted a sunrise reflection picture of Reflection Lake at Mt Rainier. It takes me three hours just to get there and I have no way of knowing what the weather will be ahead of time (concerning wind or clouds). It took four trips for me to finally get the picture in the right conditions. The others weren't wasted trips, because overcast days are great for other types of photography, I just wouldn't need to get up at 3:30AM for that.

. The lenses are sharp edge to edge (especially the 2nd image) and seem to be tuned for landscape - High quality lenses are the first part of the equation - other lenses he didn't mention are the sigma 10-20 and tamron 17-50 and pentax 20-40. Those would actually be my recommendations over the DA15 or 12-24
. Aperture seems to stay within the optimum range of f8 to f11, for good DOF before diffraction starts to show in the picture - Using and knowing how to use sharpening tools in PP is a class unto itself. I recommend one of several books out there. I like Scott Kelby, others despise him.
. Pictures were taken when the light was optimal. You can't fake good light with PP. -this is the biggest thing. everything from angle of lighting to atmospheric distortion can mess with your images. Cold, dry days with low light angles will give you the best contrast. There are many stories about planning shoots months and years in advance for that one photo. I'm not a nat geo pro, but I do spend several weeks planning my photo trips, starting from the time I decide on a location. I have sunrise and sunset times for the area, travel times and hiking distances. I've decided whether it's a sunrise or sunset location and as soon as the long range weather forecast comes out, I start tracking it. Often I'll move subjects around depending on weather for a day. For instance, waterfalls might move to a Cloudy Tuesday and coastal pics to a partly cloudy Wednesday instead of original plan.
. Depending on what you are trying to do, high quality filters help a lot, but they're not essential - My Cokin filter system is some of the best money I've every spent on photography. Once I learned to manage the handling and multi tasking involved, its results have done wonders for my images
. Once you have that perfectly exposed picture, PP will become much easier and rewarding... but of course it still needs a lot of practice.- Know how to shoot to your histogram. Learn about things called "expose to the right" and the zone system. They may not be applicable all the time, but you'll be better educated about the decision to make regarding exposure. Understand terms like micro contrast and black point. Get a couple books, and now you have the perfect excuse to go take more pics. Cuz you HAVE to practice! Also, one of my go-to websites is Luminous Landscapes. I have learned a lot of stuff reading their articles and how-tos.

This advice has been extremely useful - thanks a lot dns, Wingincamera and nomadkng!

nomadkng, your pictures are incredible. The ones you took in Banff National Park are essentially what I'm after

[dms]

As a follow up on the mid tone sharpening--the values I gave above, are what I have been using a lot recently, but a better starting point likely is:
12%, 60 pixels, and 0 level.

[PANGU_yien]

I have recently got the Adobe Creative Suite and am starting to get into Lightroom (savouring Photoshop for later). I shoot a lot of landscapes and have achieved some decent first results, but there is a certain look I have come across a couple of times in the past and always wondered how it is done.

I am talking about the look of this picture: Erik McRitchie, Lake Louise

Here is a similar example (but more saturated): https://flic.kr/p/htGrs8

What I am after is this incredibly clear, sharp look. The water almost looks crystal, you can see the sharp reflection of the mountain.

I think one of the aspects is the quality of the lens used - I originally thought that the main difference between cheaper and more expensive lenses is sharpness but realised that colour rendition and clarity also differ quite a bit when I got my first lens past the 18-55 kit, an SMC-A 50 f/1.7. What I have concluded about post-processing in Lightroom is that he probably increased contrast and clarity quite a bit while slightly reducing overall saturation and increasing the saturation (and luminance?) of blue and aqua. But beyond that, I have no clue.

Same for the second picture, just that the saturation for yellow and blue seems to have been increased.

Does anyone know how this look is achieved and would care to share his wisdom with a novice like me?

As far as the clear sharp reflection, these are short exposures taken when there was no wind disturbing the water. I can't speak for the Yosemite shot (which was tagged as HDR) but the Lake Louise shot wouldn't necessarily need tons of post to look like that. Louise really is that clear and aqua coloured. It may be right place right time.

