How else would you shoot this frame in these conditions?

[hoggdoc]

Idle speculation: There are those of us who look at the OP's shot and immediately think "fill flash." Then there are those who immediately think "post." I like post processing as much as the next guy but I learned photography with film, where you really had to get it right SOOC. I wonder if that is the difference between the two points of view.

I totally agree. I think it would be interesting for him to post the RAW image and see what people with POST skills could do with it.

 

[hoggdoc]

I am thinking I will upload the RAW file here to better facilitate editing.. if anyone else wants a go at it.

Well it's Saturday I don't see the RAW file, but maybe it's too big to upload or the is no way to make it available here, I have never tried.

 

[relic]

I may be wrong, but I wonder if using flash would result in reflections from the large glass area (bounce flash, as had been suggested, might obviate that)?

 

[Reflector]

I'd shoot that handheld with one of two techniques: 2 shot HDR or 5 to 7 shot bracket-stack in continous high and e-shutter. For a bracket-stack: Use the shot with the underexposed interior to select the underexposed areas and just brush in the interior for the "properly exposed" shots in post afterwards. If a tripod is available: HR mode and manually EV comp to shoot one lightly overexposed interior shot and normally exposed exterior shot for a two shot HDR.

Here's an example of what dynamic range can be achieved with a bracket stack. Shots below in sequence are: Exposing for highlights/shadows followed by the merged shot and a 100% of the darkest and brightest areas.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

In regards to a bracket-stack: You basically manually "pull" the shots in post (so the -2EV shot is pulled +2EV, +2EV becomes -2EV so they all "equal" 0EV in the stack. Unless ETTR is used, see below) as a bunch of layers. Afterwards mask off the overexposed areas on each layer before. Each layer is blended successively (1st layer = 100% opacity, 2nd = 50%, 3rd = 33%, 4th = 25%, 5th = 20%...)

The net photons you pull in from a 5 to 7 shot bracket-stack is more than the exposure on a 8 shot high res stack or even a single exposure from medium format which means you can annihilate noise in the shadows. Since the window has the background then selection of everything but the window is actually fairly easily with selection tools.

With 1EV spacing, a 5 shot bracket-stack means that if you manually EV comp the "most underexposed" frame to be around say -1EV off what the meter thinks is right for the darker parts of the scene then you're able to get 15-31 (depends on how you meter) shots equivalent worth of exposure one part of the scene (especially in shadows) versus a single exposure. Comparatively speaking that's approximately close to 4 exposures from 135 format assuming it is metered conservatively to keep the shadow regions -1EV for post.

*Of course if the metering is to the right to boost the shadows then that's easily >30 exposures worth of photons collected as long as the successive overexposed shots afterwards aren't blown in the shadows. If the least underexposed shot is 0EV, then everything else is pulled down afterwards to equalize exposure and then stacked.

A word of warning about UV filters: You will probably want to unscrew it due to the very wide amount of dynamic range that can be captured as faint internal reflections (mostly in the form of lares) can ruin the most overexposed image and are difficult to recover from (especially with interior shots with "complex features" that'd take too long to touch up to recover from a flare.)

 

[oldracer]

... (about a page of detailed instructions) ...

I got tired just reading ... I'd just bounce a flash off those nice white 2 x 4' suspended ceiling tiles. Three or four different aperture trials should get me something l like.

 

[relic]

Well it's Saturday I don't see the RAW file, but maybe it's too big to upload or the is no way to make it available here, I have never tried.

One way to make it available would be to upload it to Dropbox and post the link to the file here.

 

[relic]

Here is another attempt: last time I used DXO exclusively because that was what the OP apparently used. This time I used Elements. I did not do anything out of the ordinary. I basically brought up the shadows "to taste" (using Highlights/Shadows), increased the contrast and brightness slightly, and further increased the brightness locally of the paintings at the left side. I also applied "Dehaze" to the view outside the window to bring a bit more "clarity" to the mountain.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[m43happy]

Did you go watch the video presentation? Afterwards in the screening room they open the curtain and it's a similar window without the giant pillars in the way. Here's a photo from the screening room 8 years ago. It was cloudy, so the view wasn't as good as yours, but I thought the window frame made for an interesting pic.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Sleepy Capybara]

One way to make it available would be to upload it to Dropbox and post the link to the file here.

