Rizole Overexposed

A problem with editing...

I'm often irritated with the margins of edited pictures, especially where there's a high contrast edge. Certain edits/filters cause edges to over lighten/darken to cause obvious tonal fringing. Like this for example, you can quite clearly see a lighter halo around the turbines and at the ground/sky boundary.
IMG_20220508_144131-01.jpeg


Snapseed is usually my weapon of choice and the tools that cause this include the following. I'm sure there are others and I know it's not a problem that's limited to snapseed.
  • Structure
  • Tonal Contrast
  • HDR
  • Drama
I frequently use the first two and the others can often go in the mix as well and these things have a cumulative effect, amplifying the problem.
Sometimes it works though. I purposely exagerated it in this picture by dodging the light side of the shadow and burning the dark, for instance...

20200207_154626-01.jpeg


But I've spent quite some time trying to find ways to mitigate, minimise and compensate for this and generally find it irritating.
My go to method is to burn the light areas with the brush in snapseed. This can be a hit and miss with the feathering in the problem areas and the feathering in the burn not quite matching up and making the cover up a bit messy and patchy.

You can see on this one there's still significant lightening at the horizon, patchyness around the blades and the dodging has over darkened some detail out of the turbines.
IMG_20220508_144131-01-01.jpeg
 
rizole said:
A problem with editing...

I'm often irritated with the margins of edited pictures, especially where there's a high contrast edge. Certain edits/filters cause edges to over lighten/darken to cause obvious tonal fringing. Like this for example, you can quite clearly see a lighter halo around the turbines and at the ground/sky boundary.
View attachment 180216

Snapseed is usually my weapon of choice and the tools that cause this include the following. I'm sure there are others and I know it's not a problem that's limited to snapseed.
  • Structure
  • Tonal Contrast
  • HDR
  • Drama
I frequently use the first two and the others can often go in the mix as well and these things have a cumulative effect, amplifying the problem.
Sometimes it works though. I purposely exagerated it in this picture by dodging the light side of the shadow and burning the dark, for instance...

View attachment 180217

But I've spent quite some time trying to find ways to mitigate, minimise and compensate for this and generally find it irritating.
My go to method is to burn the light areas with the brush in snapseed. This can be a hit and miss with the feathering in the problem areas and the feathering in the burn not quite matching up and making the cover up a bit messy and patchy.

You can see on this one there's still significant lightening at the horizon, patchyness around the blades and the dodging has over darkened some detail out of the turbines.
View attachment 180218
Click to expand...
iColorama has some tones that will even things out, but they tend to white out the sky and remove a lot of the clouds, which is not what you want. I love the motorcyclist, which adds scale.:thumbs:
 
rizole said:
A problem with editing...

I'm often irritated with the margins of edited pictures, especially where there's a high contrast edge. Certain edits/filters cause edges to over lighten/darken to cause obvious tonal fringing. Like this for example, you can quite clearly see a lighter halo around the turbines and at the ground/sky boundary.
View attachment 180216

Snapseed is usually my weapon of choice and the tools that cause this include the following. I'm sure there are others and I know it's not a problem that's limited to snapseed.
  • Structure
  • Tonal Contrast
  • HDR
  • Drama
I frequently use the first two and the others can often go in the mix as well and these things have a cumulative effect, amplifying the problem.
Sometimes it works though. I purposely exagerated it in this picture by dodging the light side of the shadow and burning the dark, for instance...

View attachment 180217

But I've spent quite some time trying to find ways to mitigate, minimise and compensate for this and generally find it irritating.
My go to method is to burn the light areas with the brush in snapseed. This can be a hit and miss with the feathering in the problem areas and the feathering in the burn not quite matching up and making the cover up a bit messy and patchy.

You can see on this one there's still significant lightening at the horizon, patchyness around the blades and the dodging has over darkened some detail out of the turbines.
View attachment 180218
Click to expand...
I get that problem. In fact it’s been left in the latest one I put in the new mono challenge. I’ll have to look into this using your workflow.
 
