It can give you more blown highlights if you don't meter off the brightest spot. Usually that is not a problem though.
Ken.
--
http://www.pbase.com/ken_5
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
I used to not be so critical
- Thread starter Jarrell Conley
- Start date
Ken.
--
http://www.pbase.com/ken_5
Clipped, shiny, whatever you call it, it looks fine in this photo. Do you want her beautiful skin to look like it's covered with heavy powder? Know you don't, so what's wrong with her youthful glow?
--
Muriel - 9 9 5, 3 1 0 0, W C-6 3, T C-2 E
DPR and Pbase supporter
FCAS Charter Member
--
Muriel - 9 9 5, 3 1 0 0, W C-6 3, T C-2 E
DPR and Pbase supporter
FCAS Charter Member
Uncle Frank
Forum Pro
A perfectly delightful picture, Jarrell. There is absolutely nothing wrong with it. Print it, frame it, and give it to her, and 40 years from now she'll show it with pride to her own grandkids.I'm getting to the point that clipped highlights bother me
more and more. I think it's gotten to be a personal thing, like
with these in a natural light photo of one of my grand daughters....
I've got the June 30 copy of People magazine right here. The mag is full of candid photos of celebs by some of the highest paid photogs in the country, and there are highlights all over the place. In fact, the only shots that don't have them are studio shots. There a stunning shot of a model for Matrix beauty products on the 3rd page, and she's got clipped highlights all over her carefully coiffured hair. So what? It's an eye grabbing photo.
My thought is that we need to embrace the highlights and the shadows, and use them to make our work more powerful. They exist in the real world, and give dimension and interest to what we see. Why should be try to supress them completely in our photography?
Jmho.
--
Warm regards,
Uncle Frank, FCAS Charter Member, Hummingbird Hunter
Coolpix fifty seven hundred due to arrive Friday - can't wait!
http://www.pbase.com/unclefrank/cp995&page=all
David Chin
Forum Pro
--
Rgds,
David
C o o l p i x 4 5 0 0
~ Out-of-the camera series: http://www.pbase.com/dlcmh/outofthecamera
~ Fantastic Majeske's 4 5 0 0 gallery: http://www.pbase.com/ryenke/coolpix_4500
~ THE post that convinced me to buy the 4 5 0 0: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1007&message=3087176
Jarrell: Beautiful picture, to begin with!
Uncle Frank: I agree, many times they happen to be appropriate in the scene. But if I review the captured image and find them not-so-appropriate, I cannot un-blow tham back
So I prefer them non-blown at the time of capture, please.--
Regards,
Elias.
-- http://www.pbase.com/elias -- N i k o n . c p 4 5 0 0 --
-- how to embed images from PBase:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1007&message=4823908 --
Jim Campbell
Senior Member
shooting transparancy film. There is a dynamic range and that's it. You need to expose for the highlights and process for the shadows. You can use light modifiers and bounce some light back or difuse the light coming through the window. One advantage we have is Photoshop curves, masking and layers.
If all else fails just enjoy a really nice shot and the effect that the lighting created.
If all else fails just enjoy a really nice shot and the effect that the lighting created.
Jarrell: Beautiful picture, to begin with!
Uncle Frank: I agree, many times they happen to be appropriate in
the scene. But if I review the captured image and find them
not-so-appropriate, I cannot un-blow tham back
non-blown at the time of capture, please.
--
Regards,
Elias.
-- http://www.pbase.com/elias -- N i k o n . c p 4 5 0 0 --
-- how to embed images from PBase:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1007&message=4823908 --
I'm not sure the same things apply that do to the 990. I know the D100 is a completely different beast, but I'll toss it out anyway. With the 990, I learned long ago that it seems to do best with the in-camera settings as follows: Sharpening to low or normal, contrast to low. I used to dial in exp comp of +0.7, but I'll only do that on occasion now, the 0 comp seems less prone to clipping the highlights.
Like I said, works well with the 990, try it and see with the 5700.
The only other way to do it is to reduce the contrast of the scene. As for outdoors, a polarizer can help with reflections from foliage, but you knew that already.......;-)
http://www.pbase.com/baywing
Like I said, works well with the 990, try it and see with the 5700.
The only other way to do it is to reduce the contrast of the scene. As for outdoors, a polarizer can help with reflections from foliage, but you knew that already.......;-)
--but, I'm getting to the point that clipped highlights bother me
more and more. I think it's gotten to be a personal thing, like
with these in a natural light photo of one of my grand daughters....
I fight them every way I know how but I still get them sometimes no
matter what I do, as with the shine off skin. I guess that is why
Hollywood film makers keep makeup artists around.....
