how to make trees *pop*

[jsnail]

I think I have an average "eye" for composition. I'll get an idea in my head when I see a potential subject but usually lack during execution of the shot. For example, here is an interesting tree I found as I was hiking through Run Hill, a little known park (similar to Jockey's Ridge, for those of you familiar with the Outer Banks). Straight out of the camera it was very boring to me. After a little pp'ing I came up with this. I realize there is a lot of distracting foliage in the shot...but...Did I overprocess it? Was it a poor subject to begin with?

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2328/2175162823_c31feb8fd5.jpg?v=0

And here is a shot that I took against the sunset. My original intention was as I saw the tree with my own 2 eyes. Detail with some shadowing, the glint of the setting sun...it was gorgeous! However no matter the settings I tried, I ended up with a mostly backlit tree (I even tried metering without the sun in the picture, then recomposing the image). Unimpressed with the final image, I again pp'd the shot and came up with this.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2255/2175124959_ec9ebbac15.jpg?v=0

I know I still have a LOT to learn...right now I'm stuck halfway between trial and error and at least pretending to know what I'm doing :)

[Esoterra]

What your eye can see, and what you camera can capture are two different things. Camera's are so technically advanced when you consider where they were 2,3,4 10 years ago, but they are still limited in dynamic range and will limit how much of a scene it can truly capture. The Fuji S5 pro is a great camera for maximum dynamic range, so I hear, but it's speed is lacking. There is nothing wrong with your camera, obviously, and I like the composition in image #1. It has an alien, out of this world look to it.

Art in photography is more about expressing your vision and creativity than adhering to static guidelines and worrying about others opinions (guidelines are great for a foundation to build off of, but sooner or later you need to fly from the nest and experiment on your own). If you are shooting for a living, the challenge may surface when what you envision is not what your paid customer envisions; easily avoided if they understand and like your style. As long as you are true to yourself as a photographer and are passionate about it~ well then you have the potential to be better than many of the photographers near you that click their camera shutter for $$$ only.

Your subjects are not poor. It is a picture of an average tree.... but your post processing is what makes it a great image. It made me look twice.

Great work. Keep it up!

[toriaj]

Both your trees are interesting. I find myself in those same shoes often. I see a subject that I know is cool, I know there's a great shot "in there," I take 200 shots, then I don't like any of them :(

Something that's made a big difference for me is focusing on the composition just as much as the subject. This is my most sucessful tree shot yet:
32188

I think the leading lines in the composition are what makes it work as well as it does (admittedly it's still not a masterful shot.) I've played around with cropping it, but nothing looks much better than the original.

I think your first shot might benefit from a simpler composition. Just the stark tree against the hill and sky, without the other foliage. Perhaps a few steps forward and to the right might have helped, but on the other hand I wasn't there (of course) and maybe there was something in the way.

Keep up your good work, I'm sure that you'll get some images you're pleased with. Post 'em here, too, so we can admire :)

[fionndruinne]

I believe HDR photography applied to a tree photo could be quite successful. That, at any rate, is the only way you're going to get any detail other than silhouette in the second shot.

Being too lazy for a tripod most of the time and lacking auto-exposure-bracketing on my camera, I've mucked about with developing multiple "exposures" from a single raw file. It works, with some limitations.

[jsnail]

Chris - I'm afraid that if photography became anything more than a hobby then I would grow too frustrated with my inability to capture, as you said, what the client was looking for. OF course, I do have much to learn still :) I greatly enjoy just heading out and shooting whatever I see...although I do find myself getting frustrated when trying to capture that "perfect shot" because, well, I so rarely do! I also paint/sketch and I feel the same way about my artwork in that I grow so very critical of my final product, especially when it is for someone else. While I will gift my pictures, I've only once produced a "commissioned" piece, so to speak. Wow the pressure!

Toriaj - I love the colors in your shot...and what poofy clouds! Perfect day to shoot :) Unfortunately, if I had moved any further to the right I would have fallen down quite a steep embankment. With a pond at the bottom. It would have been quite nasty, lol.

fionndruinne - I would love to try HDR. I'm still saving up for a tripod though...and I don't have a RAW editor yet, so I'm very limited in how much I can work with out of camera shots. I've perused Flickr's HDR pools...and I have seen some absolutely amazing work. I'm inspired!

