SCoombs
Well-known member
Sometimes I find that photos taken in completely natural conditions have a "flashy" look which have lighting that reminds me a bit of snapshots taken with the built in flash on a point and shoot camera. Here is one example from yesterday. It was never going to be an amazing shot (I was out testing a lens) but I think it's made worse by that odd lighting characteristic which I notice from time to time in photos.
This is entirely unedited other than to straighten it out. I'm going to post a couple of edits here, but this is NOT a post-processing discussion: these are here to help get at the main question.
First, the original photo was underexposed. I did this on purpose with -0.7 compensation to save the highlights on the face. This was in full manual with auto ISO, so the only real change was dropping to ISO 640 from the ISO that was really required of 1000 or something. Here is what it looks like with the exposure increased (with the highlights dropped some to preserve that face):
As you can see, this looks good on some parts while other parts - mainly the heron - look overexposed.
The closest I can get to correct is to boost exposure of the overall photo and then mask the heron and reduce it by a fair bit:
I'm not sure it's perfect, but it's better than the other two and looks a lot more natural.
My question for discussion, then, has to do with this phenomenon. What exactly is it about this scene or lighting that lead to the flashy look in the first place and how can I recognize this kind of thing in the field? Is it just a question of an animal with a lot of reflective tones put against a background that is a little darker, or is there more to it than that? For what it's worth, I wouldn't have considered these branches "darker" in the field, as looking with the naked eye they were, as in my final version of the photo here, quite well lit, and other than the white patch on the face I wouldn't have considered the heron to be especially bright or reflective, either.
Once I have recognized this sort of thing, what is the best way to handle it? It is to do as I have done here where the exposure has been reduced to save the highlights and then masking has balanced things out in processing, or is there something better to do?
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
This is entirely unedited other than to straighten it out. I'm going to post a couple of edits here, but this is NOT a post-processing discussion: these are here to help get at the main question.
First, the original photo was underexposed. I did this on purpose with -0.7 compensation to save the highlights on the face. This was in full manual with auto ISO, so the only real change was dropping to ISO 640 from the ISO that was really required of 1000 or something. Here is what it looks like with the exposure increased (with the highlights dropped some to preserve that face):
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
As you can see, this looks good on some parts while other parts - mainly the heron - look overexposed.
The closest I can get to correct is to boost exposure of the overall photo and then mask the heron and reduce it by a fair bit:
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
I'm not sure it's perfect, but it's better than the other two and looks a lot more natural.
My question for discussion, then, has to do with this phenomenon. What exactly is it about this scene or lighting that lead to the flashy look in the first place and how can I recognize this kind of thing in the field? Is it just a question of an animal with a lot of reflective tones put against a background that is a little darker, or is there more to it than that? For what it's worth, I wouldn't have considered these branches "darker" in the field, as looking with the naked eye they were, as in my final version of the photo here, quite well lit, and other than the white patch on the face I wouldn't have considered the heron to be especially bright or reflective, either.
Once I have recognized this sort of thing, what is the best way to handle it? It is to do as I have done here where the exposure has been reduced to save the highlights and then masking has balanced things out in processing, or is there something better to do?