Today I was noticing how the sunlight struck certain leaves in a
tree and how I could not see any detail in the bright areas of the
leaves. I knew taking a picture of that tree in that light would
yield the same blown highlights.
If anyone has a cure, I'm all ears... huh... eyes.
Oh, I've done the clone with rubber stamp route. Sometimes it's
successful, most times it isn't. I've toned them down in the above
photo. I won't show you the original...
Taken with the 5700..
Jarrell
--
How to Post Pictures Here! Click on the first link below...
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1007&message=4033727
To visit my pbase albums, use the link below
http://www.pbase.com/jarrell/nikon_5700_images
http://www.pbase.com/baywing
Jarrell Conley
Forum Pro
Jarrell Conley
Forum Pro
The Fuji method sounds promising, maybe they can get a handle on it. I apologise to the newer members for not explaining what "clipped highlights" were in this post. I sometimes forget some are just learning all the terms of this technology. Half of them I don't know myself. Thank you FJ for your try at it. I think I'll put this photo over on the retouching forum and see what the geniuses there can come up with. I have a feeling they'll tell me to learn to live with it and try to meter more accurately. I am going to try switching to center weighted metering for a while and see how it does. Can't hurt....
One thing for the newer people here. There is such a thing as blown or clipped highlites such as we've been talking about here (the bright area on the lighter side of Whitney's nose) and there are specular highlights. Those are the ones you see on bright metal like chrome, those super bright white areas. Also, you see it alot when sunlight reflects off water.
But, it is possible I could have done better with this photo by carefully metering off the brightest area of Whitney.
Jarrell
One thing for the newer people here. There is such a thing as blown or clipped highlites such as we've been talking about here (the bright area on the lighter side of Whitney's nose) and there are specular highlights. Those are the ones you see on bright metal like chrome, those super bright white areas. Also, you see it alot when sunlight reflects off water.
But, it is possible I could have done better with this photo by carefully metering off the brightest area of Whitney.
Jarrell
Odd Bod
Member
Jarrell Conley wrote:
There is such a thing as
I've read all of the responses to your thread, and have great respect for the opinions voiced here and for the people who voiced them, and I appologise if I'm "trying to teach my granny to suck eggs", but I'm still inclined to wonder if, since a "highlight" is really only an area of concentrated reflection, whether a polarising filter might improve the situation by cutting down the "glare"
Best Regards,
Odd Bod.
Life's hard by the yard, by the inch it's a cinch
There is such a thing as
Hi Jarrell,
I've read all of the responses to your thread, and have great respect for the opinions voiced here and for the people who voiced them, and I appologise if I'm "trying to teach my granny to suck eggs", but I'm still inclined to wonder if, since a "highlight" is really only an area of concentrated reflection, whether a polarising filter might improve the situation by cutting down the "glare"
Best Regards,
Odd Bod.
Life's hard by the yard, by the inch it's a cinch
the other day when I was shooting macro flower pics in my garden. I had it on F 4. or so and was blowing out the yellow lillies left and right. I switched up to F 5.6 just to see what would happen and the color came back, highlights became manageable. I really don't know why. I thought the F stop only affected DOF.
If anyone wants to explain this to me, feel free.
p.s. Jarrell, your posts get so many responses I just can't read all the responses in one sitting! In other words, forgive me if someone already mentioned something like this.
--
Todd Muskopf
professional fine art painter, wannabe photographer
http://www.muskopf.org
To all of those who I offend, please forgive me.
If anyone wants to explain this to me, feel free.
p.s. Jarrell, your posts get so many responses I just can't read all the responses in one sitting! In other words, forgive me if someone already mentioned something like this.
--
Todd Muskopf
professional fine art painter, wannabe photographer
http://www.muskopf.org
To all of those who I offend, please forgive me.
You know, I hadn't thought of that. Does the contrast setting mean that the camera will be looking to show an absolute white and an absolute black in the photos? Not many of my photos have that. Maybe I should just turn the contrast thing off.
--
Todd Muskopf
professional fine art painter, wannabe photographer
http://www.muskopf.org
To all of those who I offend, please forgive me.
--
Todd Muskopf
professional fine art painter, wannabe photographer
http://www.muskopf.org
To all of those who I offend, please forgive me.
F
FJBrad
Guest
Odd,
I think you're right about the polarizer, especially in a shot where hard lights are used. Another tactic is to bracket the exposusure. With a tripod and still subject one can borrow from one image to cover another, or density mask. Portraits are a whole other thing, though. We'd all like to get it right in the camera, and not have to rely on PS retouching.