[tcadwall]

I have seen HDR done wrong more than right when it comes to trees. Why? I don't know exactly, because I haven't taken the time to try it myself yet - but I do have a theory. It seems that when a tree breaks the horizon, often the HDR will result with a tree that is beautiful on the lower half (below the horizon) and then suddenly dark on the upper half (above the horizon). Maybe there is some tweaking that can be done to fix that, but it would probably be quite tedious or I would see it done better more often. Just something to think about.

[mugsisme]

Maybe I am in the minority here, but I like the second shot a lot. I like how the glow sort of circles around the tree, and I find the colors intriguing. It is a little darker than I usually like, but what can you do at that time of day, right?

Just keep shooting. You will start to get a feel for what you like. I picked up a book on composition from the library. http://www.amazon.com/KODAK-Art-Digital-Photography-Photograp/dp/1579907903/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1199806896&sr=8-1
Truth be told, I have had this for a month, and didn't read it yet. But you may want to pop over to your local library and see if they have anything on composition. (The price is great, no?)

[jsnail]

Leah - yes, the second shot IS very dark...and unfortunately in cropping out some distracting trees to the left, the image was left very, well, square. I do like the deep blue color though, with the sun coming in directly behind the tree. I very rarely try to put the subject smack dab in the middle of the frame. I also, in retrospect, don't like the thick border I used...however I can't seem to find my original image :(

[fionndruinne]

Yeah, the intersection of tree and sky is pretty difficult to get right in HDR.

[Prospero]

The below is a detailed description on what causes trees to be hard to work with in HDR shots and the sollution. I realize that for those not familiar with HDR processing, this is hard to follow.
___________

The trees issue with HDR appeared in lots of my HDR in the beginning. The theory of Tcadwall is more or less correct.

When creating HDRs with the Detail Enhancement algorithm of Photomatix, the local contrast throughout the picture is boosted and the exposure is levelled. In that way, you will see details in the entire picture and everything seems well exposed. Boosting the details and levelling the exposure has some downsides, though. Different zones of a picture need different treatment, which brings problems at the transition of one zones to the next. The program cannot cope with sharp edges in between zones.

Depending on the settings used, two things can occur. If you set the light smoothing to high, Photomatix will make the regions of the image blend into each other. Doing so, means that the accuracy will drop and that small zones (for instance branches) will not benefit from the exposure levelling. This will result in things like trees changing in brightness when surrounded by sky, water of a fountain changing from white to black, changes in brightness close to horizons.

Here's an example. You can clearly see the branches of this tree looking much darker when being smaller and surrounded by bright sky than when surrounded by a less bright zone.

32285

However, if you set light smoothing to low (while keeping strength high) you will see severe halooing around the edges which will make the picture look fake.

There are basically two ways to deal with the problem, the first is using a low strength and low light smoothing, and the second is using the "Tone Compression" algorithm of Photomatix. I find the latter more consistent. The downside is that the image will look dull out of Photomatix and it will need quite some enhancement before it looks any good. You basically have to enhance the details yourself, which gives more control in difficult scenes, but costs more time. The picture below is a HDR, here you do not notice the things described above. The brightness of the trees show no changes on different positions (very little, anyway).

32286

So, HDR can be used with trees, to enhance the sky while keeping detail in the leaves and branches. It does take some practice, though.

___________

Now, back to the pictures by Jsnail. I think they are great. I love the treatment on the first one. Very surreal.

The second is great too. As fionndruine said you could have done HDR treatment with that one, but then again, silhoute shots are great too. You could have improved the composition of this shot by placing the backlit tree more to the side of the frame, but it works as it is as well.

[jsnail]

Prospero...WOW great examples/post! Thank you very much for your insight!

And, thank you, also, for the compliments re: the trees I shot. Its rewarding to hear from someone whose works I admire :)