So I thought to try something new today, new to me anyway, and thought I'd stick it here in case someone finds it useful.
I'm starting this explanation with the finished edit - the one at the top of the previous post where Structure, Tonal Contrast and Drama have really messed up the boundaries - where I'd normally set to work with the dodge and burn brush. This time, instead of saving my work, I used the Share option to share the picture with snapseed again, opening up another instance of it and and then saving that without doing anything. As I like the picture as it is except for the problem boundaries, this is still my base picture.

I then go back to the original edit still open in snapseed and undo the last edit, which in this case was drama. Now i'm going to edit the picture in an attempt to match the sky to something like my base pic. To do this I go to Tune image, drop brightness and shadows and up contrast and highlights. I had a go at reconstructing the process for this demo so these settings wont match my original edit but you get the idea.

Screenshot_20220508_171738_com.niksoftware.snapseed.jpg


Now I've got the sky to a similar dark and contrasty state as the base picture, I do a double exposure and bring the base picture back in, putting the transparency of that to 100%.
Now I go to the edit stack and go to the masking tool of that layer.
I can now set the transparency of the masking brush to 0% and paint the blownout boundary highlights out, revealing the dark and contrasty sky below. Here's it half done. The left hand side has been done, the right is the original base with the problem highlights.

Screenshot_20220508_172115_com.niksoftware.snapseed.jpg


Again, the pic above has a few issues, but it was done for demo so I wasn't trying my hardest.
Here's my final pic though.

IMG_20220508_144131-02.jpeg


In practice I blended the two skys more like 75%/25% but the technique seems to work and bypass the problem with dodge/burn.
There's still some darkening of detail on the turbines but it's not as bad. I could also have introduced some grain into the problem areas to better match the sky but that's for another edit.

I'd be interested if anyone else has a different solution.
 
Last edited:
rizole said:
I'd be interested if anyone else has a different solution.
Click to expand...
My solution wouldn't be editing. Did you use a lot of zoom on the image? I know the Huawei has a lotta zoom to use. I'd be interested in seeing the original, maybe a good image for a revamped 'Edit This'?
I'm curious as to how you usually view Mobitog, phone or pc/mac? On a big screen its often not that forgiving of mobile images, you get the double zoom option. Ted's images are always flawless in this respect.
 
rizole said:
So I thought to try something new today, new to me anyway, and thought I'd stick it here in case someone finds it useful.
I'm starting this explanation with the finished edit - the one at the top of the previous post where Structure, Tonal Contrast and Drama have really messed up the boundaries - where I'd normally set to work with the dodge and burn brush. This time, instead of saving my work, I used the Share option to share the picture with snapseed again, opening up another instance of it and and then saving that without doing anything. As it like the picture as it is except for the problem boundaries, this is still my base picture.

I then go back to the original edit still open in snapseed and undo the last edit, which in this case was drama. Now i'm going to edit the picture in an attempt to match the sky to something like my base pic. To do this I go to Tune image, drop brightness and shadows and up contrast and highlights. I had a go at reconstructing the process for this demo so these settings wont match my original edit but you get the idea.

View attachment 180225

Now I've got the sky to a similar dark and contrasty state as the base picture, I do a double exposure and bring the base picture back in, putting the transparency of that to 100%.
Now I go to the edit stack and go to the masking tool of that layer.
I can now set the transparency of the masking brush to 0% and paint the blownout boundary highlights out, revealing the dark and contrasty sky below. Here's it half done. The left hand side has been done, the right is the original base with the problem highlights.

View attachment 180226

Again, the pic above has a few issues, but it was done for demo so I wasn't trying my hardest.
Here's my final pic though.

View attachment 180227

In practice I blended the two skys more like 75%/25% but the technique seems to work and bypass the problem with dodge/burn.
There's still some darkening of detail on the turbines but it's not as bad. I could also have introduced some grain into the problem areas to better match the sky but that's for another edit.

