I am curious how we process landscape images. Is there a usual routine we go through? A lot of photographers here take shots at landscape photography in a plethora of dramatic styles. These days a growing number seem to implement the use of hdr, to a small extent at least.

For me I have tried to keep it simple. I usually do the same few methods and fine tune small adjustments as needed from there. They are basic steps but I find K.I.S.S is a friendly acronym (Keep It Simple Stupid). My approach with with intended minimal PS work. Every now and then I wonder if it is because I am PS-shy :) Always striving to raise effectiveness and efficiency!

My basic steps are something like this for color photo:
01 - Heal any dust spots (Lightroom)
02 - Crop *if necessary
03 - Adjust saturation/vibrance
04 - Adjust individual colors and color vibrance, tone curve *if necessary
05 - Sharpen using unsharp mask 3.0 pixels (Photoshop)
06 - Add brightness/contrast layer
07 - Add gradient dark/light layer *if necessary
08 - Sharpen via high pass *if necessary
09 - Resize and resharpen 1.0 pixels


Thanks for looking!

Hi Ansel.

Quick question, do you print a lot of your work or in the main are your images for web publication only? Just curious because you go through a lot of sharpening techniques in what I would call the "pre-production phase", Quite often, I do not sharpen at all and if I do - its always at the end and to suit the medium upon which the image is aimed at i.e. web or print.

So in general I would use techniques that suit the image (in my view) rather than any structured method. So, in general, I would follow your steps apart from the sharpening bits.

mal

I very much agree with Mal on the sharpening. It is best not to sharpen at all until everything else is done, whatever that is, and then tailor the sharpening to the size/intended output.

For myself, I don't have a routine. I try to adjust my images depending on what the image needs to look the way I want it to look, but I've never been able to come up with a method or a routine for doing it (outside of leaving sharpen, or resize and then sharpen, for the last step). Your routine sounds pretty adequate. I have one question: What is #07? How do you add a gradient dark/light layer and what for?

Very interesting.

One question, though.

What output gets more sharpening? internet or print? (I never print, but will start doing it)

My processing in a nutshell:

RAW
- Alter WB if necessary but usually OK shot in Cloudy.
- Possible slight adjustment to overall exposure, +/- 0.3EV.
- Possible slight corrections to certain parts for local exposure, small areas brightened or darkened.
- Convert to 8 bit TIFF.

TIFF
- Slight crop if necessary for aesthetic reasons.
- Check horizon is absolutely level using crop tool, make adjustments if required.
- Heal or clone dust spots and small distracting objects such as a rock on edge of frame or jet trail.
- Localised contrast adjustments using levels only and lasso tool to select areas with 100 pixel feather.
- Save as Master TIFF at size after crop.

I may manually blend two images exposed for sky and foreground if I was unable to use ND grad filters successfully then do the TIFF steps on the blended image.

I never do HDR, tried it and don't like it and I'm not good at getting good results.

I used to tone map images but not anymore.

I never sharpen an image, have camera set to max sharpness and use this throughout.

All done in sRGB througout and only convert to RGB if required for magazine or competition.

JP

The majority I process for web these days. I print about 10 a month, generally several sizes and types of prints per photo. Maybe I am sharpening too much for web though :)


This is something I started doing myself. It is only a fine adjustment and cannot save an image (I have tried it out - long ago refined). I set the layer to "overlay" and using the gradient tool splash a dark to light pattern across the frame. This I use to either lighten or darken one section of the frame while keeping the rest the opposite. Transparency is about 30% here, so really helps adjust mood than manipulate the photo. Smaller scale graduated filter :)


Definitely the print. Internet size I rarely make larger than 1060. I do the sharpening before I downsize though and then again only very minor adjustment afterward.

All this I do in AdobeRGB (1998) for personal and printing uses. Sometimes I forget to switch to sRGB for web and send-off printing:/ I like RGB idea of public magazine, etc!

John P. - Is there a reason you use .tif instead of .psd?

Also when you did hdr or tone mapping did you strictly use 3 exposures or "make-save" in Camera Raw? I try hdr once in a while but also don't like end results 90% of the time. Exposure blending I do like as an alternative.

Yes, I always flatten the final Master TIFF and never save any layers, I very rarely go back to an image that I have saved as the master so there is no need to save as a psd for me.



Never did any serious HDR with different exposed shots as its not for me.

My tone mapped images were all from one RAW file then saved at 3 different TIFFs 0.5EV apart then tone mapped in Photomatix. The tone mapping technique for me had nothing to do with exposure dynamic range, I just did it because I liked the depth and 3D effect it gave, can't be bothered to do it these days though.

This one is Tone Mapped.

This one isn't.

JP

Your last two methods are dubious. Sharpening is basically a contrast boost which should happen after the levels have been used. Sharpening in camera cannot be reversed. As to the mode you should reverse what you are doing. Process in aRGB and save and the convert to sRGB if posting to the web.

Sharpening in camera can't be reversed? Really? I thought RAW defaulted everything once it got on the comp.

Hi bob,

Good advice and I'll bear it in mind.

Cheers,

JP

Sharpening in camera only applies to the jpg, it won't impact the raw file.