--
FJBrad
Mauro.B
Senior Member
Jarrell,
as probably already pointed out somewhere else in this thread, highlights clipping can often be reduced by selecting an aperture in the F5.6 - F8.0 range this will not blur portraits background).
If you are willing to spend some time with PS, you could try the following:
1. Shoot Raw with your settings of choice
2. Convert the Nef file into three different Jpeg's: 0EV, +1EV and -1EV (or 0EV, +2EV and -2EV according to taste / situation). Remember to bring the Jpeg's back to 8 bits (Image / Mode) or some PS functions will not work
3a. "Blend" the standard (0EV) and the underexposed (-1EV) pics with LAYER MASK as set forth in the following tutorial:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/digital-blending.shtml
If necessary, blend the 0EV / -1EV combo with the +1EV pic if needed. As opposed to what the tutorial says, I would not go past 12 in Gaussian Blur.
3b. Alternatively, you can use the iNova's "iDynamicRangers.atn" action, bundled with his e-book, to blend the three exposures.
The above process improves highlights at the expense of some contrast, which can be brought back afterwards (but ... contrast = clipping ...).
Cheers,
M
Greets from Rome
Mauro
http://www.pbase.com/m_ben/
as probably already pointed out somewhere else in this thread, highlights clipping can often be reduced by selecting an aperture in the F5.6 - F8.0 range this will not blur portraits background).
If you are willing to spend some time with PS, you could try the following:
1. Shoot Raw with your settings of choice
2. Convert the Nef file into three different Jpeg's: 0EV, +1EV and -1EV (or 0EV, +2EV and -2EV according to taste / situation). Remember to bring the Jpeg's back to 8 bits (Image / Mode) or some PS functions will not work
3a. "Blend" the standard (0EV) and the underexposed (-1EV) pics with LAYER MASK as set forth in the following tutorial:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/digital-blending.shtml
If necessary, blend the 0EV / -1EV combo with the +1EV pic if needed. As opposed to what the tutorial says, I would not go past 12 in Gaussian Blur.
3b. Alternatively, you can use the iNova's "iDynamicRangers.atn" action, bundled with his e-book, to blend the three exposures.
The above process improves highlights at the expense of some contrast, which can be brought back afterwards (but ... contrast = clipping ...).
Cheers,
M
--The Fuji method sounds promising, maybe they can get a handle on
it. I apologise to the newer members for not explaining what
"clipped highlights" were in this post. I sometimes forget some
are just learning all the terms of this technology. Half of them I
don't know myself. Thank you FJ for your try at it. I think I'll
put this photo over on the retouching forum and see what the
geniuses there can come up with. I have a feeling they'll tell me
to learn to live with it and try to meter more accurately. I am
going to try switching to center weighted metering for a while and
see how it does. Can't hurt....
One thing for the newer people here. There is such a thing as
blown or clipped highlites such as we've been talking about here
(the bright area on the lighter side of Whitney's nose) and there
are specular highlights. Those are the ones you see on bright
metal like chrome, those super bright white areas. Also, you see
it alot when sunlight reflects off water.
But, it is possible I could have done better with this photo by
carefully metering off the brightest area of Whitney.
Jarrell
Greets from Rome
Mauro
http://www.pbase.com/m_ben/
The contrast setting, and others, is software driven. The image as a raw-off-the-ccd lacks contrast. The camera's electronics add this later, so turning it off, in effect, gets you closer to the actual ccd output. Will you get all the Zones this way? Not likely, unless the contrast range of your scene is equal to the contrast range of the ccd.
I have found a great range of contrast to work with by turning the in-camera settings down and adding (if required) later in PS.
http://www.pbase.com/baywing
I have found a great range of contrast to work with by turning the in-camera settings down and adding (if required) later in PS.
--You know, I hadn't thought of that. Does the contrast setting mean
that the camera will be looking to show an absolute white and an
absolute black in the photos? Not many of my photos have that.
Maybe I should just turn the contrast thing off.
--
Todd Muskopf
professional fine art painter, wannabe photographer
http://www.muskopf.org
To all of those who I offend, please forgive me.
http://www.pbase.com/baywing
Hi FJ, I had read a article in the latest PopSci on the technology
that Fuji has been refining and by having different pixel sizes it's
akin to the fact that silver crystals in film are as well of differing
sizes thus allowing a wider lattitude for capturing the range of
light correctly.
I'm sad to say that it doesn't appear that Nikon is being very
innovative in digital camera market. I feel that Fuji is on the
right track with the direction they are headed in regards to
DR..
