Colour for beginners

[rsv_mark]

All
I need some advice. Having tried and failed I am struggling to capture strong colours in my photography. I am mainly trying landscapes and streetscapes as opposed to portraits and close ups but failing to capture the colours as strong as i would like them to be. So typically the blues in sky's and greens in landscapes aren't great and not being an expert in photoshop either, everything is looking a bit flat.

I am mainly trying to shoot with relatively small apertures (in aperture priority mode) to maintain a decent dof but appreciate that impacts on the shutter speed. ISo is set to automatic. I have experimenting with different settings but it isn't 'happening' for me.

So advice needed in simple terms. How you you get great colours?

Thanks in advance
M

 

[gblades]

I normally find editing in Lightroom and adjusting the 'vivid' slider works pretty well.

 

[TCR4x4]

Shoot RAW, then use lightroom to boost the saturation in which ever colour you want. The vivid slider also works well, but will do the whole image rather than just one colour.

You can also use a polariser filter on a sunny day to boost the blue saturation a bit.

If you dont want to shoot RAW, your camera should have different Jpg picture styles. Usualy called Vivid or some even have dedicated landscape ones that should boost the colours a bit more.

Have a look at this video. When I click reset, the image goes back to how the camera took it. It looks flat, dull and lifeless.. A few slider tweaks and it completely changes the image.

http://youtu.be/ccpOz95z31I?hd=1

 

[Phil V]

I've no idea why photographers generally miss the photography in topics like this.

It starts with light, quantity, quality and direction. 90% of the time, the light in the UK isn't very good for vivid colours. So you need to learn to recognise when the 10% of good light is happening, and when the next best 10% is happening that'll allow you to make the best of 2nd best.

Then you can either set your camera to more vivid settings or shoot RAW and learn to work on your Images.

 

[TCR4x4]

I've no idea why photographers generally miss the photography in topics like this.

It starts with light, quantity, quality and direction. 90% of the time, the light in the UK isn't very good for vivid colours. So you need to learn to recognise when the 10% of good light is happening, and when the next best 10% is happening that'll allow you to make the best of 2nd best.

Then you can either set your camera to more vivid settings or shoot RAW and learn to work on your Images.

Sadly not many people can spend all day sat waiting for the right light, so we have to work with what there is.

In which cases Lightroom and PP in general are a godsend

 

[Phil V]

Sadly not many people can spend all day sat waiting for the right light, so we have to work with what there is.

In which cases Lightroom and PP in general are a godsend

I'd be impressed to see some examples of great photos taken in crap light and polished to greatness in PP.

I'm one of those odd individuals who believe that the effort put into capturing photos is repaid in results. And I could never be bothered to go out at 4 to shoot landscapes, that's why I don't consider myself a landscape shooter. But I have walked for miles on a rally stage looking for the right shot, and I hang about with gaggles of brides friends in order to capture bridal portraits. A lack of planning and preparation would give me lesser results that no amount of photoshop magic could make up.

 

[TCR4x4]

I'd be impressed to see some examples of great photos taken in crap light and polished to greatness in PP.

I'm one of those odd individuals who believe that the effort put into capturing photos is repaid in results. And I could never be bothered to go out at 4 to shoot landscapes, that's why I don't consider myself a landscape shooter. But I have walked for miles on a rally stage looking for the right shot, and I hang about with gaggles of brides friends in order to capture bridal portraits. A lack of planning and preparation would give me lesser results that no amount of photoshop magic could make up.

Well look at my 500px. All my photos have been taken when I can take them, not pre planned to catch a certain bit of light. I work full time, I can't plan when I can go out and shoot.
If you are saying all my images are crap, Because they were taken at times when the light wasn't its greatest, well that's your call.
Personally I think I've done a good job with what I was given.

 

[Phil V]

Well look at my 500px. All my photos have been taken when I can take them, not pre planned to catch a certain bit of light. I work full time, I can't plan when I can go out and shoot.
If you are saying all my images are crap, Because they were taken at times when the light wasn't its greatest, well that's your call.
Personally I think I've done a good job with what I was given.

I hate to sound like an old bloke but I wouldn't know how to find you on 500px but I'm happy to believe that your pictures aren't crap.
But what's the point of advice if it's not the best advice we can give. Photography is by nature a picture made by light, I can't advise people that the quality of light doesn't affect pictures, it's just wrong.