Well it's Saturday I don't see the RAW file, but maybe it's too big to upload or the is no way to make it available here, I have never tried.

Uploaded the file here: https://file.io/SnrECK

 

[Sleepy Capybara]

I did
I like this picture, nicely done!

Did you go watch the video presentation? Afterwards in the screening room they open the curtain and it's a similar window without the giant pillars in the way. Here's a photo from the screening room 8 years ago. It was cloudy, so the view wasn't as good as yours, but I thought the window frame made for an interesting pic.

View attachment 777538

 

[relic]

Uploaded the file here: https://file.io/SnrECK

I tried the the link, but it gives me the "404 Page not found" error.

 

[Sleepy Capybara]

I tried the the link, but it gives me the "404 Page not found" error.

Oops
http://s000.tinyupload.com/?file_id=05826656398504396501

Or, Google drive:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1PfCR3DTnPZX18JtmfWfKLNnevW1FzO3a

 

[relic]

Oops
http://s000.tinyupload.com/?file_id=05826656398504396501

Or, Google drive:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1PfCR3DTnPZX18JtmfWfKLNnevW1FzO3a

My take (all done in DXO PL2). Not sure if this is anywhere near what you would consider satisfactory.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Settings I used (rather drastic settings):
Adjusted geometry as best I could using VIEWPOINT and GEOMETRY.

LIGHT
Smart Lighting Uniform, Intensity 30
Highlights -100, Midtones -25, Shadows 70, Blacks 20
Clearview Plus 70
Contrast 100, Microcontrast 16 (auto)
Additional contrast using S-shaped tone curve (contrast slider did not provide sufficient contrast, at least to my eye).
Using tone curve reduced RED level by 6 bits (to 249).

COLOR
Color saturation -10.
Color rendering,
Category: Generic renderings,
Rendering: Netural color, neutral tonality (my default setting).

DETAIL
Noise reduction: PRIME 40 (default)
Lens Sharpness: -2.4
Chromatic aberration: Lateral chromatic aberration (default values, 100, 6).

 

[PakkyT]

Late to this thread but I really like the original shot. The room really isn't that interesting and serves best as a frame. The original shot allows it to be exposed just enough to kind of make out details just about the right amount for anyone interested. Anything brighter and you just get to see more uninteresting room and anything darker I think loses the sense of the over all "scene" as does a tight crop. My ONLY suggestion is that I would like to see the top row of ceiling tiles cropped out but leave the next ones with the lights to balance the more interesting looking floor with light from the windows and not lose the over all "scene" or sense of place.

 

[relic]

As I commented prviously, I agree. But, given that @Amol Thorat wanted the room lighter, I tried to approximate that by simple editing without the need for HDR, flash, etc.

 

[PakkyT]

given that @Amol Thorat wanted the room lighter,

Sure, but my suggestion is to rethink that and give the original post a second look as presented. With no offense meant towards your attempt to lighten up the room as an example, I really dislike that over-baked HDR look. To me well done HDR shouldn't smack you in the face "I'M SUPER MANIPULATED" when you first see the photo. I end up NOT looking at the mountain range as the main subject but find my brain immediately trying to comprehend everything else.

 

[Sleepy Capybara]

The halo effect around dark edges is distracting. I think that's the result of HDR, but yes I get the idea. The shadows were too dark in the first place.

My take (all done in DXO PL2). Not sure if this is anywhere near what you would consider satisfactory.

View attachment 777774

Settings I used (rather drastic settings):
Adjusted geometry as best I could using VIEWPOINT and GEOMETRY.

LIGHT
Smart Lighting Uniform, Intensity 30
Highlights -100, Midtones -25, Shadows 70, Blacks 20
Clearview Plus 70
Contrast 100, Microcontrast 16 (auto)
Additional contrast using S-shaped tone curve (contrast slider did not provide sufficient contrast, at least to my eye).
Using tone curve reduced RED level by 6 bits (to 249).

COLOR
Color saturation -10.
Color rendering,
Category: Generic renderings,
Rendering: Netural color, neutral tonality (my default setting).

DETAIL
Noise reduction: PRIME 40 (default)
Lens Sharpness: -2.4
Chromatic aberration: Lateral chromatic aberration (default values, 100, 6).

 

[Sleepy Capybara]

I have one more that I edited. Sunlight/shadows are much more forgiving on this one though. This is from Mt. Rainier NP visitor center.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)