[WileyB]

I am occasionally frustrated by a scene like this - darker across most of the photo, with a bright (cloudy) patch of sky in an irregular shape in the top right.

The bright sky is completely oversaturated, and blowing out the neighboring pixels (like the bridge railing).

What kind of technical tips, both while taking the photo and post-processing, could have improved this picture?

Thank you for any suggestions!

[Kerrowdown]

There's many tweaks that can be done to this image, but it's your vision of what you saw.

My take is... adjust white balance, tweak colours a little, grad filters and a bit of dodge and burn.

[WileyB]

Nice, thank you!

Any techniques while taking the pictures to control the blowout in that corner?

---------- Post added 02-12-17 at 12:37 PM ----------

Besides composing the bright sky out of the frame...

[BrianR]

If the sky is clear a polarizer can knock its brightness down, but will also affect the reflections on the water and leaves, the net effect may be a win depending on the conditions. It's worth trying if you have a polarizer.

You can bracket exposures and combine later as an HDR (which does not have to be cartoonish).

A 1 photo pseudo HDR may also be possible - expose to keep the sky from being blown out, then raise the shadows aggressively. This won't work well if the dynamic range of the scene is too large, and can end up making the entire image look 'flat' if your processing technique is poor. I am definitely poor at this.

You can get a split ND filter to make the upper portion darker - this is tough with a wobbly tree line or dappled light areas as you can't selectively hit just the bright areas..

You can come back at a better time when there is less of a difference between the sky and your scene- for example if the sun ever hits your bridge (a strong ND filter would be needed if you wanted to keep the blurry water).

Or embrace the highlights and focus on the rest of the image as Kerrowdown has done... a bit of blank sky here and there is sometimes the way it goes.

[WileyB]

Kerrowdown did a great job.

Thanks, Brian!

[Kerrowdown]

Any techniques while taking the pictures to control the blowout in that corner?

Try to find a different angle with more trees filling up the gaps, but I appreciate this is not always possible.

[Kerrowdown]

Or embrace the highlights and focus on the rest of the image as Kerrowdown has done...

Kerrowdown did a great job

Thank you both, sometimes you just have to work with what your presented with and then do the best job you can.

---

Last edited by Kerrowdown; 02-12-2017 at 03:37 PM.

[Bruce Clark]

I like what Kerrowdown has done with your photograph. A very good job of editing. The only remaining problem is the sky and I doubt much could be down with that. Key is framing in the first place. On a dull day these are ideal scenes but try to keep the sky out of the frame and pay attention to the white balance.

[Kerrowdown]

I like what Kerrowdown has done with your photograph. A very good job of editing

Thank for your kind words, I literally just gave it a quick tweak, the image is worthy of having proper time spent on the editing.

[PenPusher]

There's many tweaks that can be done to this image, but it's your vision of what you saw.

My take is... adjust weight balance, tweak colours a little, grad filters and a bit of dodge and burn.

I'm absolutely new to post processing, you have made some very interesting changes to the image, may I enquire what you mean by adjust weight balance, I understand the colour tweaking but I thought grad filters had to be used when taking the shot

[Kerrowdown]

may I enquire what you mean by adjust weight balance

I'm not sure what PP software your using, but most allow you to click on a neutral grey part of the image, to correct the rest of the colours. In the original image you may have noticed, that there's a blueish look (cast) to it.

I thought grad filters had to be used when taking the shot

No you can use them in PP software too, grad filters work in just the same way as physical ones on the camera, but IMHO are more controllable.

[Rondec]

I guess if I were going to make recommendation, it would be to shoot using a tripod at lower iso and under expose by a stop. Then, you can bump the shadows up in post processing.

[PenPusher]

Thank you, it was the term weighting that confused me, I am thinking of getting DxO so I shall have to download and read the manual several times before I pull the trigger and get it, at the moment I am messing with LightZone but it has some limitations.

[wildman]

Technical Tips?

Most obvious issue was that WB was off.
While highlights were burned a bit it was not extreme. Next time shoot RAW and normalize in PP. A RAW file would have handled the DR nicely I think.

Big hint - you had a lot going on in this scene and speaking only for myself, I wouldn't have attempted to shoot jpg and get it right SOOC - you just don't have that kind of control through the camera only.

[Schraubstock]

but it's your vision of what you saw.

I come in here late but I offer my version nevertheless.

Krrodown is on the right track suggesting a colour correction. He also says: "but it's your vision of what you saw" as if to offer an apology for his colour correction. (because he is a polite man) This is O.K. but in my view this is an unnecessary precaution to avoid bad blood. The poster asks for help and when help is given to correct an obvious fault, as in this case bad white balance, it should be truthfully stated. After all manufacturers of cameras go to great length to get white balance right and when the operator or the camera get it wrong there should be no apology needed to corrected it.

There are however situations where a colour cast is deliberately added to an image but I reckon I can pretty well judge whether a cast was deliberate or an accident. (Not always but most of the time.)

And finally (after a mild rant) here is my version.
I have stated many times, I am not a great lover of slow exposure of fast running water. It is just so fashionable in photography now that anybody just blindly follows this trend. A waterfall is a wild display of the enormous power of water tumbling down a slope or cliff and should not be soothing to the eye. The right exposure is important, shutter speed should not be too fast to freeze every drop or splash but slow enough to capture the dynamism of the falling water. This is my opinion.

Cheers