Serola

Originally posted by Frlmnk:

Isn't it possible to take 2 photos, one for each exposure and then overlap them?

Yes, and that is usually called as HDR technique and is usually done with 3 pictures. But as I try to prove with my example, even mobile phone can have surprisingly extensive dynamic range already, thus giving possibility to produce acceptable picture using contrast masking.

The ultimate question still goes: which one is better?

Originally posted by Frlmnk:

For what purpose and in what circumstance?

Touché! Obviously someone reads what I'm writing around here Well, if one would want to tell the story I just told in the first paragraph and there's only one picture to illustrate it, then what to do?

So, the story goes:

There's a construction site to follow outside my window at work. But I took this picture to show the weather front that seem to be stuck there for the whole day. Sun shines somewhere there but not here.

Is it enough to show just the silhouette of cranes against the sky where one can see the weather front? Or would it be nice to see also what happens on the ground?

Originally posted by LorenzoCelsi:

The one on the right.

Thanks There comes moments when I start doubt own taste.

Originally posted by Frlmnk:

Do you have it in UV and infra red as well?

Not possible with cameras I have. That would need some modification:
http://www.naturfotograf.com/UV_IR_rev00.html

Originally posted by qlue:

This photo was taken with a mobile? Was it a Nokia by any chance?

Mobile but not Nokia. I have ZTE Blade. Yes, that stigmata is actually quite annoying.

I've been trying different editing techniques and tonight I think I finally discovered something that works, at least for me:

Originally posted by qlue:

I wonder if it's the lens or the imaging element that causes this?

No idea

Originally posted by qlue:

So you manage to eliminate the colour distortion? What technique do you use?

Sorry Uploaded wrong image. Here's the right one and the explanation for GIMP:


1) Duplicate layer and add alpha channel into it for transparency.
2) Select blend tool and set mode for 'add color', gradient for 'from foreground to transparent' and shape for 'circle'.
3) Set foreground color for cyan.
4) Use blend tool to draw line from center to one corner (on duplicate layer). You should get cyan round shape that blends to background.
5) Set opacity of that layer approximately to 10% (almost completely transparent.

Very brutal way but I think is better than do nothing

Originally posted by Frlmnk:

do you have any more showing more of the sky?

That was not the point but you can crop one third from the bottom of the picture away and there you have what I had in mind EDIT: Like this...

Originally posted by qlue:

Some experimenting last night produced a different method to remove the pink.

Your method sounds actually better How about combining them? I don't know why I thought it would be necessary to use duplicate layer. One can just as well use blend tool for empty transparent layer like you did with selection tool. Moreover, 'Overlay' (or 'Soft light') is a good point.

But I still think 'blend tool' would give much nicer transition than selection tool. I try both this weekend

Originally posted by qlue:

I just don't know where blend is or how to access it.

It's one right from the pain bucket. I also just figured out what would be the perfect approach to this "selective color balance" issue and I will write a post about it today evening. Much better than painting with cyan is to use blend tool to select an area and then do the color balance for this selected area. Paint always covers but color balance ain't

If you just can't wait then have a peek here how the blend tool can be used: http://www.bartbusschots.ie/blog/?p=774