Moon in Australia's Bush

[Brightbear]

I'm interested to know what your thoughts are on this one. 

[FUJI]

Love this one BB.................it has the look of the cover of a Mystery novel.

 

FUJI

[Guest]

like the idea but for me the moon is over exposed and so has no detail in it, if you were trying to achieve what I think you were two shots merged would have given the light in the bush and the detail in the moon

[JohnP]

like the idea but for me the moon is over exposed and so has no detail in it, if you were trying to achieve what I think you were two shots merged would have given the light in the bush and the detail in the moon

 

 

I couldn't have put it better myself.

[ChrisLumix]

like the idea but for me the moon is over exposed and so has no detail in it, if you were trying to achieve what I think you were two shots merged would have given the light in the bush and the detail in the moon

 

Yes - my thought too, though it's a nice enough composition. I think you need some detail in the moon, but not the normal beige under-exposed view; perhaps just enough over-exposure to give that atmospheric glow? Like this, which I got via Google Images (not mine!):

 

[David]

I agree too. Really good composition but the moon does look like 'just a light in the sky' Something like the image Chris posted would allow the same light in the image, but still give detail in the moon and add to the atmosphere in the image

[NannyFerret]

As said about the moon being over-exposed, but I really do like the silhouetted leaves and the idea and setting.

[Brightbear]

Ok, I'm going to experiment on my moon photography and see what I can do. I bought a tripod the other day so there may be a chance of improvement. That night I could barely hold the camera still enough to compose the shot as my arms were so high in the air holding the camera for the leaves. I was more than happy. But I agree it would be amazing to get some of the character of the moon in the shot for more impact. Thanks for all the comments. I'm learning a lot by through your opinions. To be perfectly honest I have so little understanding of what is to be done to improve. But I'm trying to catch up where I can. So I'll keep posting and you can keep giving me your opinion. Thanks guys. BB

[colinb]

 I think the picture Chris has posted looks completely false, an awful photoshop look to it, where as BB's photo has a quiet charm about it with the leaves curving around the moon.

[David]

 I think the picture Chris has posted looks completely false, an awful photoshop look to it, where as BB's photo has a quiet charm about it with the leaves curving around the moon.

 

Agreed, but I think something like this might work...Hope you don't mind me taking the liberty to edit in detail of a moon of mine BB...not perfect but to give an idea of what could be achieved with a bit more pp work

 

[NannyFerret]

Good one, David.

How did you edit the shot, and did you lasso the moon or just adjust the whole frame?
 

[ChrisLumix]

 I think the picture Chris has posted looks completely false, an awful photoshop look to it, where as BB's photo has a quiet charm about it with the leaves curving around the moon.

 

With respect Colin, you missed the point. I only posted that shot for the picture of the moon in it - it was the best I could find on Google. I agree, the rest of it is inferior as you say.

 

Agreed, but I think something like this might work...Hope you don't mind me taking the liberty to edit in detail of a moon of mine BB...not perfect but to give an idea of what could be achieved with a bit more pp work

 

BB's-moon-shot.jpg

 

That looks good - but perhaps it needs a bit more brightness in the moon to capture the atmosphere?

[David]

Yeah I agree Chris, but it was just a 'quicky' to show what it could look like instead of trying to imagine it.

 

However, the shot would not work at all without the light from the over exposed moon, so the only way to keep the atmosphere would be to take 1 like the original then another under exposed and edit them together in image editing software

 

And Tina, It was simply layered onto the image in Elements 12, re-sized to match the original moon and the center of BB's moon erased to let the detail of the added moon show through. With more time and effort and it could be done so it looks like the shot was taken like that

[NannyFerret]

Thanks, David.

So the new moon layer was at the bottom, and did you have to have some transparency so that you could see where your were erasing?
I've never done that before, so it's good to know how other people do these things.

[ChrisLumix]

Thanks, David.

So the new moon layer was at the bottom, and did you have to have some transparency so that you could see where your were erasing?

I've never done that before, so it's good to know how other people do these things.

 

In Photoshop (& Elements) there are 'Opacity' sliders for each layer, so you can adjust from 100% (fully opaque) to 0% (fully transparent). They help a lot not only with creating effects, but also used in a temporary way when erasing.

[David]

In Photoshop (& Elements) there are 'Opacity' sliders for each layer, so you can adjust from 100% (fully opaque) to 0% (fully transparent). They help a lot not only with creating effects, but also used in a temporary way when erasing.

 

Exactly as Chris said:

 

I duplicated the original image layer so my moon would layer underneath it, then set the opacity to about 60% on the duplicated image (you can go higher or lower depending on how much you need to see),

 

I added a mask layer to the copied layer (that's the square with the circle in the middle on the mini toolbar for layers) so the erasing wasn't permanent and set the eraser to 25% to allow some original light through (I needed to go over a few times to get it looking ok).

 

With more time you could get the balance of detail and light just right.

 

There are other ways to achieve the same or sometimes better result but for speed this was the best way, and maybe if you are not too experienced you can get good results using that method.

[David]

Spent a bit more time on it' so here is a slightly improved version:

 

[colinb]

whilst you can just adjust (??) the opacity can I suggest you use the layers blending tab and try either 'screen' or 'overlay' you might find the blending between layers works much better that way.

[ChrisLumix]

whilst you can just adjust (??) the opacity can I suggest you use the layers blending tab and try either 'screen' or 'overlay' you might find the blending between layers works much better that way.

 

Yes, that would work too, if you're not scared by blending modes as I was for years !

 

I'd do it even different than David - I'd select the moon-with-detail from the other image (magnetic lasso would work superbly on the moon's edge), copy and paste it as a new layer, Transform/Nudge it so it overlays the original moon correctly, adjust the opacity to what I want, then flatten the image.

[David]

Yes all would work and I am never afraid to try new things as I always save edited images separate to the original and also duplicate the original as a copy layer so the original remains untouched and can always be reverted back to

 

I just hope Brightbear doesn't mind me hijacking his image!

[Brightbear]

To be honest I'm enjoying this. I can't believe my novice photos create such a stir. Go for it! I'm learning stuff and I think you should do what you want to the image. Thanks for commenting though David. BB

[David]

Pleased you are enjoying BB

 

That image is an excellent composition that already has atmosphere, its just the overall image could have extra appeal with some detail added to the moon.

 

I am sure some would say it is fine as it was (I was impressed). It shows what a good image you have to start with that people just want to add an extra tweek to it