Hot air balloon.

I have no idea how to photograph and crop a hot air balloon up close. Here is what I came up with.

The Story:
Heavy clouds at sunset. Sunset is off to the left at 9 o'clock, balloon is at 11 o'clock in front of me, and drifting toward me. Shot tight in the portrait orientation.

Post Processing:
Shot in RAW, basic adjustment made and slight crop.
Sky was blown out. Isolated in lightroom and exposure was reduced -1.00.
Highpass filter +4.0 added in Photoshop and used Vivid Lighting at 100%

Comments please and thank you in advance.

Nice shot Rick. These things do move and it's not so easy to get them to be where we'd like. I think you did great and I find it's quite defined and the shape is nicely lit.
The only thing I might have done different (and then I don't know what was there around) is to allow more room around the balloon to let us see the area where it was. Sometimes for these big things it's good to see them in their environment to give a sense of size a little more. But maybe that was not possible in that particular case.

i agree. the shot is nice for what it is, but often times people see a subject and try to get JUST the subject. The balloon itself is not that interesting. Getting the surroundings in the shot, along with using the rule of thirds would have made for a much better image. As of right now, we don't know how big it is, how far away or how high up it is. those things are kind of important with a subject like this.

Here is an unedited RAW file that I shot using the rule of thirds. As you can see there is not much to this shot. Well it does nothing for me, in portrait or landscape. So I chose to shoot it close up, when it got closer to me. I know things that move we are suppose to leave room for them, when I opened up the shot for this I found the sky to be very overpowering. I could not knock it down in post processing, and make it look believable. This is one of those shots you find while you're out that you don't have a lot of time to set up for. This was shot out in the country where roads are miles apart, a dark cloudy evening and almost shooting into the sunset. I tried to make something of it. Thanks for your input.

Ah, I see. I think you squeezed all there was out of this situation. Great choice or crop and pp.

I think the only thing I would have done different with the camera would have been to push the aperture up to about 9 if you could still get the shutter speed you want. I like that for two reasons, first it is more of a sweet spot on lenses, you will get the maximum out of it, and secondly it will increase the depth of field just a little. I use that when I shoot air shows and it has served me well.

Mark, The lens I'm using does not fair well in low light, so I had to set my aperture at 5.6. ISO was set on auto, I'm guessing it was picking up all the extra light from the sky other wise I guess it would have been higher. Didn't have a lot of time to play with camera setting other wise I would have forced the ISO high trying to gain an f/stop back.

This problem will be solved when I satisfy my NAS with a fast glass zoom in the near future.

If I could sell this lens right now I would, my lens came in before my clear filter did and I scratched part of the UV coating on the edge of the lens putting on the lens cap on the first day I had it, so I'm not going to get that much for it if I sell it. So I might as well keep it and use it in high light settings that need a long zoom.

Rick, I think it's done about as well as can be expected under that sky. Maybe a single-shot HDR process could bring out more character in the clouds.

I do, however, want to sincerely thank you for not shooting this. That one scares me and I'm fearless.

PhotoAV8R said:

I do, however, want to sincerely thank you for not shooting this. That one scares me and I'm fearless.

Click to expand...

ROTFLMFAO Thanks!

OK that balloon is just too funny.
Axe, I fully understand about the lens. I am looking at some glass myself and the stuff I want is not the cheap stuff I really want the 70-200 f2.8. I just need to save for it. Well then my son starts college this month and.... well you get the idea. Someday. then I just looked and they are saying the new D4 is coming out this fall. Well that will drop the prices on the used D3's. I don't want the "s" or "x", just the plane ole' D3. Maybe next year I can pick one up. They should drop significantly when the D4 comes out. You can get a D2X for less than a grand if you look hard enough. So maybe in the next year or so the D3 will be used for about $2K. A boy can dream can't he?
My dream team will be the D3 with the 70-200 2.8 and a 24-70 2.8. Will it make me a better photographer, no, but is sure will be fun!!

I can tell that the original submission was a crop, as the pixels are fairly noticeable. I like that you dialed up the vividness, as that's typically appropriate for subjects like this. However, you might have taken it just a tad too far. I read an incredible tutorial once on how to give photos that extra "magazine look" with a vivid color pop, so I'll have to dig that one up.

I like the original better because it shows the entire scene. This is something I struggle with too, Rick. You and I are surrounded by flatlands and cornfields, and it's very boring to us. But we have to try to remember that not everyone who is viewing our photos is from the same neck of the woods. People who live in the concrete jungle of NY are saying, "Wooooow, cornfields!"

I think why you picked up on the pixels is because of the High Pass filter, which you pointed out in another thread, it may have it's downfalls. I like the High Pass Filter, still learning it. But I sometimes think it can be destructive if over done, something easily done in the learning process, I find myself using less of a percent now when using it. Even then I see some major changes at 1:1 (actual pixels) I'll have to do one in lightroom and CS5 and look at them side by side to see which one in my eyes works for me.

The other thing you might have picked up on, remember I used a smart brush around the balloon to lower the exposure on the sky, you might have picked up on the feathering of the brush.

Not making excuses, just thinking out loud.
Thanks for your input and suggestions.

I can't remember what the ratio is, but there's some kind of rule when it comes to cropping. You can generally safely crop X% of an image before pixels become an issue, and it all depends on the MP of the camera/the image's original size. That balloon accounts for probably less than 15% of the entire image, which is going to show pixels, even if it were left unedited. The high pass filter is only going to magnify damage at that extreme of a crop.

Lightroom's default sharpening Presets aren't that great. I have some custom ones made that are much more comprehensive. I also have a Sharpening Action for Photoshop that uses the High Pass filter in two different passes for large and small details. They are also in different layers, so the opacity can be tweaked. If you're interested, PM your email and I'll send them to you.

Anthony what your seeing is something else, and it got my curiosity going. The second photo I posted was just to show the surroundings, the shot was not cropped from that photo.

Right now I'm shooting JPG & RAW, here is an unedited JPG copy of the original shot used. Now, any ideas what your seeing? This is why I'm suspecting the High Pass Filter as the cause. As you can see not much of a crop, Sky has been toned down, Vibrance, and sharpening added to the RAW file. Thanks again.

Anyone wishing to contact me via e-mail can contact me at:

[email protected] (It's new and really nothing now, so I don't mind posting it)

Ah, okay...gotcha. Yes, it must be the high pass filter. I don't see it so much in the balloon itself, but in the basket. There is a lot of noise, for lack of a better word, around the basket.

I'll get those presets and actions out to you today.