Sid
4500 Community (900+ Members)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nikon-4500/
Ring Of Fire
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap030530.html
that Fuji has been refining and by having different pixel sizes it's
akin to the fact that silver crystals in film are as well of differing
sizes thus allowing a wider lattitude for capturing the range of
light correctly.
I'm sad to say that it doesn't appear that Nikon is being very
innovative in digital camera market. I feel that Fuji is on the
right track with the direction they are headed in regards to
DR..
Sid
--
4500 Community (900+ Members)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nikon-4500/
Ring Of Fire
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap030530.html
Same shutter speed Todd ?
Sid
4500 Community (900+ Members)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nikon-4500/
Ring Of Fire
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap030530.html
Sid
--the other day when I was shooting macro flower pics in my garden.
I had it on F 4. or so and was blowing out the yellow lillies left
and right. I switched up to F 5.6 just to see what would happen
and the color came back, highlights became manageable. I really
don't know why. I thought the F stop only affected DOF.
If anyone wants to explain this to me, feel free.
p.s. Jarrell, your posts get so many responses I just can't read
all the responses in one sitting! In other words, forgive me if
someone already mentioned something like this.
--
Todd Muskopf
professional fine art painter, wannabe photographer
http://www.muskopf.org
To all of those who I offend, please forgive me.
4500 Community (900+ Members)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nikon-4500/
Ring Of Fire
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap030530.html
Jordan Robbins
Senior Member
Hows this?
All I did was select color range... choose highlights... and press control+J to copy them to a new layer. I then did a really rough job with the stamp tool to copy over the highlights with a dark adjacent skin color (used a large brush size... 24). Applied gaussian blur to the new layer with a radius of 12. Finally I adjusted the opacity down to 40%. You can probably do a better job with a bit more time on the original image.
-Jordan, CP5700
All I did was select color range... choose highlights... and press control+J to copy them to a new layer. I then did a really rough job with the stamp tool to copy over the highlights with a dark adjacent skin color (used a large brush size... 24). Applied gaussian blur to the new layer with a radius of 12. Finally I adjusted the opacity down to 40%. You can probably do a better job with a bit more time on the original image.
--but, I'm getting to the point that clipped highlights bother me
more and more. I think it's gotten to be a personal thing, like
with these in a natural light photo of one of my grand daughters....
I fight them every way I know how but I still get them sometimes no
matter what I do, as with the shine off skin. I guess that is why
Hollywood film makers keep makeup artists around.....
Today I was noticing how the sunlight struck certain leaves in a
tree and how I could not see any detail in the bright areas of the
leaves. I knew taking a picture of that tree in that light would
yield the same blown highlights.
If anyone has a cure, I'm all ears... huh... eyes.
Oh, I've done the clone with rubber stamp route. Sometimes it's
successful, most times it isn't. I've toned them down in the above
photo. I won't show you the original...
Taken with the 5700..
Jarrell
--
How to Post Pictures Here! Click on the first link below...
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1007&message=4033727
To visit my pbase albums, use the link below
http://www.pbase.com/jarrell/nikon_5700_images
-Jordan, CP5700
Jarrell Conley
Forum Pro
Oh.. is THAT all you did... I'm kidding, but you can believe I'm going to pratice it right now. I'm assuming this will work fairly well on most clipped highlights.
Thank you for the little lesson!
Jarrell
I'm kidding, but you can believe I'm going to pratice it right now. I'm assuming this will work fairly well on most clipped highlights. Thank you for the little lesson!
Jarrell
Hows this?
All I did was select color range... choose highlights... and press
control+J to copy them to a new layer. I then did a really rough
job with the stamp tool to copy over the highlights with a dark
adjacent skin color (used a large brush size... 24). Applied
gaussian blur to the new layer with a radius of 12. Finally I
adjusted the opacity down to 40%. You can probably do a better job
with a bit more time on the original image.
J
Jeff4500
Guest
Jarrell:
I've found the highlight issue over-blown
Actually I've gone to using spot with manual selecton as well as shooting with bracketing......then of course photoshop. seems like there is always lots of detail in the underexposed areas which then can be leveled up with photoshop.
Unfortunately, bracketing doesn't seem to stay "on" when I shutdown, so you have to remember to reset it.
Regards,
Jeff Lee
I've found the highlight issue over-blown
Actually I've gone to using spot with manual selecton as well as shooting with bracketing......then of course photoshop. seems like there is always lots of detail in the underexposed areas which then can be leveled up with photoshop.
Unfortunately, bracketing doesn't seem to stay "on" when I shutdown, so you have to remember to reset it.
Regards,
Jeff Lee
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum