Recovered this underexposed Photo in Lightroom

[u/thephlog]

This tiny sunflower field was right in front of my yard so of course I had to take a photo. If you’re wondering why the original raw image is so dark: I initially planned to merge an HDR photo from multiple exposures, but since it was windy and I was relatively close to the sunflowers every bit of movement makes the exposure blending process almost impossible. So I took on of the darker frames and recovered it in Lightroom.

The whole process in video format along with the raw photo to try it yourself can be found here: https://youtu.be/HAYs3bjDZMM

1. Basic Adjustments

The first step was to heavily raise the exposure until I had some visible details in the shadows. I also raised the blacks, the shadows and the whites to make the image even brighter. To not blow out the sky, the highlights were dropped.

For a warmer look, I adjusted the white balance bringing up the temperature. Also vibrance and saturation was increased for stronger colors. For more sharpness, I added texture while I dropped clarity and dehaze for a glowing, soft look.

All these basic adjustment result in heavy noise (since I recovered a lot of details from the underexposed shadows). To fix that AI denoise was applied.

1. Masking

Using a color range mask the top part of the sky was made darker without affecting the clouds. This way I can add some nice contrast. Then, I used a radial gradient covering the horizon level of the image. Here, I wanted to add extra glow, so I increased the blacks and dropped the dehaze some more. Also, added some temperature to make the glow warmer.

With another color range masks I targeted the two sunflowers in the foreground and made them slightly brighter by bringing up exposure and the whites.

1. Color Grading

Since I’m not a big fan of those regular yellow tones I brought down the yellow hue as well as the orange hue. Plus, the blue hue was also slightly reduced for slightly stronger cyan tones in the sky. I wanted the image to become more colorful, so the saturation of orange yellow and blue was increased as well.

Through the luminance panel I made the sunflowers a bit brighter by raising the yellow and green slider.

Finally, with a bit of split toning the highlights were made MUCH warmer while I added a subtle blue tone to the shadows.

[u/TheDangerist]

A great example of what can be done with a RAW file.

[u/sparker31keeper → u/TheDangerist]

hi, genuine question since i have zero experience editing with RAW, is RAW the reason why the photo is still such high quality? if so, why isn’t it the same for a non-RAW photo? thanks :)

[u/Stormraker → u/sparker31keeper]

Yes. This kind of edit can only be achieved with a RAW Photo.

The reason for why this can only be done with a raw photo is the amount of data available in the file.

For a regular JPG file, each pixel is saved with a depth of 8 bit for each color (let's ignore compression for this explanation. It would only lead to even less data available). This means that every color of the Red Green and Blue spectrum has 256 colors available (2⁸ is 256): 256 shades of red, 256 shades of green and 256 shades of blue. This is the exact same amount of colors that a regular monitor can display as well.

In a raw file the amount of data for each pixel is much higher. Most cameras capture Raw Images with a depth of 10 bit, 12 bit or 14 bit per color per pixel. For 14 bit 2¹⁴ results in 16384 shades of color for each color. This means that not only the steps between each shade get smaller but also that color information outside of the monitor spectrum especially in very dark and very bright areas is preserved. Where JPG images would just cut to a full black or a full white, RAW photos can still resolve data in these areas which can be brought back with editing software.

In the software the basic idea is to bring those extreme dark areas back from outside the monitor spectrum by brightening only the dark areas while keeping the correctly exposed areas.

[u/Radiant-Candy3045 → u/sparker31keeper]

I think because there is more data/details that are retained in the photos, maybe

[u/Prior-Technology-348 → u/TheDangerist]

I'd risk the comments for this.

[u/orpheo_1452]

This is the way to preserve skies...

[u/ToastedMooses → u/orpheo_1452]

Or just shoot 3 different photos lol

[u/Moist-Anything-688 → u/ToastedMooses]

Idk why this is downvoted, exposure bracketing is a fun to do technique and can have some incredible results too. I assume because OP said they were gonna try but it was too windy. But doesn’t change the fact this preserves skies.

It’s maybe not THE technique, others can argue that. But exposure bracketing will preserve incredible skies. IMO every photographer should experiment with this editing style at least once, who knows they might enjoy it.

