Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 20 Jul 2017 (Thursday) 01:26
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Lot's of light spots, workaround

 
rapurimanka
Member
140 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Moscow
Post edited over 1 year ago by rapurimanka.
     
Jul 20, 2017 01:26 |  #1

So I was in the forest, with my family. And in some places tree crowns weren't too big to cover the sunlight, this produced some light spots which were over-brighten on photos. Dead areas. I wonder what technic should I use? Just ETTL? And then push shadows? But I'll have noise all over the place.

Sample:

2560
x
1707
TOO LARGE!
EMBED PREVENTED, IMAGE TOO LARGE:
https://pp.userapi.com …816/52081/ROR4u​_xSOg0.jpg
Click here to see our image rules.


And low exposure to show dead areas:

2560
x
1707
TOO LARGE!
EMBED PREVENTED, IMAGE TOO LARGE:
https://pp.userapi.com …816/5208b/BzSmq​JlQ0vE.jpg
Click here to see our image rules.


Was there a camera with almost human eye-level dynamic range? So i would not have dead white spots?

6D | Canon 85 1.8 | Canon 24-105 4 | Lightroom 4
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/27393138@N08/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,364 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2390
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 1 year ago by Wilt. (3 edits in all)
     
Jul 20, 2017 01:44 |  #2

The so-called 'wide dynamic range of the human eye' is a false capability. Actually the eye has a rather NARROW dynamic range at a particular iris size; it requires the iris to open/close to extend the perceived dynamic range, with the brain doing some image integration.

Also, if you go from very bright light to very very dim light, your eye CANNOT SEE until it has accommodated to the dim light...which takes 30+ minutes in the dim light, and is not instantaneous with the opening of the iris to its max size!

You can use your camera in a manner which mimics the eye...multiple shots at different exposures composited together with HDR techniques.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mathmans
Senior Member
272 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 92
Joined Apr 2014
     
Jul 20, 2017 02:12 as a reply to  @ Wilt's post |  #3

That's how it is with high dynamic scenes.
You have a few options, if you don't want blown highlights:
-expose for highlights and lift shadows in post
-use fill flash
-move your subjects somewhere else
-put your camera on tripod and tell your family not to move; take 2 exposures-one for highlights and one for shadows; merge them in HDR image


My photos:
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/149610703@N05/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
john ­ crossley
Goldmember
2,433 posts
Likes: 735
Joined Nov 2009
     
Jul 20, 2017 02:19 |  #4

rapurimanka wrote in post #18406436 (external link)
So I was in the forest, with my family. And in some places tree crowns weren't too big to cover the sunlight, this produced some light spots which were over-brighten on photos. Dead areas. I wonder what technic should I use? Just ETTL? And then push shadows? But I'll have noise all over the place.

Sample:

2560
x
1707
TOO LARGE!
EMBED PREVENTED, IMAGE TOO LARGE:
https://pp.userapi.com …816/52081/ROR4u​_xSOg0.jpg
Click here to see our image rules.


And low exposure to show dead areas:

2560
x
1707
TOO LARGE!
EMBED PREVENTED, IMAGE TOO LARGE:
https://pp.userapi.com …816/5208b/BzSmq​JlQ0vE.jpg
Click here to see our image rules.


Was there a camera with almost human eye-level dynamic range? So i would not have dead white spots?

To be honest with you the first image looks perfectly OK to me, just a little bit of fine tuning is required.
You have NOT said what software you are using so I can't tell you what adjustments to make.


Football is a very simple game. Twenty-two players chase a ball and Germany always win.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rapurimanka
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
140 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Moscow
     
Jul 20, 2017 03:26 |  #5

Wilt wrote in post #18406440 (external link)
The so-called 'wide dynamic range of the human eye' is a false capability. Actually the eye has a rather NARROW dynamic range at a particular iris size; it requires the iris to open/close to extend the perceived dynamic range, with the brain doing some image integration.

Also, if you go from very bright light to very very dim light, your eye CANNOT SEE until it has accommodated to the dim light...which takes 30+ minutes in the dim light, and is not instantaneous with the opening of the iris to its max size!

You can use your camera in a manner which mimics the eye...multiple shots at different exposures composited together with HDR techniques.

I disagree :) If I have a bright spot and dark spot at the same time, and I'll be looking at dark one, my side-view won't show blown-away bright spot. But, okay, maybe it's "brain image integration"...

https://pp.userapi.com​/c836724/v836724659/5d​611/7u4iQmk1LXU.jpg

Mathmans wrote in post #18406447 (external link)
That's how it is with high dynamic scenes.
You have a few options, if you don't want blown highlights:
-expose for highlights and lift shadows in post
-use fill flash
-move your subjects somewhere else
-put your camera on tripod and tell your family not to move; take 2 exposures-one for highlights and one for shadows; merge them in HDR image

Sad story, wish it was easier. While my current example is not that hard, I sometimes catch more difficult scenarios like shooting a walking girl under such random light. And sometimes I'm getting a good shot but with a bright spot on face. Using flash is, well, very pro thing, especially if you are shooting on street (you need a big one), takes more time than just point and shoot.

john crossley wrote in post #18406448 (external link)
To be honest with you the first image looks perfectly OK to me, just a little bit of fine tuning is required.
You have NOT said what software you are using so I can't tell you what adjustments to make.

Thx, its Lightroom.

Another shot, better one, but with a bright spot on my daughter.

1440
x
2160
TOO LARGE!
EMBED PREVENTED, IMAGE TOO LARGE:
https://pp.userapi.com …659/5d611/7u4iQ​mk1LXU.jpg
Click here to see our image rules.

6D | Canon 85 1.8 | Canon 24-105 4 | Lightroom 4
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/27393138@N08/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mathmans
Senior Member
272 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 92
Joined Apr 2014
Post edited over 1 year ago by Mathmans.
     
Jul 20, 2017 05:44 as a reply to  @ rapurimanka's post |  #6

Well; that's how it is. Light is everything in photography.
It seems that for your type of shooting the camera sensor is limiting factor.
If your camera can't handle such a dynamic range and it's noisy when pushing shadows and you are annoyed about that then perhaps it's time to get a camera with better dynamic range and ISO invariant sensor.

Hmmm; as I see, you already had a similar thread regarding high dynamic scenes and there you've got lots of good answers.
https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1427062


My photos:
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/149610703@N05/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kirkt
Cream of the Crop
5,739 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 581
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA USA
Post edited over 1 year ago by kirkt. (5 edits in all)
     
Jul 20, 2017 08:05 |  #7

The "light spots" are just overexposed portions of the image, mainly the lighting and reflection on leaves facing the incoming direct sunlight. "Dappled shade" is notoriously difficult to expose for when the image is taken during bright sunlight (as opposed to morning or evening). You are fighting exposure for small areas of intense light falling on your subject and the shaded areas of the rest of your subject. The range in exposure between these two extremes defines your working dynamic range (that is, areas lighter than the brightest areas you want to preserve are allowed to blow out to pure white and areas darker than your darker detailed shadows can clip to black).

As proposed earlier in the thread, you can attempt to bring the two extremes closer together by using fill flash - this will bring the shadows closer to the highlights and compress the dynamic range you are trying acquire in a single shot. Otherwise, you will need to make a decision about where your exposure should fall to make the image you want.

Usually, the most objectionable image element is overexposure on the important skin tones of your subject - for example, the side of a face that blows out to pure white with no hope of recovery. You may have to shoot with this portion of the face placed in the headroom of the highlights for your camera and let the rest of the scene fall where it will. You can also try to reposition your subject so that they do not receive the difficult lighting and the exposure on them is more uniform (for example, all shade).

