Layer Masks for Increased Contrast Range II

Here is another photograph which required some manipulation to salvage a full contrast range. If I had exposed for the bee, the leading edge of the flower would have been totally burnt out. On the other hand, if I exposed for the flower, the bee would have been totally black, and without detail.

I used a slightly different technique for this image than for the last one. I made one exposure, taking care to maintain highlight detail. Then, in Photoshop, the RAW image was brought over twice, once correcting for the highlights, and the second time, correcting for shadow detail. These two images were then blended together with a layer mask into one image that maintained detail in both shadows and highlights.

I have found that using a layer mask to blend together almost identical images is an indispensable technique, at least for the type of photography I prefer. I use it to assist with depth-of-field issues as well as contrast range.

Layer Masks for Increasing Contrast Range I

When I first noticed this Beautiful Wood Nymph (Eudryas grata) on the clematis leaf, I was immediately struck by the image, but knew that there would be an exposure problem. There is at least an 8 stop contrast range from the white on the moth's "shoulders" to the dark purple of the clematis. Your eyes can "see" approximately a 20 stop range of contrast, but modern sensors can record perhaps 7 or 8 stops at best, barely better than film.

If the petals and leaves were properly exposed, the white areas on the moth would be totally "blown out" and over-exposed. If, on the other hand, I exposed for the white areas, the remainder of the image would be grossly underexposed.

Photoshop to the rescue! I made 2 exposures, one with the white areas of the moth exposed for maximum highlight detail, and the other, a more "normal" exposure, for the darker tones. Both images were then brought into Photoshop and a layer mask was used to combine the correctly exposed highlights of one photograph with the darker tones of the other. The resulting image demonstrated the tonal and contrast range of the original scene, which could not have been captured in a single image.

This is a relatively simple technique which I consider a "bread-and-butter" tool. It involves use of the histogram in the field and a layer mask in Photoshop.

So, your question of the day is, "Is this cheating?"

The Smaller Majority--A Book Review

The Smaller Majority
by Piotr Naskrecki
The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2005

What occurs when you couple a meticulous scientist’s awareness of detail with the eye of an artist? It
seems that you wind up with Piotr Naskrecki, Director of the Invertebrate Diversity Initiative of Conservation, International and Research Associate with the Museum
of Comparative Zoology at Harvard University.
Unlike many of us who learn about our subjects in order to obtain
better photographs, Neskrecki is a working entomologist who learned photography in order to advance his
research and study.

“What started as an attempt to simply document some of these organisms with a camera my wife had surprised me with one Christmas day quickly developed into a photographic passion for capturing all things small and overlooked by many nature photographers. Very early on I discovered that it gives me immensely more satisfaction to lower my lens and look for animals hiding on the forest floor than to take a picture of an elephant or toucan, subjects that have already been expertly photographed”.

Naskrecki’s chosen subjects are small “match-box sized” creatures; insects and other invertebrates (animals who wear their skeletons on the outside) that make up over 90% of the visible animal species populating this planet. In fact, by sheer numbers, it is more their planet
than ours.

“This book is a treasure house of images and information about a world most of us are barely aware of.”
--Frans Lanting


“The best kind of nature writing: by a scientific expert of the subject, beautifully illustrated, and with striking, original examples.”
--Edward O. Wilson

Warning: This is not truly a “photography book” per se, and certainly not a photo-instruction book, in the sense of multi-page discussions of pixels, cameras, or lenses. Even the one chapter specifically on photography deals mostly in generalities; there is more discussion of plastic bags than tripods. I doubt, however, that you could find better macro work anywhere, and if you can learn from examining superb examples, the lessons on these pages will not be wasted. Naskrecki has a fine awareness of composition and lighting (not many black backgrounds in his flash shots, and the ones that are present are mostly nocturnal.) Flash is used expertly, and is unobtrusive. His use of very wide-angle lenses up-close shows off his subjects like diamonds in the settings of their proper environments.
How could you not love a book whose first bit of advice for dealing with the overwhelming sensory overload of a first trip to the tropical rainforest is to leave your camera behind? Just walk, observe, and acclimate your vision to a new perspective.

Naskrecki discusses species lost to us forever, even over the past few years, but also leaves us with hope by including images of animals newly discovered, some never before photographed. No, the book is not just about bugs—there are also plenty of frogs, geckos, and other small creatures.

Five Stars out of Five--Highly recommended.

To read more about this book visit:
http://www.hup.harvard.edu/features/nassma/

Composites---Imagination at Work!

I couldn't show dragonfly photographs without posting this one. One of my favorite images, it is entirely made up. It was composed of 4 different photographs and put together in Photoshop.
Reeds, insect, moon, and clouds--all from different times and places. The only common denominator--my imagination.

What I like:
The monotonic, dreamy softness of it.

What I don't like:
Not much. I'm not sure that the perspective of the moon is totally believable in terms of size and sharpness.

Any comments?

Backgrounds to Isolate Your Subjects...

This is the dragonfly image that kept disappearing whenever I would try to post it. Thanks for your patience while I learn how to do this blog thing.

What I Like:

The triangular composition is a very stable one, although its very stability risks making the image seem static and non-living. The background is more mottled, and, to my eyes, more natural than a monotone "posterboard-type" background. And a nice pose.

What I don't like:

I don't care for the abruptness with which the grasses explode out of the base of the frame. If I could do it again, I would try to vignette the bottom of the frame by holding some grasses or leaves close to the front of the lens. I suppose I could do a gradual blur in Photoshop, but I always prefer to "get it right in the camera".

Japanese Kite Butterfly

Tips for Butterfly Photography:

• Use shallow depth-of-field to blur busy and distracting backgrounds

• Use a longer macro lens to "compress" backgrounds

• Frame the subject with appropriate secondary subjects

• Keep the plane of the butterfly's wings parallel to the camera plane to maximize depth-of-field even while using a wide aperture to blur the background

What I like:
The balance of the image. I like how the bud recapitulates the color and position of the butterfly.

Cabbage Butterfly

What I like:
The balance of the image. I like how the bud recapitulates the color and position of the butterfly.

What I don't like:
The image appears almost two-dimensional -- quite flat. I used fill flash and perhaps this has obliterated the texture that gives objects their dimensionality. Background is BORING! Looks almost like poster board. Would selective dodging and burning help?