Shadows and highlights; recovery of detail; NIK, etc.

Greetings!
I am not enthralled with the shadows/highlights functions in Photoshop and would like to know what methods you use when attempting to recover details in the whites and blacks, for example? I know the NIK plug-ins are very popular, but I've never used them myself. I'd be grateful for any tips, recommendations, advice, etc. For me, it's most important to keep things simple in the post-processing dept. so as to focus on all the other joyful things, viz., finding birds, observing, and photographing them. And also because I'm not terribly bright!
Hello and many thanks!

Hi Jack! I do not use NIK either but I've heard nothing but good things about it.

My favorite tools to recover shadows and highlights are:

- In LR, the shadows and highlights sliders (how aptly named!)
- In PS, the dodge and burn tools (I use low opacity and repeat if necessary, something in the 8 to 10% range, and a "soft" brush of 30% hardness or so).

I realize this is a highly simplified answer and there are few others that I do use occasioonally, but this is it in a nutshell for my workflow for this type of recovery when needed.

Once you're in PS (or any editor) you can only recover the tonal information that came in from the raw converter. If you left shadows too dark or highlights too light (with the histogram showing blocked up and blown out, or close to it) in the raw conversion, you can do a little, but not much. If you were careful to keep a good histogram in raw conversion, tailing off to the darkest and lightest tones instead of blocked up) you can do much more. So the place to start is with a good raw conversion. LR and ACR offer the best tools if the image is at all problematic.

Shadows-Highlights is a very old technology -- it can be good at times, but Detail Extractor in Nik's Color Efex Pro is worth the cost of the entire suite, as far as I'm concerned. But it's easy to overdo -- caution is in order. It's very sophisticated, pulling out an uncanny amount of detail, and it makes a separate layer which you can then mask to certain areas if necessary.

Hi jack, the best place to preserve detail is during the raw conversion like Diane said there are some methods in PS that you can also use and Nik also has some nice tools. Dodge and burning really only lightens or darkens areas so they are more tonal balancing techniques then detail extractors. There are ways to use the shadow and highlight tool in PS that are more subtle and do not induce a lot of noise but that involves layers and mask along with blending options which are neither fast or easy. I am sorry you do not find post processing joyful for me watching an image come alive on my screen is just as rewarding as capturing it in the field. one of the the things that separate the advance amateurs and profesinals form others is their skill and knowledge at post processing their images.

I guess there are many ways to skin a cat, but I have a great amount of success in extracting localized details in whites by using the burn tool...I find that it, and the dodge tool, very under-rated in what they can do without having to purchase plug-ins (not that there is anything wrong with that!)

I wholeheartedly agree that a good RAW conversion is paramount! Also: a good photograph is a good photograph and post-processing cannot turn s. into g. but certainly it's true that post-processing can elevate an already good image to "the next level," as the catchphrase goes. Like Daniel, I am a fan of the doge and burn in Photoshop, and I have a feeling I'd very much enjoy the NIK plugin as well, used selectively, and on its own layer(s). Yes yes, one mustn't overdo any of these things, it's true.
Kind and sincere thanks to all who've written in!

I concur with comments regarding getting the raw conversion as near as possible to "correct". I used to shun Shadows and Highlites in Photoshop but have recently found it to be excellent - if used sparingly. In other words if the image only requires slight adjustment I can get good results, I keep the Radius at about 30 but use the Amount and Tonal Width antagonistically, ie I may need a small Tonal Width but a fairly high adjust ment or vice versa, the Tonal Width I have found useful has recently been in the region of 1 -10%.
If the image requires more extensive work I would make a mask and try curves. I also use the method advocated by Artie in his processing guide - Tim Grey Dodge Burn.
I agree with Dan, the Dodge and Burn are also good, you can build to the required result gradually, but again they have limitations - the key as mentioned before is to get the raw conversion as good as possible.

The so-called "Tim Grey" dodge and burn (and BTW he didn't invent it) is about on the same level as the Dodge and Burn tools. As Don said above, these will really only allow lightening and darkening, although in local areas. Next in sophistication comes Shadows-Highlights, best done on a duplicate pixel layer so it isn't burned into stone and can also be masked if needed.

The most flexible and powerful method is using a masked Curve, which allows both tonal and color adjustments, and is on a layer which can be modified as much as needed with no "damage" to the image. See the tutorial in Educational Resources "Making Local Adjustments in Photoshop Using Quick Mask Mode." It's the best way to bring up low-contrast areas (which always seem to fall on the subject's face) and it can basically serve as digital fill flash.

Nik's Detail Extractor works a little differently and does pull out (available) detail in addition to lightening shadows and darkening highlights. It creates a layer, which can be masked as needed.

Sincere thanks for the helpful information, all.