Need some help

[SwampGrizz]

Need help with this. If this is in wrong forum, please advise.
This was taken a while back with my old camera, a Rebel T6, since traded in for my R50. Somehow I think that this may not be the camera’s fault, but rather pilot error on my part. I have had this happen a few times with the new camera, but it’s not as pronounced. See the shiny whitish area in the middle of the rose? The flower is all the same color in real life. My guess is overexposure, but the rest of the elements look ok to me. I adjusted in Lightroom, and could have masked it and corrected the color maybe, but I’m curious as to why this happened in the first place. Is this an incorrect setting in the camera? White balance? Any ideas and help will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
Dale

• Join to view EXIF data.

 

[ShipleyNW]

This isn't about gear, at least not entirely. Your Rebel was a pretty old camera and newer cameras have much better dynamic range, so there's that.

But the main problem is the light. Roses and plants in general have a sheen that reflects light like a mirror. In those washed-out areas, you're not seeing the flower at all, but a reflection of the mid-day sun. That reflection is so bright that there is no exposure that will capture that without everything else in the frame going dark. That's called dynamic range; the range from the deepest shadow detail to the brightest colors the sensor can record. Your exposure has exceeded the camera's dynamic range.

The easiest and best way to fix this is to shoot in shade. That compresses the dynamic range of the scene considerably. It flattens out the light so you don't get blown highlights and deep shadows. If you can find some open shade -- a scene shaded from the side, like from a stand of trees or the side of a building -- you can still get directional light and soft shadows. Open shade is your friend. (Pro tip: if you're looking for natural portrait lighting, nothing beats an empty loading dock.)

If bright colors and deep shadows are part of your vision for the shot, you could shoot that scene in bright sun though a polarizing filter to cut through those reflections. If you've got a vision, there's probably a tool or technique to deal with it. But day to day the best plan is to get out early or stay out late and shoot in the shadows.

 

[SwampGrizz]

Many thanks for the reply. I have struggled with high dynamic range. My newer camera does somewhat better, but still it’s tough in bright light. I have taken some shots in the HDR mode on the camera, and it’s a lot better. Still a little clumsy though. Your explanation about the sheen and reflection on the flower itself went a long way toward my understanding. I had not considered that a flower could be reflective, so that’s something to think about next time. Shade is my friend too, especially when it’s 100 degrees in the South Georgia sun. I was convinced that I had some exposure or color setting screwed up. I’m going to be a lot more deliberate about shooting in the bright sun. Thanks again.

 

[Bryan Conner]

I agree that the reds are simply over-exposed. Your T6 had about 11.7 stops of dynamic range according to DXO, Your R50 has about 13.9 stops. If you are able to have to histogram visible in your viewfinder or on the rear screen while shooting, you can avoid this in the future. If you aren't shooting in RAW, then that would definitely be a recommendation.

 

[SwampGrizz]

Bryan,
Thanks for the reply. Back then I didn’t shoot raw, but now maybe half the time, depending on the situation. I’ll try that.
I have been watching YouTube vids about “expose to the right”, ETTR, and I’m wondering how that would affect things, particularly in harsh sunlight like that on the flower. Would that make it worse? Maybe I need to go back and watch the vids again. I’ll start watching my histogram, too.
You and Shipley have addressed my main concern, namely, that it was an exposure problem rather than a camera setting or camera flaw. I think exposure can be mitigated by proper procedures and techniques, and simply by shooting in the shade. Thanks again for the help and patience.
Dale

 

[BradS]

There are many different portable and inexpensive white diffuser/colored reflector screens which are sold in combination. They are useful for shading small subjects such as flowers in areas where there is no natural shade. Check Amazon, for example. It would be a simple fix.

 

[Bryan Conner]

Bryan,
Thanks for the reply. Back then I didn’t shoot raw, but now maybe half the time, depending on the situation. I’ll try that.
I have been watching YouTube vids about “expose to the right”, ETTR, and I’m wondering how that would affect things, particularly in harsh sunlight like that on the flower. Would that make it worse? Maybe I need to go back and watch the vids again. I’ll start watching my histogram, too.
You and Shipley have addressed my main concern, namely, that it was an exposure problem rather than a camera setting or camera flaw. I think exposure can be mitigated by proper procedures and techniques, and simply by shooting in the shade. Thanks again for the help and patience.
Dale

You are very welcome. I used to be a big fan/follower of the expose to the right idea back in the 2000s-2010s, but now I don't see it as such a necessity. Today's Canon sensors have greater dynamic range than my Canon D30, D60, 10D cameras had back in the day. It was critical then. I have my histogram (3 color) visible in my viewfinder as well as on the back screen while shooting. When I shoot macros, including flowers, I always take a test shot and look at it on the screen for blown out areas, then adjust my exposure as needed.

Remember, you in camera histogram etc. is directly affected by your picture style settings. I normally set my camera to "Neutral" picture style. If you choose a style which has boosted saturation or contrast, then your histogram and screen preview will not closely resemble the natural raw file. This is also why I only shoot RAW and basically never JPEG. I have control over the image, not the camera having control. And remember, the picture styles do not affect the raw file, only the image you see in the view finder or on the back of the screen while shooting. But, if you are using Canon's DPP for RAW processing, it will use the chosen, in camera, picture style as your starting point. But, it isn't "baked in", meaning that you can change it at any time.

 

[SwampGrizz]

Thanks Bryan! I learn something new every day. I’m going to check my picture style. I did not know it affected histogram and preview. That’s good to know.

 

[SwampGrizz]

Brad,
Thanks for the tip. I will look into it. Amazon knows exactly where my house is.

 

[Bryan Conner]

Thanks Bryan! I learn something new every day. I’m going to check my picture style. I did not know it affected histogram and preview. That’s good to know.

Play around with the picture style settings with your camera pointed at a static scene with constant lighting. If you have your camera set to manual mode and fixed iso to eliminate any variables, you can change settings and make the histogram move a little bit. Mind you, it isn't a great change, but it definitely can have some affect on your histograms. Whether it is enough of an effect to matter, that is up for debate. Some people used to say to reduce saturation and contrast all the way to the minus, but that was on older sensors with less dynamic range that what we have available today.

 

[jcass]

I've confused myself reading the existing replies, so please bear with me. Chasing my own tail as usual.

As noted in your original post, the highlights are overblown causing the rose blossom - the subject of your composition - to lose detail. I agree with ShiplyNW that this is not a gear issue and the same resolution would apply to your Rebel TS6 or any camera.

What mode and settings are you using? Metering mode may be significant in this case... Spot vs Evaluative, etc. But there are several methods to address your example. This one is only what I do based on my own preference and habits...

1. Shoot Raw if you can. It just gives many more options in post-processing. But it doesn't work for everyone.
2. Adjust your mode(s) based on situation. I almost always shoot in Manual with auto-ISO (very common). So this is my shot-flow.
   1. Metering Mode. I usually use evaluative because it works best 75% of the time, especially with "good" diffused light in the mornings and evenings.
      1. In bright sunlight, I sometimes change to "spot" evaluation. Or when shooting the moon at night. I would have changed to Spot Metering in bright sunlight for this rose.
   2. Use Exposure Compensation.
      1. In the case of your rose, I most likely would have reduced exposure compensation a stop or two so that the rose was not overblown. This would have had the side-benefit of separating the subject from the background because that background would appear darker (just my opinion).

In general, set your exposure for you subject. That rose is beautiful, but your correct that the exposure highlights the background at the expense of detail in the rose. Even in Raw, you wouldn't have the detail to fix the rose in post-processing. So, expose for the rose (rhymes) and the let the background fade into darkness.

 

[jcass]

What modes and setting do you like to use for photos like this rose?

 

[Copterdoc]

There are many different portable and inexpensive white diffuser/colored reflector screens which are sold in combination. They are useful for shading small subjects such as flowers in areas where there is no natural shade. Check Amazon, for example. It would be a simple fix.

 

[Copterdoc]

smaller 3 in 1 and 5 in one reflectors usually have a defuse in the mix. Even a smaller reflector used as a shade will work wonders. I virtually have one with my camera all the time.

 

[SwampGrizz]

Jim,
Thanks for your input. This particular photo was taken several years ago, so I can’t remember what the exact settings were. At that point, I was still learning the camera, and it most likely would have been evaluative metering, and whatever default settings came with the camera. Back then, I was just shooting everything I came across, so I probably just noticed the rose and shot it without actually having a plan.
These days, with my little R50, I generally shoot with Aperture Priority and a fixed ISO, and adjust exposure compensation to suit. I keep it on evaluative metering, because I’m led to believe that’s a good general purpose setting. One thing in your comment above jumped out at me, and that’s the idea that the next time I come across this particular situation, whenever I see something “hot” like the center of the rose, I should use spot metering. Correct? I think I need to spend more time in the bright sun working on this.
I greatly appreciate everybody’s time and patience here. I also appreciate the fact that you are sharing your hard earned knowledge and experience with me.
Dale

Edit—- just reread your post, and setting the exposure for the subject is probably what I should have done to begin with.

 

[ACEkin]

Although there are alternative fixes for future frames, I would like to chime in and mention a problem some early digital cameras had: Magenta bloom. In addition to slight overexposure, there is also a good amount of what they used to call magenta bloom. In the image I am going to upload, I gently tweaked the exposure but significantly lowered the red saturation in ACR; the same can be done (perhaps more easily) in Lightroom. Of course, I was not there, and my tonal conclusion and the color of the rose may be incorrect. But, after the rose petals regain their structure, the overall color or just the rose can easily be remedied. I hope you do not mind my downloading and doing some minor edits on your photograph. Shade and/or diffused light may help, as suggested by others.

 

[SwampGrizz]

I appreciate everyone’s responses here. I feel like I’m in a master class.

 

[SwampGrizz]

Cemal,
That’s much closer to real life. Thanks for doing that. Feel free to edit anything I put on here.
Magenta bloom is a new one on me. I am making the inference from your post that this is a condition that more modern cameras have addressed or solved. The camera that I used was a Canon T6. Was that model susceptible to the bloom, or do you know?
I had filed this picture away, but it always bugged me. When I discovered this site recently, I figured somebody on here could educate me as to what was going on. That has really been the case. I took this photo before I started using Lightroom, and I fooled around with correcting the color, but I always wondered about the root cause, and how to avoid this in the future.
This post has given me a lot to chew on.

 

[ACEkin]

Cemal,
That’s much closer to real life. Thanks for doing that. Feel free to edit anything I put on here.
Magenta bloom is a new one on me. I am making the inference from your post that this is a condition that more modern cameras have addressed or solved. The camera that I used was a Canon T6. Was that model susceptible to the bloom, or do you know?
I had filed this picture away, but it always bugged me. When I discovered this site recently, I figured somebody on here could educate me as to what was going on. That has really been the case. I took this photo before I started using Lightroom, and I fooled around with correcting the color, but I always wondered about the root cause, and how to avoid this in the future.
This post has given me a lot to chew on.

I do not know whether that Canon model had this problem, but it is possible that under some conditions, more cameras might have had it. I know I dealt with it even with newer model cameras when the conditions were right. The fix in Lightroom or ACR involves adjusting the tonality and then lowering the red channel luminance. It may also benefit from doing the same to the magenta and purple sliders, but to a much lesser degree. As you pull the red luminance slider to the left, you will see the rose petals take shape.

 

[SwampGrizz]

Thanks, I’ll give it a try.