Reading mode: Light Dark

I used to not be so critical

Go to last post
Jordan Robbins said:
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.
Click to expand...
Fantastic work flow, Jordan! It sounds like something Scott Kelby should have put in his book! I've never used the color range/highlights selection method before. Once I had the new layer, I went to the levels menu and reduced the output level to 220, and then adjusted the opacity level of the new layer to taste, which was 30%. It kept me from having to "paint" with the cloning tool, and the result was very similar to yours.

Thanks for putting another trick in my bag :-)

--
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
 
I just read every comment in one sitting and think a basic refresher of what the camera is doing and comparing it to film may be in order.

First - get (borrow) a hand held light meter and compare it to your camera. You need to read the ambiant light not the reflected light. All digital cameras read relected light. With a hand held meter you will probably find the reflected light reading is one to two f stops over exposed. By this I mean if I point the meter at the face and get a reading then set the meter to read the light falling on the face and place it in front of the face pointed at the light source the meter will give me two different readings. The EV settings in the camera are really to help control the light reading errors. It is not really to over or underexpose your shot. The change in exposre is the correct exposure. This was the basis of the Zone system of exposure of Ansel Adams and the f64 group.

Film is not as noticible for blown highlights because the film base itself absorbs light and will not record as pure a white.

When pros shoot portraits they immediately go to low contrast films, so the earlier reply about setting low contrast in a digital camera will help. It may not be the perfect solution for all work but one technique.

Highlights and skin tone is normally controlled with lighting in a studio setting not in exposure or even in film. That is why the earlier post about People magaine shots was so strongly on point. If you are trying to duplicate the best portraits you see, realise they are under very controlled situations.

You may have noticed in photos of a studio setting that the lighting usually has an umbrella bounce flash as the main lighting source. Actually an bounce umbrella alone (not just any bounce light- a flat bounce reflector creates a totally different lighting effect) will greatly even the light across a face. The rest of the flashes are to control shadows and background.

Try to thing about what the camera, light meter and ccp are doing and it will give you other options for your photos. When we switched from film to digital we gave up a lot of things that were developed over time with trial and error. There are hundreds of types of film on the market all of which will record an image differently. There are even more types of processing and papers to create an image. In digital we are starting with one recording technique (with a few limited controls).

And do not forget that the computer monitor create its own problems and blown highlights is one a monitor exagerates.

By the way a very nice photo.
 
JeffG8 said:
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
Click to expand...
--
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

 
I'm going to try hard to keep all that in mind! :)
Jarrell
jerry meola said:
I just read every comment in one sitting and think a basic
refresher of what the camera is doing and comparing it to film may
be in order.

First - get (borrow) a hand held light meter and compare it to your
camera. You need to read the ambiant light not the reflected
light. All digital cameras read relected light. With a hand held
meter you will probably find the reflected light reading is one to
two f stops over exposed. By this I mean if I point the meter at
the face and get a reading then set the meter to read the light
falling on the face and place it in front of the face pointed at
the light source the meter will give me two different readings.
The EV settings in the camera are really to help control the light
reading errors. It is not really to over or underexpose your shot.
The change in exposre is the correct exposure. This was the basis
of the Zone system of exposure of Ansel Adams and the f64 group.

Film is not as noticible for blown highlights because the film base
itself absorbs light and will not record as pure a white.

When pros shoot portraits they immediately go to low contrast
films, so the earlier reply about setting low contrast in a digital
camera will help. It may not be the perfect solution for all work
but one technique.

Highlights and skin tone is normally controlled with lighting in a
studio setting not in exposure or even in film. That is why the
earlier post about People magaine shots was so strongly on point.
If you are trying to duplicate the best portraits you see, realise
they are under very controlled situations.

You may have noticed in photos of a studio setting that the
lighting usually has an umbrella bounce flash as the main lighting
source. Actually an bounce umbrella alone (not just any bounce
light- a flat bounce reflector creates a totally different lighting
effect) will greatly even the light across a face. The rest of
the flashes are to control shadows and background.

Try to thing about what the camera, light meter and ccp are doing
and it will give you other options for your photos. When we
switched from film to digital we gave up a lot of things that were
developed over time with trial and error. There are hundreds of
types of film on the market all of which will record an image
differently. There are even more types of processing and papers to
create an image. In digital we are starting with one recording
technique (with a few limited controls).

And do not forget that the computer monitor create its own problems
and blown highlights is one a monitor exagerates.

By the way a very nice photo.
Click to expand...
--
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

 
today. Ended up in a building with a lot of very nice watercolor paintings of a bright and colorful spanish village on the coast, I had to laugh because the artist, with complete control, chose to show the walks and roofs and some of the facades with what we would consider blown out highlights devoid of detail. And, it really made one feel that you were standing there on a hot bright summer day.

Anyway, thought it was interesting.....
Jarrell Conley said:
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

Click to expand...
 
Lol! Here we are fighting them tooth and nail and he's putting them in on purpose.

Oh! I got a two thumbs up on the photo from her mom even with the hilites, so I guess it's ok... :)
Jarrell
Jim Campbell said:
today. Ended up in a building with a lot of very nice watercolor
paintings of a bright and colorful spanish village on the coast, I
had to laugh because the artist, with complete control, chose to
show the walks and roofs and some of the facades with what we would
consider blown out highlights devoid of detail. And, it really made
one feel that you were standing there on a hot bright summer day.

Anyway, thought it was interesting.....
Click to expand...
How to Post Pictures Here! Tips from Elias...
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1007&message=4823908
 
Sid Daley said:
Sid
Todd Art said:
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.

Click to expand...
--
4500 Community (900+ Members)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nikon-4500/
Ring Of Fire
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap030530.html
Click to expand...
--
Todd Muskopf
professional fine art painter, wannabe photographer
http://www.muskopf.org

To all of those who I offend, please forgive me.

 
Baywing said:
Todd Art said:
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.

Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/baywing
Click to expand...
--
Todd Muskopf
professional fine art painter, wannabe photographer
http://www.muskopf.org

To all of those who I offend, please forgive me.

 
Glad I can be of some help. Yup, my experience with this is that it will work with blown highlights in most circumstances. In some cases you may get more of the image selected than you had intended to when selecting highlights in the select color (generally occurs when much of the image is very light). This can be easily remedied by simply erasing the excess areas after copying them into a new layer. Changing the mode to overlay also gives a slightly subtler approach (although I usually just keep it in normal).
Jarrell Conley said:
Jordan Robbins said:
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.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
-Jordan, CP5700
 
Low Contrast, -0.3EV... Does the 5700 have the same clipped highlight display that the D100 has?
Jarrell Conley said:
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

Click to expand...
 
the selecting more than you need part. Thanks for the tip on earasing the unneeded areas.
Jarrell
Jordan Robbins said:
Glad I can be of some help. Yup, my experience with this is that
it will work with blown highlights in most circumstances. In some
cases you may get more of the image selected than you had intended
to when selecting highlights in the select color (generally occurs
when much of the image is very light). This can be easily remedied
by simply erasing the excess areas after copying them into a new
layer. Changing the mode to overlay also gives a slightly subtler
approach (although I usually just keep it in normal).
Click to expand...
How to Post Pictures Here! Tips from Elias...
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1007&message=4823908
 
Todd,

Baywing is dead on with his assessment on low contrast, try this experiment set up the camera to take a shot and then adjust the constrast setting and take the exact same shot withou adjusting any other parameter or moving the camera. Load both images into photoshop and take a look at the histogram, you should notice that the low contrast histogram is flattened and widened in comparison to the normal or high contrast curve, low contrast preserves gradual tonal variations under bright light conditions using the cameras dynamic range more efficiently. Conversely, under low light conditions it helps bring out contrast in your scene. If you combine this setting (my 990 is permanantly set to it for daylight outdoor shooting) with in camera histogram and blinking highlight checks you should eliminate blown highlights from your shots. Another trick, that works when even low contrast isn't enough is to deliberately underexpose the image by a stop, you can then post process it to pull up the shadows (remember digital sensors behave more like slide than negative film) expose for the highlights! I have a few old threads posted on this method that shows the results, not only can you get a better dynamic range in the final image but you can do it while minimizing CA in relation to shooting the scene at the "proper" exposure.

Here's the link: (follow the cascade of links within...)

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1007&message=2088895

Regards,
Todd Art said:
Baywing said:
Todd Art said:
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.

Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/baywing
Click to expand...
--
Todd Muskopf
professional fine art painter, wannabe photographer
http://www.muskopf.org

To all of those who I offend, please forgive me.

Click to expand...
--
--

 
Right you are David, digital behaves very much like transparency film. I honed my E6 techniques on 8x10, where each shot cost me about $10, so you learn fast how to exposed a piece of film! Digital is similar, but you have more control of contrast thru the camera's menu. Shooting in "raw" (in-camera stuff turned off or down to minimums) gives you the most you can get. There are times that I will turn up the in-camera settings, I equate that with using films of different contrast for different scenes/effects. E100SW is different than Velvia, there is a time and place for both, likewise, the different settings offered by the digital world.
David SL said:
Baywing is dead on with his assessment on low contrast, try this
experiment set up the camera to take a shot and then adjust the
constrast setting and take the exact same shot withou adjusting any
other parameter or moving the camera. Load both images into
photoshop and take a look at the histogram, you should notice that
the low contrast histogram is flattened and widened in comparison
to the normal or high contrast curve, low contrast preserves
gradual tonal variations under bright light conditions using the
cameras dynamic range more efficiently. Conversely, under low light
conditions it helps bring out contrast in your scene. If you
combine this setting (my 990 is permanantly set to it for daylight
outdoor shooting) with in camera histogram and blinking highlight
checks you should eliminate blown highlights from your shots.
Another trick, that works when even low contrast isn't enough is to
deliberately underexpose the image by a stop, you can then post
process it to pull up the shadows (remember digital sensors behave
more like slide than negative film) expose for the highlights! I
have a few old threads posted on this method that shows the
results, not only can you get a better dynamic range in the final
image but you can do it while minimizing CA in relation to shooting
the scene at the "proper" exposure.

Here's the link: (follow the cascade of links within...)

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1007&message=2088895

Regards,
Todd Art said:
Baywing said:
Todd Art said:
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.

Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/baywing
Click to expand...
--
Todd Muskopf
professional fine art painter, wannabe photographer
http://www.muskopf.org

To all of those who I offend, please forgive me.

Click to expand...
--
--

Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/baywing
 
Why don't you post the pictures I'd like to see if
I can replicate your results..

Sid
Todd Art said:
Sid Daley said:
Sid
Todd Art said:
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.

Click to expand...
--
4500 Community (900+ Members)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nikon-4500/
Ring Of Fire
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap030530.html
Click to expand...
--
Todd Muskopf
professional fine art painter, wannabe photographer
http://www.muskopf.org

To all of those who I offend, please forgive me.

Click to expand...
--
4500 Community (900+ Members)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nikon-4500/
Ring Of Fire
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap030530.html
 
Jerry:

I agree with you, I use the EV comp. and spot metering to give me a zonal range that I know will capture the detail I need. I resort the internal setting because I often forget to use the EV dial setting.

As far as I can see the Zone system still works, but I'm I think the zonal ranges are compressed in digital. Although I am amazed what I can bring out of the shadows in digital and PS.

Thanks for a well reasoned response.

Regards,

Jeff Lee
 
Well they're not there yet! I have a fuji with one of these new sensors in it! In good light, the pictures are noisey but the tonal range is really good... In low light, the pictures are horrible!
Sid Daley said:
A sensor for the photo and a equivalent sensor for
dynamic range. I give it a few more years and they
will get us the dynamic range of silver crystals..

http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1043202460.htm

Fuji PDF
http://www.fujifilm.com/JSP/fuji/epartners/bin/4thGenSUPERCCDBrochure_1.pdf

Btw : Nice portrait Jarrell

Sid

--
4500 Community (900+ Members)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nikon-4500/
Ring Of Fire
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap030530.html
Click to expand...
 
Somebody may have already suggested this earlier, but a common technique is to use a fill flash bounced into an umbrella. Use a handheld incident meter (like minolta flashmeter) to measure the ambient then set your flash unit for the right amount of fill flash. Outdooors use a high shutter speed to limit the ambient.

Very nice shot though, nothing to fix there!

--
Peter Zuehlke
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top