This is all predicated upon the assumption that you are shooting raw. If you have not, take the time to experiment with your particular camera and software combination to see just how far you can extend your (over)exposure before you completely lose data to clipping. Some raw converters have pretty sophisticated highlight reconstruction algorithms, but even those may look unnatural if pushed too far.

If the area in the image is important but really small (a small sliver of a face lit by direct sunlight) you may want to let it blow out in order to expose for a larger portion of the subject. Get to know how much dynamic range your camera can accommodate in post, and how far you can push shadows without revealing objectionable levels of noise and other vagaries of underexposure.

Exposure is a balancing act. There may be reasons why you would want to capture the entire dynamic range (like real estate interior photography) - in your case, spontaneous portrait shooting would really require careful exposure in a single capture, with software that permits you to squeeze the most out of your image data. At some point, you will have to let highlights blow and/or shadows block up.

Also, highlight reconstruction is sensitive to white balance, so make sure you understand how these two factors interact when working with the extreme highlight range of data in your images. All else being equal, I would think skin tones are most important, so concentrate on how these tones get rendered in your experiments, perhaps (balancing the green cast that often falls on subjects under tree leaf canopies, for example).

Good luck!


Kirk
---
images: http://kirkt.smugmug.c​om (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Colin ­ Glover
Goldmember
1,364 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 125
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southport nr Liverpool United Kingdom
     
Jul 20, 2017 08:51 |  #8

On the last image, I'd increase EXPOSURE by between 1.3 and 1.5. Then I'd decrease HIGHLIGHTS down until it looks good to go. Only sparingly use contrast or black so you don't end up where you started from.


Canon EOS 70D, Canon EOS 600D, EF-S 18-55 ii, EF 55-200 USM ii, EF-S 75-300 iii, Tamron 28-80, Sigma 70-210. Pentax 50mm, Pentax 135mm, EF-S 55-250, Raynox Macro adapter, Neewer filters (CPL, UV, FLD & ND4), Fuji HS20 EXR (30X zoom ) & cable release, Yongnuo 560 iii & Luxon 9800A manual flashguns for the Fuji, Hama Star 63 tripod, Hongdek RC-6 remote control, Velbon DF 40 www.point-n-shoot.co.uk website.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Redcrown
Senior Member
335 posts
Likes: 32
Joined Dec 2008
     
Jul 20, 2017 15:29 |  #9

Yeah, the image is junk. But fixing up junk is sometimes entertaining and makes you practice techniques.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kirkt
Cream of the Crop
5,739 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 581
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA USA
     
Jul 20, 2017 15:34 |  #10

Also- see this article from the good folks at Raw Digger:

https://www.fastrawvie​wer.com …amic-range-of-your-camera (external link)

kirk


Kirk
---
images: http://kirkt.smugmug.c​om (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,364 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2390
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 1 year ago by Wilt. (3 edits in all)
     
Jul 20, 2017 15:38 |  #11

rapurimanka wrote in post #18406470 (external link)
I disagree :) If I have a bright spot and dark spot at the same time, and I'll be looking at dark one, my side-view won't show blown-away bright spot. But, okay, maybe it's "brain image integration"...

you can disagree with me, but read this, Section 3...

http://www.cambridgein​colour.com …/cameras-vs-human-eye.htm (external link)

scientists of old and even theologians disagreed with Copernicus heliocentrism


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mathmans
Senior Member
272 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 92
Joined Apr 2014
     
Jul 21, 2017 02:03 as a reply to  @ Wilt's post |  #12

rapurimanka;

Your image is not good for a magazine cover, but it's perfectly acceptable snapshot for memories. This is what you'll get if the light is difficult and you need to shoot fast to catch a moment.
If you want a pro image you will need a different approach with soft boxes and flashes.
If you still don't want to accept this it's OK by me.


My photos:
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/149610703@N05/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,129 views & 2 likes for this thread
Lot's of light spots, workaround
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is charleslvajr
925 guests, 369 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.