How do I get a picture to look like this?

[Euro-Tuner]

I'm not talking about the fish eye lens.

I have a Canon Rebel XTi and Photoshop CS4 Extended so I think I have the equipment, now I need the editing/photography skills.

I'm looking into taking a few classes for fun, but just for reference, what makes this picture so amazing???

Long shutter? Saturation? Softened? I would like to know...

Thanks in advance!!

[SugarTTRS]

i dont' know much about this either, but lots of people here do. maybe these links can get you started.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_dynamic_range_imaging

http://www.hdrsoft.com/

[Euro-Tuner]

Thank you.

[Quatime]

That is an incredible picture!

Beautiful lighting mostly. It doesn't look like HDR is being used because of how dark the water and the house is. Probably a lot of dodging and burning though.

Also, it's not a fisheye. It's a few portraits stitched together.

[Euro-Tuner]

That is an incredible picture!

Beautiful lighting mostly. It doesn't look like HDR is being used because of how dark the water and the house is. Probably a lot of dodging and burning though.

Also, it's not a fisheye. It's a few portraits stitched together.

Oh, good to know. I just thought the house looked crooked, but now I see that it was just the angle of the wall.

I've seen those tools in P-shop but never used them. I'll have to find a tutorial for them. Thanks for the info.

[FITZ TITS]

Let's put it this way, the photographer isn't new to photography. That pictures takes skill, more so than equipment (other than really good glass).

[cab509]

yeah, I would imagine it's multiple exposures, like an HDR, but blended as to not look HDR, also I would imagine it was shot with top of the line glass on the perfect day with a Damn good camera. I would also guess that it has more then a few hours of Post Processing into it to get the results that you see there.


It's the work of a skilled photographer, that is obvious, I can never get water to look that good.

[Machiavelli]

The guy who took the picture can teach you better than any of us shmucks. http://www.muenchphotography.com/ind...d=34&Itemid=18

That picture is incredible, a picture of that quality comes down to experience, dedication and the time put in to get everything just right about the composition. Sometimes professional photographers spend days on end waiting for everything to come together.

Pretty sure that is taken with a large format 4x5 film camera with a wide angle lens.

[daverussell]

it looks to me like it's not hdr or blended, it looks like the shadow detail was just recovered in photoshop with shadow/highlights or dodging it also looks to be a fisheye with the barrel distortion corrected in photoshop

[Ryan_T]

Very very nicely done HDR. Like.

[BamfiNogaroS4]

Its not an HDR at all, like mentioned above it was probably done with a 4x5 large format camera which allows for incredible detail, on top of that I can bet that the photographer used filters on the lens to achieve this picture, thus why the lake looks like glass and the sky is deep blue. Practice and knowing what equipment to use is the reason that picture is so good as well.

[eskimopunk]

Wide angle, not fisheye. And it is HDR... Done right.

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=4920356

"Panorama stitched of 4 vertical photos with 17 mm HDR, 3 exposures with step 1.66 EV"

[szo111]

Contrary to popular belief this is indeed an HDR, the culprit is the semi-white house. If you closely observe the right side of the frame/image you notice some variations in density and tonality. This is caused from High Dynamic Range post processing programs, I assume he did it through Photoshop. Professional programs such as Photomatix Pro are made specifically to handle HDR. Notice how there is detail in the highlights all the way to the shadows. Although some issues appear in the image, it is very well composed, I don't particularly care for the distortion.

[AlpineDrive]

Beautiful image, maybe there is a bit of long exposure? I mean that water is perfectly motionless, unless he just flipped the topside of the image for a clearer reflection. A neutral density filter would allow for that motionless water. Well now that I think about it probably not because the clouds would show motion if it was a long exposure HDR.

Over all stunning image, and very good use of HDR.

[bob12312357]

Stunning pic

[vintagespin]

Contrary to popular belief this is indeed an HDR, the culprit is the semi-white house. If you closely observe the right side of the frame/image you notice some variations in density and tonality. This is caused from High Dynamic Range post processing programs, I assume he did it through Photoshop. Professional programs such as Photomatix Pro are made specifically to handle HDR. Notice how there is detail in the highlights all the way to the shadows.

Nice assessment, but a quick google search of the photographer, Maciej Duczynski, shows that he is a Photomatix Pro user. And if you look at a higher res version of the photo, what you're seeing in the house is really just discolored/ dirty siding.

To the OP: good glass, a good sensor, good exposure knowledge, and a good grasp of software will get you a picture like this. In this case the combination was a 17-40mm f/4L lens, a Canon 5D, a talented photographer, and good use of Photomatix Pro.

He said himself:

Panorama stitched of 4 vertical photos with 17 mm HDR, 3 exposures with step 1.66 EV

[323ca]

Nice assessment, but a quick google search of the photographer, Maciej Duczynski, shows that he is a Photomatix Pro user. And if you look at a higher res version of the photo, what you're seeing in the house is really just discolored/ dirty siding.

To the OP: good glass, a good sensor, good exposure knowledge, and a good grasp of software will get you a picture like this. In this case the combination was a 17-40mm f/4L lens, a Canon 5D, a talented photographer, and good use of Photomatix Pro.

He said himself:

YUP!