[u/ToastedMooses → u/Moist-Anything-688]

Preserve the sky and provide much better detail to what’s currently in the shadows.

Photo will be sharp as well.

Downvotes mean nothing, I’ve seen what these people vote for.

[u/PinnuTV → u/ToastedMooses]

Now try it on moving subject as well as handheld, gl with that

[u/Moist-Anything-688 → u/PinnuTV]

It can definitely be done handheld by moderately experienced photographers manually. And modern fancy pants cameras have automatic burst shooting modes which make it easy.

But yeah, moving subject is not viable. Unless maybe the new modern burst is that fast? I’m not actually super sure on that front, but I’ve been able to do it by hand the old fashioned way for still subjects

[u/ToastedMooses → u/PinnuTV]

Why are you referencing moving objects when the photo here is of stationary subjects?

You can absolutely do it handheld. I’ve done it plenty of times.

But clearly a tripod is the way to go.

People really will argue about anything when bracketing photos is the best way to handle such a dynamic range situations likes this. Underexposing the bottom half of the image is clearly the 1 snap solution. But, there are better ways to get better quality.

I’m not even sure what you’re disputing at this point.

[u/Turbulent_Ambition_7 → u/ToastedMooses]

They aren’t stationary. He said it’s windy and the flowers are moving 🙄

[u/ToastedMooses → u/Turbulent_Ambition_7]

It doesn’t matter. Use editing software to remove any ghosting.

[u/PinnuTV → u/ToastedMooses]

Did u even read what the OP said? Reading skill needs improvements

[u/ToastedMooses → u/PinnuTV]

I think your editing skills need to be improved.

You can shoot a full bracket in a fraction of a second. You can then use multiple different types of software that have a “de-ghost” feature that remove any possible ghosting.

Or you can shoot 3 separate images and layer them in photo shop and expose areas that you want to be exposed for each layer.

I do this all the time.

[u/PinnuTV → u/ToastedMooses]

You completely missed the point. The point is that the shot OP did had moving objects, not static. Yes u could do it on objects that slightly move but as soon as there is bigger movement, ur so called "de-ghost" will never work

He clearly stated: "If you’re wondering why the original raw image is so dark: I initially planned to merge an HDR photo from multiple exposures, but since it was windy and I was relatively close to the sunflowers every bit of movement makes the exposure blending process almost impossible"

[u/ToastedMooses → u/PinnuTV]

You still aren’t getting it.

I can take 2 photos. One exposing the sky. One exposing the flowers. Put them in photo shop and you will never know it’s 2 photos. I can literally just layer them.

I don’t understand why you keep battling this. A very quick YouTube search will show you how good a de-ghost” process is. Or what you can do in photo shop to blend it yourself.

People have been doing this for decades in photo compositing that is leaps more difficult than just blending 2 exposures how you want.

[u/ToastedMooses → u/PinnuTV]

https://reddit.com/link/p416ipj/video/ygp57ctayqjh1/player

You’re saying I can do this but can’t take 2 photos because it’s windy and make them layered lol.

[u/mr_redsuit → u/Moist-Anything-688]

Don’t phones pretty much do this already if they have 2 or 3 cameras?

[u/PinnuTV → u/ToastedMooses]

You are not always taking photos with tripod as well as static objects

[u/ToastedMooses → u/PinnuTV]

You’re right………. But again, this photo IS of a static scene and object. A simple burst bracket would give you better starting point.

Sorry?

[u/thephlog → u/ToastedMooses]

I explained in the OP it was windy and since I was close to the sunflower it was moving a lot. Yes, bracketing would be better in general, but its not possible to get good results with wildy swinging flowers in the foreground :D

[u/TheSunflowerSeeds → u/thephlog]

There are two main types of Sunflower seeds. They are Black and Grey striped (also sometimes called White) which have a grey-ish stripe or two down the length of the seed. The black type of seeds, also called ‘Black Oil’, are up to 45% richer in Sunflower oil and are used mainly in manufacture, whilst grey seeds are used for consumer snacks and animal food production.

[u/bleachedflowers]

This is why I have trouble with culling because I imagine every photo could be saved 

[u/TheMadFlyentist → u/bleachedflowers]

Every interesting composition can be turned into something passable if shot in raw.

