Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-07-2019, 06:05 PM   #1
Pentaxian
sealonsf's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: San Francisco
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,640
Your Thoughts?
Camera: K3II Photo Location: Monument Valley 

Not sure if this works (dark, yet blown out)... interested in your thoughts... Taken at Monument Valley.

Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-3 II  Photo 
01-07-2019, 06:15 PM   #2
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 456
Definitely way too dark, but the composition is pretty nice. If you had shot in raw, this would definitely be recoverable. Even with the original JPG, you might be able to recover some of the lost detail.
01-07-2019, 06:53 PM   #3
Pentaxian
sealonsf's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: San Francisco
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,640
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by igowerf Quote
Definitely way too dark, but the composition is pretty nice. If you had shot in raw, this would definitely be recoverable. Even with the original JPG, you might be able to recover some of the lost detail.
Thanks, I don't disagree. I shot raw but if I bring up the exposure it wasn't working very well - too noisy and my denoise with DXO couldn't take care of it all - and an ugly building in the foreground. Everything I was doing didn't seem to help it much. I might have to let this one go! :-)
01-07-2019, 07:42 PM   #4
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,001
It would have to be reshot IMO.
You should expose for the subject rather than the sun, which is what the camera would want to expose for (to avoid blowing out highlights). Then you have more latitude with PP to get the effect desired. HDR makes such a scene look washed out, and you don;t need to save the highlight details in the sun, so shoot for the background and PP should try and save the sky details.

01-07-2019, 08:01 PM   #5
Pentaxian
sealonsf's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: San Francisco
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,640
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
It would have to be reshot IMO.
You should expose for the subject rather than the sun, which is what the camera would want to expose for (to avoid blowing out highlights). Then you have more latitude with PP to get the effect desired. HDR makes such a scene look washed out, and you don;t need to save the highlight details in the sun, so shoot for the background and PP should try and save the sky details.
Thank you for that explanation - that helps. I'll keep that in mind for next time.
01-07-2019, 08:20 PM   #6
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,001
No worries. It is quite hard to salvage a highly underexposed photo even with low ISO. All the best with that.
01-08-2019, 02:22 AM   #7
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Mallee Boy's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hindmarsh Isl. Sth Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,820
Not sure if this is a jpeg or raw ? Raw would have more potential, jpeg less so, but certainly not a lost cause.
I immediately wonder what detail is in the darks in the foreground...try and brush them over and play with exposure, Pentax is very good at preserving detail, so there maybe more in the dark areas than you think. Even a visit to NIK might be worthwhile. Goodluck, the image has something. You mention an ugly building ? can you crop that out and make it into a pano ?
01-08-2019, 08:33 AM   #8
Pentaxian
sealonsf's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: San Francisco
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,640
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Mallee Boy Quote
Not sure if this is a jpeg or raw ? Raw would have more potential, jpeg less so, but certainly not a lost cause.
I immediately wonder what detail is in the darks in the foreground...try and brush them over and play with exposure, Pentax is very good at preserving detail, so there maybe more in the dark areas than you think. Even a visit to NIK might be worthwhile. Goodluck, the image has something. You mention an ugly building ? can you crop that out and make it into a pano ?
Thanks for your thoughts.
It is raw but very noisy if I try to bring up the exposure. The building is too close to the important elements of the shot to crop it out. I tried to remove it but not very successfully.

I'd set up my tripod to try to catch the moonrise and had given up and gone inside - then of course the moon started peeking out from the side of the hills so I missed the best moment.

01-08-2019, 09:42 AM   #9
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 7,771
It's not a landscape.
01-08-2019, 09:49 AM   #10
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,933
This is a night shot, not? I mean it is iso 800 shot at 13 seconds. It still feels really under exposed to me. Probably needs a longer exposure in order to get the landscape a bit of detail -- either that or do some light painting with a flashlight or some such thing. Probably would be tough to get a proper exposure of the foreground and still have the moon look like a moon without doing some type of combination of exposures.
01-08-2019, 11:30 AM   #11
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
RGlasel's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Saskatoon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,967
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
This is a night shot, not? I mean it is iso 800 shot at 13 seconds.
Good catch, I missed that when I first looked at it. I now see that aperture was f29, which explains the weird starburst pattern. Depending on how much digital fidgeting the OP wants to do, one shot could be taken to expose for the moon, one shot to expose for the foreground and then combine the two. Not blowing out the moon also means that the moonlit clouds will look much better and I don't think there is a single exposure setting that will allow for capturing enough detail from both the sky and the foreground.


At 53mm, this lens is wide open at f4.5, which will be good for depth of field and sharpness for everything except possibly the "ugly building in the foreground." A full moon is a pretty big light source and will dominate the image no matter what, so if the OP wants to avoid a composite image, then I would expose to get the moon looking like a moon at ISO 100 and use a mask to brighten up the foreground. Whatever foreground detail can be recovered is better than black.

Assuming that there won't be another opportunity to take the same picture, then my suggestion is to try making this photo darker, so the moon's starburst doesn't overpower the clouds so much and the outline of the foreground will still be visible.

Last edited by RGlasel; 01-08-2019 at 11:37 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
critique, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nature give me your thoughts fastpitchdad Photo Critique 9 06-22-2018 05:51 PM
Hello from Norway + penny for your thoughts Mørkus Welcomes and Introductions 17 03-24-2018 05:39 AM
Cityscape Your thoughts on the post processing here sealonsf Photo Critique 11 10-21-2017 07:58 PM
Landscape Which one? Please share your thoughts! MarkJerling Post Your Photos! 9 06-13-2017 01:59 AM
Black & White Your thoughts? B&W conversion sealonsf Photo Critique 12 04-20-2017 04:28 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:37 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top