PDA

View Full Version : contrast masking


Gin Monster
23rd April 2008, 06:47 PM
Hello,
I've been fiddling around with this photo trying out contrast masking- seems a bit of a black art- but quite striking how much detail it can bring out of the shadows and highlights, can make things a bit brash though too. Any opinions welcomed...

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/swan.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/4849)

GM

Paulpp
23rd April 2008, 08:40 PM
Would be interested in seeing it used with b&w - seems a little of a strange effect in colour. How do you do it?

steverh
23rd April 2008, 10:43 PM
The foreground looks OK - although the feathers are burning out on the left side (at least on my monitor).

The background looks odd - a bit like an old colour postcard.

I don't know much about the process either.

theMusicMan
24th April 2008, 05:44 AM
I hadn't heard of contrast masking either GM. Care to explain a little more about it please...?

Graham_of_Rainham
24th April 2008, 02:10 PM
Apart from the somewhat strange effects of the processing, the whites on the swan have lost a lot of detail by being burned out.

I've underexposed swans by as much a 2 stops and still had some bits burned.

With digital you can get a lot from the shadows and underexposed areas, so with white subject try under exposing at least a stop.

Graham

Gin Monster
24th April 2008, 07:07 PM
Hi there,
You're right about the burnt out swan- looks like I was trying to bring out detail that just wasn't there. Here's a link to the tutorial I kind of followed.

http://gimp.org/tutorials/ContrastMask/

I was rather slap-dash with the editing the photo- just playing around.
It's interesting to read different approaches to photos with a wide dynamic range. Seem to remember someone advocating slightly over exposing the photo and compensating in processing. Think it was somewhere on the luminous landscape website.

Cheers

GM

Graham_of_Rainham
24th April 2008, 09:52 PM
I've never been able to get much if anything back from over exposed areas, I do however quite often get a lot of detail from underexposed shadow areas.

So I tend to shoot RAW all the time and with the camera set by default to underexpose by 0.7 and unless it's a really bright day (not seen one yet this year) I rarely have any burned out bits

The great thing about Digital is you can try all sorts of things and all you lose is you inexperience...:)

Have fun

Graham

theMusicMan
25th April 2008, 05:04 AM
I've never been able to get much if anything back from over exposed areas, I do however quite often get a lot of detail from underexposed shadow areas.

So I tend to shoot RAW all the time and with the camera set by default to underexpose by 0.7 and unless it's a really bright day (not seen one yet this year) I rarely have any burned out bits

The great thing about Digital is you can try all sorts of things and all you lose is you inexperience...:)

Have fun

GrahamThat's the thing with overexposed images Graham - white is white... :) If it's overexposed too much, or burned out, there's nothing that can be done to bring it back. This is often why as you correctly point out, that photographers set the EV on their cameras to a negative value as a default, by doing so helps to not overexpose shots. It obviously works for you :)