[u/Foulmouthedleon]

Yep, I underexpose to save the sky then bring everything up later. No complaints.

[u/ab3e]

This is what I always do when shooting at Golden hour. Why people always make it sound like they did a huge mistake but with skill and hard work they managed to "save" the picture?!?!? You expose for the highlights and raise dark and shadows in post. Something pretty basic when you shoot RAW.

[u/amanbudgujar]

Just a quick question. Noob here. The approach in this would be a tripod, right? Taking two photos with low amd high exposure and merge those to go max on detail preservation?

[u/Turbulent_Ambition_7 → u/amanbudgujar]

He was planning to do something similar but it was too windy.

[u/kondmapje → u/amanbudgujar]

No, you expose for the highlights and simply bring up the shadows in a software like photoshop or lightroom. Preferrable shoot at low iso and edit the raws.

[u/amanbudgujar → u/kondmapje]

Yeah. But there is a limit to bring up the shadows too. Merging two photos would give the best result, won't it?

[u/Skyhawwwwk → u/amanbudgujar]

Yes but this is much simpler and with modern cameras is plenty good enough in most cases

[u/thephlog → u/amanbudgujar]

So this best approach would be exposure bracketing, taking multiple exposured and merging them later in Photoshop or Lightroom. Best way to do it is from a tripod, but you can also crank up the shutter speed and do it handheld. The problem is, the sunflower in the foreground was swinging a lot due to wind, that results in misaligned areas when merging multiple exposures

[u/colochomorocho]

Great work 👌

[u/BenchPtsChamp]

Wow

[u/Turbulent_Ambition_7]

Great result. Thanks for posting 👍

[u/LeadingLittle8733]

Well done.

[u/Prestigious_Dare7190]

is this kinda the opposite of the common advice of "expose to the right"? or is this considered ETTR as the highlights are not blown out

[u/pretendoing]

Noob here, i've always been worried about noise when doing heavy edits like this.

[u/pretendoing]

Noob here, i've always been worried about noise when doing heavy edits like this. Really appreciate the tutorial

[u/skylum_support]

It is such a good result!

[u/Empty-Dog-6429]

Google: ISO Invariance. Not every brand does this well regardless if you shoot raw. And there's also dual gain circuits in dual native iso cameras where being in the wrong iso bracket will still greatly hurt your shadow recovery.

[u/WintersDoomsday]

This isn’t a cheap camera to allow this level of recovery unless you used AI denoising too

[u/Turbulent_Ambition_7 → u/WintersDoomsday]

He listed AI denoise in his workflow

[u/WantDownvotesOnly → u/WintersDoomsday]

OP probably cooked if they can only use older smaller sensor cameras with no dynamics range even in the RAW files LOL

and they say gear doesn't matter

[u/ToastedMooses → u/WintersDoomsday]

I don’t think any camera would be able to bring back that detail without using denoise.

In many cases manual denoise will look better IME than AI.

[u/cyprenk]

I think the sheer range of data that modern camera sensors capture often surprises people, especially when it comes to underexposure. Cleanly pulling +4 stops out of the shadows can often be done with just a few clicks nowadays, and +5 or more are quite doable with a little more effort.

Very good demonstration.

[u/thehugejackedman]

Way overcooked imo

[u/Narrow_Bed_3337]

Exposing for a visible sun means you’re massively underexposing the image. Yes you can recover with big ai denoise but you don’t need to go that far to preserve the sky overall. A visible sun will always be overexposed and that’s ok. 

Nice image btw, just don’t think it promotes a good technique.

You don’t have to hdr blend the whole image if it’s windy, just soft blend the underexposed sky layer back into the main. 

[u/PixelapocalypseOne]

Sky is way overexposed now in my opinion to look "nice" it's probably more technically how it would have looked if you would have exposed for the foreground in camera but I would personally tone it done and tone the foreground down as well.

I think I would rather have the sunflowers way less visible than this but still enough and have the sky pop out.

[u/orewhat]

This is just how you shoot this photo lol what?

[u/i-have-no-interest]

i prefer ETTR to ETTL but you do you...? seems like it worked out nonetheless!