[Macworld]

Post your comments for A fast trick to salvage an underexposed photo here

[rkeefer]

Hmm, the before looks better to me.

[donfrase]

Import the picture into iPhoto, and try the "Shadows" control. I suspect it will do a better job, and with just one slider to move. No duplication and layer nonsense.

[DavidBarto]

Take the 'after', collapse the layers Cmd-E, then apply a curves layer to improve the contrast and it will be much much better.

[KickDrum]

If you're going to have people open controls and move sliders around, why not just teach them where the level controls are? Even if this tip is for beginners (which it seems to be) that would produce a better end result IMO.

[Dennistrator]

Check out this tutorial by Jeremy Bim:
http://www.3drender....rial/tiling.htm
Jeremy's technique is similar to the one described in the article, except it uses Gaussian Blur on the duplicate layer (20 to 40%), and Soft Light blending mode. I work for a tech pubs firm, and have used this method on hundreds of poorly lit digital photos to bring details out of the shadows. I also use Shadows and Highlights, and Curves, as others have mentioned. Which is best really depends on the image at hand. In my situation, I pick the method that seems best for an image, try it, and if the results aren't suitable for my needs, hit Control Z and quickly try one of the others.

[hagen]

Looses too much contrast: agree with just adjusting shadows. Or adjust exposure then use recovery (Aperture).

[citizenbfk]

But I like the 'Before' better than the 'After.' No?

[icerabbit]

More like a fast and complicated trick to ruin an otherwise ok photo.

Several apps have easier ways of dealing with this (as others have pointed out).

[snagitseven]

I just opened the photo in Photoshop, selected Level, adjusted the right slider to the left and moved the center slider a bit. Looks much better than the after example and took all of 5 seconds.

This post has been edited by snagitseven: 23 July 2012 - 12:33 PM

[ecormany]

fill light slider in Lightroom? it won't ruin the sky, either.

[bobm3]

this is an april fool thing right?

the after photo looks horrible

[tatilsever]

Mr. Johnson must be a really good photographer if he was unable to find another, more suitable photo beset with too much backlighting and underexposure. I also find the "after" picture quite a bit uglier and washed out. The more visible details of the tangle of branches in the background is distracting from the likely object, the rider on the horse. Of course, if the photographer was actually aiming to draw attention to the tree instead, then I take my comment about him being a good one.

[Hugues]

I must not have the same eyes as everyone else on this board. This technique is useful, it consists of highlighting the areas in the image inversely proportional to their initial lightness, which naturally brings out the darkest area of the image. The results looks to me quite a bit better than the original, and no amount of manual tweaking with shadows or level I tried allowed to preserve the details in the sky as well as showing the details of the person on the horse without looking too unnatural.
I guess this trick is not for everyone but it does seem useful. I had never heard of it before and I can see how it can be useful sometimes.