Where once we were manually editing layer masks, now we can just perform sky replacements without doing hardly any work and the results are nearly perfect. Just getting the mask right in Photoshop was crazy hard and often ended in tears. The bottom line is that up until recently sky replacement was an advanced photography technique that virtually nobody did very often. To help make the final photo look right it was common for a photographer to re-visit the same location on a day when the sky looked better just to ensure that the replacement sky was a good fit. Everything from colors to which direction the shadows were going, all had to be carefully managed in order for the replacement sky to not stand out as a post-capture edit. Sounds simple but in reality, it was anything but mostly due to how much extra editing you had to do in order to make the sky look right. In the past, this was done using Photoshop by masking the sky and then manually loading up a replacement sky into the mask. So, what exactly IS sky replacement? Sky replacement is exactly what it sounds like, using a photo editing tool such as Enlight Quickshot ( iOS) or Luminar 4 ( Mac/Windows) to replace the sky in a photograph with another more interesting (or more “dramatic”) sky.
So, who is right? Is sky replacement evil, or is it just another tool in a photographer’s toolbox? Others, specifically landscape photographers, seem to view sky replacement as a necessary evil as you don’t always get the sky you were hoping for, and not everyone has the time to go back to an exotic location for a re-shoot. In some circles, artificially removing the sky in photos and replacing it with a more appealing sky is viewed in a very negative light.
0 kommentar(er)
