How do I fix blown out sky in post. Shit is supposed to be blue not white.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS Macintosh Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2011:04:29 14:30:56 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 789 Image Height 789
Is it completely blown out, as in clipped into white? If it is, you can't bring that back, and this is a learning experience.
>>3122910
What should I do then ? Like what do I learn from this? How to not have it happen again
>>3122911
don't shoot in the middle of the day. the golden hours aren't just a meme, use them
>or just crush tf out of your blacks by underexposing
>>3122911
Learn what good lighting looks like, learn how to properly expose.
>>3122907
go to the exact same spot and take a good photo of the sky then blend the two images.
Here is an example of either three or four images combined.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5.1 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2017:07:29 17:21:21 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 800 Image Height 1200
>>3122917
Do I use a tripod for this?
Or do I just use a rapid shutter shooting mode or whatever it's called and try to be very still?
What program do I use to combine the stacks?
>>3122975
>calls my advice bad
>give the same advice I did
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2015:09:20 13:51:45 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1094 Image Height 670
>>3122975
How do I expose for the sky. Please i am a noob and I want to learn!
>>3122978
Adjust your settings for the sky. Anything not well lit will be dark, but it'll probably look better to raise shadows than have a blown out sky.
>>3122977
which advice was yours? if it was "learn to expose", it's bad advice. it's the same as just saying "do it right."
>>3122979
What setting for sky. Please explain I have no idea what I'm doing.
>>3122911
>What should I do then ?
Shoop in a different sky.
>>3122907
In post?
Highlights: -100
Start from there.
>>3122907
polarizing filter my man. look it up.
>>3123017
that's not really going to help him.
Film my man.
>>3122907
expose for the highlights then recover the details in the shadows in lightroom.
you wont be able to recover details from blown out highlights
>>3122975
>don't shoot midday because lighting is hard and direct
>underexpose for sky
>bad advice
okay senpai
>>3123065
Just bracket and combine the exposures
Like HDR but not as overdone.
>>3123065
You can literally not blow out the sky in any time of day, you just need to not shoot into the sun. There are 3 other cardinal directions to choose from. You guys are overthinking this.
>>3122911
You can doctor a completely different sky into the image.
You learn that you should get a camera with better automatics.
Very hard to make an actually decent camera miss the correct exposure on a sky.
>>3123142
What if the thing you want to photograph is at a direction towards the sun?
>>3123146
Decent lens will prevent almost all flaring and most other effects, decent metering system will prefer to expose correctly for the large area rather than the extremely bright sun.
YMMV when you are shooting worse gear. Some cameras need to be told to meter on an area not containing the sun and some lenses get horrible when you point them at the sun.
>>3122917
>WALL
>TREE
>coma
>underexposure
>white balance
>shooting architecture wide open
>on a lense whith severe barrel distortion
This is an honest 2/10 you failed.
>>3122975
>The only thing you need to know is: don't shoot into the sun, ever
Fucking digiplebs.
Don't you know /p/ is a film board?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 550D Camera Software GIMP 2.8.6 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2015:05:05 00:37:49 Exposure Time 1/90 sec F-Number f/11.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/11.3 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1200 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Center-Weighted Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Daylight Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
>>3123146
Come back tomorrow when the sun is in another part of the sky and you aren't going to make a bad photograph.
>>3123163
As a beginner, could you explain
>underexposure
>white balance
>lens with severe barrel distortion
?
I'm trying to get better, and saw your criticisms. I didn't understand those specific ones though.
>>3123165
Cool silhouettes man.
>>3123172
literally everything he said is googlable. why don't you just use the device you used to post
>>3123186
I wasn't asking you. I was asking him.
The guy I asked can tell me to go Google the answers himself.
I don't need you here, living out your nerd fantasies of being an internet hall monitor screeching
>USE THE SEARCH FUNCTION!
>http://www.lmgtfy.com/
Don't cry about something so stupid, you little pussy.
>>3123194
its literally like you're sitting at a dinner table and you ask someone to pass you the salt all the way at other end when you have one right next you and someone goes
>anon, why don't you just use the one next to you
and then you launch into an autistic tirade about hall monitors
also
>accusing someone of crying when you're responding with a far longer and more whiny post about someone telling you to google
>BACKTRACKBACKTRACKBACKTRACK
>>3122988
>What setting for sky.
There is no specific setting. Expose so the sky isn't blown out. If you are losing all of your shadows beyond being able to recover them, try exposing the sky a little higher, but not blowing it out too much. If this fails, take multiple exposures (yes, you will need a tripod to have the exact same framing) and blend them in post.
>I have no idea what I'm doing
It's time to make mistakes and learn from them. If you're shooting digital, it's a lot less expensive than killing entire rolls of film.
>>3123017
A polarizing filter may be a good tool to use, but it is better to know how to use the tool. Just slapping one on the lens won't fix shit. The photographer needs to fix himself first.
>>3123142
Shooting into the sun is amazing when done right. Stop trying to make it your fix-all and an unbreakable rule.
>>3123206
For sunsets, maybe it looks good. The rest of the time it looks like shit. It's also a very common rookie mistake to shoot into the sun.
>>3123204
Has it ever occurred to you that even if I were to Google those things, that I still would not be able to notice all those faults like that anon did?
I've read articles on clipped highlights and crushed shadows. I still have moments where I'll think a photo looks good, only for a couple of anons to tell me that my highlights and shadows are shit.
I wanted to basically see that photo through that anon's eyes, so that maybe I could learn something. Then you come along on a high horse, contributing absolutely nothing towards my post or the thread itself.
I came here to learn about how to fix blown skies and why that particular photo of the house is awful. Instead I had to deal with your bored ass on a Saturday night. The fact that you have that Gene Wilder reaction image on hand for internet arguments tells me everything I need to know about how much of a smug, insufferable cunt you are.
>>3123194
>>3123172
Underexposure:
Exposure is an expression to describe how much of the light is recorded by the sensor or film. So-called correct exposure is at the center of the meter. Overexposure is a higher exposure value (closer to white) of that same light. Underexposure is a lower value (closer to black) of that same light.
White balance is what color the camera sees as white. Your brain is very good at interpreting what is right for white, or making its own even incorrect decision. But the tone of light can have a huge effect on how your image looks.
Lens with barrel distortion:
This is a description of how the lens transmits light to the sensor or film. Distortion is a change. Barrel distortion is the curving of straight lines as experienced by a lot of very wide lenses. This can be corrected in many different ways, from lenses designed to have less distortion but still with a wide angle view, to fixing lens distortion in post-processing.
>>3123207
Oh, you and your dichotomies.
You are not absolutely correct. Shooting into the sun can look good besides just sunset -- or sunrise, before you try to say that's the only other time.
>>3123212
i literally just told you the google something and then you short-circuited and started ranting and raving calling me a pussy and a bitch, so who's really the smug dick here?
it would be totally reasonable if someone said "your comp is shit" and then you asked what was shitty about it. But he didn't. he criticized the barrel distortion, your white balance, and your underexposure. Nothing in there is needing further explanation, it's literally just definitions (e.g. what is barrel distortion). You're not asking to "see that photo through anon's eyes", you're just asking for him to provide definitions that you could easily do yourself (as someone just did right here >>3123215). Those are all just definitions and explanations, nothing deeper.
Stop backtracking and deflecting about smugness when you're clearly being an arrogant asshole. You asked for super easy definitions that you could've googled and someone called you out for it and you got disproportionately triggered. So now you're backtracking and trying to deflect about it with a whole bunch of shit about high horses when all I did was tell you to google super easy googlable things.
>inb4 smug comment about how you can't be bothered to reply
>>3123217
Show me one photo where it looks good.
>>3123234
Go make some. Learn to break your own walls.
>>3123236
Really makes you think.
>>3123236
Why should they put in the work to prove your point for you
>>3122907
Just post the picture so we can all have a crack at it and then call each other bad at editing
>>3123165
Digital can handle this just fine. Actually it may work better if we pit decent current lenses against film lenses from back then.
>>3122975
>>3123045
>>3123163
calm your horses. i was giving an example for how to combine multiple exposures not applying for the Magnum Photography Awards.
BTW...it seems like you forgot to post an image of yours, you lowlife cunts.
>>3122976
its on a tripod. to combine you use Photoshop, PTGUI, Corel or one of the other Software Suits. There's different types for different applications and aspirations.
Coincidentally I brought this image back from the dead last night, so I guess it really depends on how blown out you made er'
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2017 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2017:07:29 17:18:17 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 1347 Image Height 933