[johnyates]

and am starting to get into Lightroom (savouring Photoshop for later).

When you're ready for photoshop, I suggest you investigate using layer masks to get all the last bits of goodness from your camera's dynamic range.

[FantasticMrFox]

When you're ready for photoshop, I suggest you investigate using layer masks to get all the last bits of goodness from your camera's dynamic range.

Will definitely look into that. I used layers with GIMP before to create graduated filters or to make one person appear in the same picture several times, but that's about it

[Sagitta]

I'm not sure if anyone mentioned it (I didn't see it on a quick scan) but a CPL helps achieve that look in a major, major way.

I'm hardly a pro, but I managed this shot with just the kit lens and a CPL once. I tend not to use CPLs often (I just forget them when I head out), and unsurprisingly I haven't come too close since.

The other factor (as mentioned) is being able to HDR the image if conditions allow. Unsurprisingly, those same conditions tend to allow still or nearly still water, which also helps.

None of these are HDR, the first was achieved via having a good day and a CPL. The other two were strictly having decent, calm weather.







These two however ARE HDR (ignore the sensor yarg) - and the results come out close to the same. In my experience if you have a situation like the first few shots, HDR isn't necessary.





And finally just to show that no, really, its the luck of the location, this last shot was taken with a hacked A470 budget Powershot camera (yea, its HDR, but HDR from a pocket camera...).

[Mikesul]

Yes a CPL properly used can create wonderful effects.

[Sagitta]

Yes a CPL properly used can create wonderful effects.

The best part is you can actually see the results in the viewfinder/LCD as you compose. You actually eliminate a lot of the need for having to mess with post processing when you use one to pull off that look.

[Mikesul]

The best part is you can actually see the results in the viewfinder/LCD as you compose. You actually eliminate a lot of the need for having to mess with post processing when you use one to pull off that look.

Yes, exactly and when properly used the result are very natural looking.

[Rondec]

I think programs like Nik Effects or Topaz Suite will give you the kind of result you are looking for. You just really need to be careful not to over do it, as halos can show up if you are to aggressive with sharpening sliders.

[FantasticMrFox]

I'm not sure if anyone mentioned it (I didn't see it on a quick scan) but a CPL helps achieve that look in a major, major way.

Yes a CPL properly used can create wonderful effects.

I use my CPL a lot, but wouldn't it be detrimental in this situation? If you set it to maximum effect the sky will be nice and contrasty, foliage will look great but the reflections will be removed from the water. If you set it to least effect, there will be nice, strong reflections in the water but the image will have less contrast, the sky will be pale and foliage won't look as good.

X

Here's a before and after I just did using the techniques outlined in my post above.

Great advice, I will definitely look into these things. The result looks pretty good!

Thanks a lot to everyone for the really helpful replies!

[iancuad]

O poza
Acum o saptamana erea de vis.

[FantasticMrFox]

One other thing that is often overlooked - If you are looking to use your images online, make sure that your final product is in the SRGB gamut, not Adobe.

Just checked, all my images shot with the Kr and K3 and developed in LR are sRGB.

[schnitzer79]

first you need to get it right with the capture..tripod, lowest ISO, aperture between f8 and f16 (i usually use f11). then in PP you need to bring out details in the shadows and highlights and perhaps a software plugin like niks or topaz definitely helps. buts its all about trial and error.

[dms]

You probably should make your photos the best you can, and then for web use you can convert to 8 bit and sRGB. It is often said about 40% of the colors in Pro Photo RGB are missing from sRGB.

sRGB is not really consistent with wanting to get the most from your images. I suggest you use Pro Photo RGB (and 16 bit) if you use raw. Also better than sRGB is Adobe RGB. I don't know how significant the color difference is as I print w/ pro photo RGB, and only convert to sRGB when I distribute the photos, but I do see areas blown in sRGB, that aren't in Pro Photo RGB (i.e., it has a wider dynamic range).