I'm with Chrism8, alfpics and Carol8345, if you learn how to use Photomatix it can be very subtle / natural. I just use the 'Fusion' options instead of the 'Tone Mapping' and tweak the sliders to suit. Then, once the basics are complete in Photomatix, I finish the processing in Photoshop, quite often I will blend the final Photomatix image with a single exposure image of the same subject in Photoshop. I find this gives a more natural result whilst still retaining the benefits of multiple exposures for the brightest and darkest areas of the image. Sometimes the camera simply will not capture the full dynamic range in one shot and multiple bracketed exposures are the only viable option.

That said, I prefer single exposures wherever possible. Even more useful than any processing options for me are my ND Grad filters, they really do make a huge difference for landscape images.

Regards
David

Some great comments so far, thanks to all. For what it's worth, I prefer the second one, although it doesn't accurately depict the sea because it's a blend of 3 different sea states, which does rob it of some details. Regarding colour saturation, both are pretty close to what I was seeing at the time, this was not a heavily saturated sunset, so I wouldn't personally saturate it any further. There's definitely scope for enhancing both images further, I haven't spent much PP time on either of them. I think what I may be tempted to do is use the multi-exposure image, but replace the sea with the one from the single exposure?

Regards
David

I fear this thread may re-ignite the debate about whether or not we should post process images and it so how much? That's not the intent, as I'm firmly in the camp of post processing, although I do try to keep it to a minimum. If we shoot RAW (as I do), then PP is essential, if we shoot JPEG, the camera applies its own post processing without user control. My question is more about single exposures versus blended or HDR exposures.

What I've posted here are two images of the same scene. Image 1 is a single exposure, whereas image 2 is a blend of 3 bracketed exposures. Both have been post processed, under my control, not in camera. The location is the Giant's Causeway in County Antrim, Northern Ireland, equipment used was the K-3, plus Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4 HSM OS lens, set at approx 26mm.

Which do you like best?

Which looks most 'natural' (if any)?

Image 1




Image 2



Thanks for your thoughts and comments!

Regards
David

I would echo what Bill Barnes has said in the post above, I'm not disappointed with my K-3 either. Whilst it may be slightly behind a K-5iis in the noise department, I can't really see much difference in my images. Granted, I don't go above 3200 ISO.

I do think the K-3 will be replaced soon though, but not sure what with. I suspect whatever the replacement it will probably be a 24mp sensor.

Regards
David

A superb set Andy, the quality shines through - like the sun! I honestly can't pick a favourite, they are all very good.

Regards
David

These are great, love the one with the 'Q', second favourite is number 5.

Cheers
David

The first is the stand-out, super shot. Keep posting them Alistair.

Regards
David

For me, the process of going out and taking photographs is the most important part, regardless of the kit I'm using. I'm in my element when alone in the wilderness somewhere, not that I get to do this very often, but when I do everything's right with the world.

I've spent some money on kit, not the highest end stuff, but decent kit, the newest of which is now 3 years old. I might buy a K-1 some day, but it's not important to me.

I don't want to go back to film, but I can understand the appeal of this to those who love using it. I agree this is a great thread, it illustrates exactly what photography is all about.

David

The image looks very nice to me, I agree with Andrew's comment about the slightly cramped composition, but there's certainly nothing wrong with the quality of the image, as far as is possible to tell from a small image on the forum.

Regards
David

I'm not really into tracking moving subjects, but I do like a bit of nature photography. For me it's more about reliable and accurate AF, image quality and consistency. The best combination I have used is K-3 with DA*300, or DA*300 plus a 1.4 Pentax Teleconverter. This is my 'go to' combination for any wildlife photography and has worked very well for me.

I steer well clear of the 55-300, great lens thought it is, it is not suitable for nature photography. Also, the K-3 (and I presume K-3ii, but I don't have one) is a more reliable focuser than my K-5iis and locks onto small subjects better.

I know the DA*300 doesn't give the flexibility of a zoom, but that doesn't matter to me. I sold the Sigma 150-500 after getting the DA* because the Pentax lens was so much better.

Regards
David