I'd be interested if anyone else has a different solution.
Click to expand...
Good solution. I am definitely aware of the problem but tend to reduce the amount of toning I do. Wonder whether an app like Affinity might do a better job. No ideas, I’m afraid.
 
sinnerjohn said:
My solution wouldn't be editing. Did you use a lot of zoom on the image? I know the Huawei has a lotta zoom to use. I'd be interested in seeing the original, maybe a good image for a revamped 'Edit This'?
I'm curious as to how you usually view Mobitog, phone or pc/mac? On a big screen its often not that forgiving of mobile images, you get the double zoom option. Ted's images are always flawless in this respect.
Click to expand...
10X zoom or there abouts.

Original:
IMG_20220508_144131.jpg

Straight B&W, no edit:
IMG_20220508_144131-03.jpeg

Stucture, tonal c and drama edit:
IMG_20220508_144131-02.jpeg

The final edit definately adds or amplifies noise in the original and I take you point about a large screen being less forgiving. Now I'm looking on a large screen I think the straight B&W looks better. So it goes. :rolleyes:
 
rizole said:
A problem with editing...

I'm often irritated with the margins of edited pictures, especially where there's a high contrast edge. Certain edits/filters cause edges to over lighten/darken to cause obvious tonal fringing. Like this for example, you can quite clearly see a lighter halo around the turbines and at the ground/sky boundary.
Click to expand...
Gods, yes, I'm familiar with that problem and sometimes don't spot it until I'm ready to upload. Then I usually have to go back to the beginning. I'd never thought of blending two versions together like that, though -- that sounds promising. Likewise brushing in the adjustments.

I've found in some cases I'm able to correct for the problem by using an app that offers a 5-band light/tone adjustment (i.e., blacks, shadows, mids, highlights whites) like ACDSee Pro or Ultralight (both iOS).
 
I’ve just had to edit an image that did the same on my 365. The solution for me is actually reducing the structure significantly while increasing sharpness. Unfortunately you do lose some of the clouds. Personally I tend not to do the extreme edit that you show. Here’s your image, starting with reduced structure. I did not apply drama - too much in my opinion. The bottom of the turbines could probably do with some burning.

268770B6-76F9-40D5-9EC3-DFC053DDC126.jpeg
 
rizole said:
Now I'm looking on a large screen I think the straight B&W looks better.
Click to expand...
It does, but not as dramatic, less Rizolian ;)
I think even optical zoom on mobiles tends to take something from the image and then you're adding some fairly heavy duty editing.
Before you had the Huawei, you didn't zoom as much did you?
 
sinnerjohn said:
Before you had the Huawei, you didn't zoom as much did you?
Click to expand...
Yeah but the zoom on my old phone wasn't optical. I never used the 5th gear on my car until I had a car with a 5th gear :p
More seriously, I think anything upto 5x on my phone works well as it uses the main lens, at higher zooms a different lens takes over and there is a different quality to the pictures and I don't think it handles the low, overcast lighting we get up north very well. Might be better with good strong summer lighting but I've mostly forgotten what that looks like since I got lockdowned into my own, small, wet, dismal part of Yorkshire. (Cue Kate Bush soundtrack).
 
Last edited:
rizole said:
10X zoom or there abouts.

Original:
View attachment 180233
Straight B&W, no edit:
View attachment 180231
Stucture, tonal c and drama edit:
View attachment 180232
The final edit definately adds or amplifies noise in the original and I take you point about a large screen being less forgiving. Now I'm looking on a large screen I think the straight B&W looks better. So it goes. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I like the straight b&w. The bike and rider seem to stand out more.:thumbs:
 
JillyG said:
I like the straight b&w. The bike and rider seem to stand out more.:thumbs:
Click to expand...
I'd tend to agree. I think John is right about desktop screens showing a pic better, with different qualities, than a mobile and I've tended to edit less as my camera equipment has improved over the years. I guess I just got a bit over excited on this one.
1652086760157.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom