brianchapman

Mike,

That's pretty much the way it is with a single exposure. You have to compromise based on what you want from the shot. If you're shooting RAW you may be able to recover some of the sky or lighten the hedge in the raw converter but that has limits as well.

If you're willing to do some photoshop work (or other image editor) and use a tripod you can expose two images, one for the shadows, one for the highlights, and combine them so that you have the desired exposure in both areas.

Here's a good link to get started with:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/digital-blending.shtml

Brian

<p>I have the Canon and also have absolutely no complaints. It's easily my favorite lens right now.</p>

<p>Another good review site is slrgear.com - they test both lenses and give the image quality edge to the Canon but I doubt you'd be disappointed with either from what I've seen.</p>

<a href="http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/135/cat/11">Canon 10-22</a>

<br/>

<a href="http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/171/cat/31">Sigma 10-20</a>

<p><a href="http://www.brianchapmanphotography.com">Brian</a></p>

Hey Kieran,

There are quite a few ways to add toning - I prefer using curves because it gives me the most control.

A few months ago someone posted a great tool called 'Tone Hacker' that makes it really easy to generate toning curves from existing images. Here's a link:

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=12955

While it's easy just to create a curve from an existing image I definitely recommend opening up the curves to see what was created so you can learn what is really happening underneath.

Brian

http://www.brianchapmanphotography.com

I've bought many batteries from SterlingTek and had problems with a couple of them - usually they just flash red/green on the charger if there is something wrong. I was told it just means that they can't hold the full charge but I don't use them anymore if that happens so I can't confirm. It's still worth it though - only 25% of the generic batteries would have to work to make it cost effective.

Brian http://www.brianchapmanphotography.com

Hey Ray,

There are quite a few ways to do this - I prefer using a curve. You can make your own by modifying the R,G,B curves (a crude sepia can be obtained by increasing red in the brighter part of the curve and decreasing blue in the darker areas).

If you're interested in copying the toning in another image as a starting point, check out the thread linked to below. The poster has developed a program to build a curve to match the tone in an existing image.

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=12955

If you use the Tone Hacker method I strongly recommend looking at the resulting curves to see what modifications to the R, G, and B curves created the result you see in the final image and then making your own adjustments to get the results you're after.

Hope this helps!

Brian

http://www.brianchapmanphotography.com

You can also change the canvas size using Image->Canvas Size and selecting a relative increase of X number of units. This will expand the canvas around the entire image. You can also select the color for the expansion.

Hope his helps!

Brian

http://www.brianchapmanphotography.com

Hmn...well, I would have to say that yes, the results of a particular toning 'curve' do vary by image, however, the curve doesn't really discriminate - it just maps tones. When you create a curve and you tell it to map any RGB(145,156,130) to RGB (147,153,133), you don't give it any logic to figure out if that's going to work for a particular image - it's going to map the tones in image A the same way it's going to map them in image B.

Depending on your conversion method, the result of the conversion may depend on the tones in the original color image. This is especially true if you're using the channel mixer to convert because then you have control over how the individual colors map to gray during the conversion and you also have control over how the relationships between the colors makes its way in to the final conversion. Some of the other methods might just take in to account luminosity, etc, others probably mix both.

But yes, applying the same conversion or tone curve to multiple images will definitely result in different outcomes.

Brian

http://www.brianchapmanphotography.com

Here's a link to a technique that explains how to copy the "tone" of an existing digital or scanned image. The procedure is a little confusing so let me know if you have any questions and I can try to help. You can use it as a base and then make slight modifications to suit your own preferences.

http://epaperpress.com/psphoto/

Click 'Black and White'

Click 'Copy a Tone'

Brian

http://www.brianchapmanphotography.com

I've used whcc.com for lightjet prints with excellent results. If nothing else, they have a comprehensive set of instructions on how to prepare the file for printing.

Brian

http://www.brianchapmanphotography.com

Here's a link to a bunch of actions that people have published for converting to black and white. There are several that combine many of the different flavors of conversion in to a single action so you can quickly see the results of the different methods. Although cumbersome, it can be very helpful for learning the differences between the methods and also developing the workflow that works best for you.

http://www.atncentral.com/download.htm#BW_Conv

One thing that's important to note is that many of the methods can be 'improved' by using additional conversion layers and masks so that different areas of the image can be converted differently.

Today (this changes regularly!) I use several gradient map layers in combination with the channel mixer to do most of my conversions.

Hope this helps.

Brian

http://www.brianchapmanphotography.com

Here's a great article that allows you to create your own toning curves based on another image. I use this technique all the time and it works great and provides a lot of control of the final toning.

http://www.butzi.net/articles/toning.htm

I can say that I am definately impressed with the flexibility of blending images in photoshop. Like a previous post mentioned, you can go as simple as emulating the standard ND grad using the gradient tool and a layer mask or you can use much more complex (and sometimes time consuming!) techniques. Here are a couple helpful links:

Good general info:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/digital-blending.shtml

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/blended_exposures.shtml

This technique (and variations) is great for taking night shots with lights:

http://www.erik-krause.de/index.htm?./blending/

Anyway, hope this helps.

Brian

My earlier comment was posted primarily to suggest that one should do some research and weigh both risk and reward before making a purchase.

I can say from experience that there is NOTHING more frustrating than trying to call a dealer who has charged your credit card for $1000 and not being able to reach them, not receiving return phone calls, and frankly, not knowing whether you're going to receive the product at all. Then to receive a call a week later stating the product isn't in stock but they'll notify you when they receive it, blah, blah, blah, same old stuff...

For me, it's not worth saving a hundred bucks if it means a huge hassle, but then again, you may have no problems wherever you purchase...

Anyway, like the previous post, I'm avoiding work right now...

I would search google groups (groups.google.com) for buydig to find out what people have to say about that company. If I remember correctly buydig is one of the less reliable companies to purchase from.

Most likely this camera doesn't have a US warranty and or they've already collected the rebate, etc...they may not even have it in stock (these are experiences I've had before I decided to go with Amazon for a bit more $$)...

It can become an enormous hassle so I'd advise doing some research on the vendor before you buy.

Good luck!

Thanks for the replies everyone. I seem to be on the same wavelength has everyone else...

To answer the last question...some of the plugins and techniques are described here:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/digital-blending.shtml

There is also a technique that at some level mimics the effects of an actual GND - still using two images, but anyway...

http://www.fredmiranda.com/article_2/

Could someone point me somewhere that the questions I've listed below

have been discussed? I haven't been able to find anything meaningful.

If this hasn't been brought up here...feel free to discuss!

What *really* is the difference between creating a graduated neutral

density filter effect in photoshop and using a piece of hardware to do

the same thing in the field? What is the ethical hang up? Is it that

multiple images were combined? And if the outcome is the same, why

does it matter?

Brian

Great! Thanks for the responses. I think I'll probably go with the larger "p" series because I will be upgrading to a dslr (hopefully sooner rather than later)...and yes, many many many people have said to skip the actual cokin filters - so I think I'll be taking that advice!

Brian

I posted this in rec.photo.digital, but didn't get any responses, so I

thought I would ask here - thanks in advance!

I have a Canon G2 with the 58mm filter adapter. I am interested in

getting a square filter system so I can more effectively use the

graduated ND filters. I am looking at the possibility of getting the

Cokin P series and then another brand of actual filter. Is this a good

idea or is there something else (or additional) I should be looking at?

I would REALLY like to make sure I don't have to buy everything over

again when I upgrade to a DSLR next summer - so any comments on that

front are appreciated!

Thanks! Brian

I am looking for a nature photography club(instruction, trips,

critiques, fun, etc) in the Puget Sound (Seattle) area, and I

thought I would ask if anyone knows of anything or can make any

recommendations.

I found a discussion from early 2000, but only one of the links is

still active. Additionally, I've looked at the Seattle Photographic

Society and the Mountaineers Photography club...so if anyone has any

comments on those, it would be apprecitaed.

A little background if it helps, I'm "relatively" new to

photography, you can find some of my stuff on my very simple website

(it only works in the evening hours PST).

http://brianchapman.homeip.net/bpweb/bpweb.aspx

and here's my photo.net info...

http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=404317

Thanks for the info! Brian