WEDDING SEASON SALE! 30% Off Training Systems!

Your content will be up shortly. Please allow up to 5 seconds
Show Critique
Blending techniques, overall what works and doesn't?
Exif Data
  • Canon EOS 5D Mark IV
  • EF24-70mm f/4L IS USM
  • f/11
  • 26mm
  • 1/1.6666666666667
  • 320

Q&A Discussions

Please or register to post a comment.

  1. Matthew Saville

    Wow, what a gorgeous scene! Thanks for sharing this beautiful panorama, Sawyer. My main critique is that overall I do see an odd balance of strong, contrasty tones in the sky, with what feels like an imbalance versus the mid-ground and foreground. I’ll elaborate in another comment…

    | |
  2. A
    Matthew Saville

    One thing I see is that the lighter tones in the sky here are a bit darker than the lighter tones in the sky just to the left of this spot. Since it’s pretty evident that the sun is actually setting just a little to the /right/ of this spot, then any area of sky to the /left/ shouldn’t be lighter, it should be a faint bit darker. Therefore, I’d blend this area just a little bit more naturally, so that the transition from the single brightest point outward is as smooth as possible.

    | |
  3. B
    Matthew Saville

    …Here’s the spot I was talking about that seems a bit brighter than it ought to be.

    | |
  4. C
    Matthew Saville

    Next, I do notice a couple faint seams in the empty blue sky here, from the pano stitching I assume. This usually happens when the stitching is either done without the lens’ vignetting correction profile being applied perfectly, or if the vignetting correction is as good as it can be, then maybe the images themselves didn’t have enough overlap to allow for perfectly smooth tones. Personally, for this reason I go with 50-60% overlap, even though it’s kinda overkill; it allows for smoother tonality in empty skies such as this area. 

    | |
  5. D
    Matthew Saville

    Lastly, the brightness levels here seem to be a little unnatural; the hillside below this point seems brightly lit, while the trees and mountains closer to the lake seem in much darker shadow than they ought to be. I do understand that this hillside is indeed probably catching more of the glow from the sky and the clouds, and these trees and hills are in fact a bit more in shadow, however, I would have still processed the image to be just a little bit brighter (or generally, lest contrasty) in this mid-ground so that it can “join” the foreground with the horizon and the sky a little bit more easily. Otherwise the foreground seems like it doesn’t belong to the background.

    | |
  6. E
    Matthew Saville

    Lastly, I’m not sure if this is an effect that happened in real life or if it’s from post-production, but there seems to be a bit of a “glow” effect applied to some of these harder light/dark edges. It looks like one of those dreamy special effects that really works best when there’s actually mist/fog in the scene, and not a clear crisp view such as this.

    | |
  7. Matthew Saville

    Either way, remember that I’m just being super detail-oriented because this is already a stunning image, and to critique a great image you have to aim even higher. So, thanks again for sharing this beautiful scene!

    | |