 

[TCR4x4]

No-one is doubting the quality of light doesnt affect things, but like you said, this country gets very little "good light", so unless you happen to be in the right place at the right time, chances are you be faced with whatever you have got.
If we all sat here waiting for that magic moment, it would be a very quiet photography forum.
Software like photoshop and Lightroom are made and very popular for a reason, for the same reason Lee colured filters are. If the light isnt there, you need to create it, or fake it.

 

[towershot]

No-one is doubting the quality of light doesnt affect things, but like you said, this country gets very little "good light", so unless you happen to be in the right place at the right time, chances are you be faced with whatever you have got.
If we all sat here waiting for that magic moment, it would be a very quiet photography forum.
Software like photoshop and Lightroom are made and very popular for a reason, for the same reason Lee colured filters are. If the light isnt there, you need to create it, or fake it.

Well said that man.
I spent years in film photography, but never managed to master the art of the darkroom.
since I moved to digital,and the adobe elements (darkroom) I am a man reborn.
OK,I'm not s--t hot at photography,but,and it's a big but (my missis told me)
I so so enjoy my photography .
auto contrast ,then play with colours as said.

 

[weybourne]

No-one is doubting the quality of light doesnt affect things, but like you said, this country gets very little "good light", so unless you happen to be in the right place at the right time, chances are you be faced with whatever you have got.
If we all sat here waiting for that magic moment, it would be a very quiet photography forum.
Software like photoshop and Lightroom are made and very popular for a reason, for the same reason Lee colured filters are. If the light isnt there, you need to create it, or fake it.

I agree with the above comment but I think that Phil's point that "it starts with light, quantity, quality and direction" and that you need to make best of 'not the best' light and then pp (in or out of camera) to work on your images is a very valid one. Up until Phil's post, the advice given was on how to rescue the image pp without addressing or offering understanding of the cause of poor colours at the point of capture and, imho, Phil's post drew attention to this and offered valuable insight.

 

[Phil V]

I agree with the above comment but I think that Phil's point that "it starts with light, quantity, quality and direction" and that you need to make best of 'not the best' light and then pp (in or out of camera) to work on your images is a very valid one. Up until Phil's post, the advice given was on how to rescue the image pp without addressing or offering understanding of the cause of poor colours at the point of capture and, imho, Phil's post drew attention to this and offered valuable insight.

Thanks Adrian

No-one is doubting the quality of light doesnt affect things, but like you said, this country gets very little "good light", so unless you happen to be in the right place at the right time, chances are you be faced with whatever you have got.
If we all sat here waiting for that magic moment, it would be a very quiet photography forum.
Software like photoshop and Lightroom are made and very popular for a reason, for the same reason Lee colured filters are. If the light isnt there, you need to create it, or fake it.

I'm afraid Adrian was right, you might say that no-one is saying the quality of light isn't important. But just have a look back up the thread

I hate to sound like an old record. I'm in no way against making the best of your images with the correct processing, but can anyone show me an 'awesome' image taken in rubbish light?

Because the truth about photography, like cooking, painting or music, is that what you get out is a result of what you put in. And if you give only 30 seconds thought to your subject and 1 second to getting the picture, then believe you can create something beautiful by spending 10 minutes in Photoshop - your priorities are the wrong way round. The truth is that a landscape shooter starts with planning locations and looking at weather forecasts. Someone needed to tell the OP how to capture strong colours in his landscape photography, because he asked the question.

 

[rsv_mark]

I've no idea why photographers generally miss the photography in topics like this.

It starts with light, quantity, quality and direction. 90% of the time, the light in the UK isn't very good for vivid colours. So you need to learn to recognise when the 10% of good light is happening, and when the next best 10% is happening that'll allow you to make the best of 2nd best.

Then you can either set your camera to more vivid settings or shoot RAW and learn to work on your Images.

So what would you call 'good light'? What is it, when do you get it, and how do I (as a novice ) recognise it when it's there.

Why raw? Is it because it's had minimal treatment within the camera so you have maximum flexibility in the pp process?

Gonna start looking at raw as I have elements v5 so I believe that can handle raw but it sounds like the consensus view is that if you start off with a great shot, well compose, exposed etc then you only have to make minor adjustments, and the 'worse' the base image, the harder you have to work at it in pp.

All advice welcome
M

 

[Phil V]

Here's the tricky bit - there's no such thing as 'good light or bad light' but some light is better for some subjects than others.

If you want vivid colours in landscapes (for instance) you want bright clear light, and then if you want definition in your pictures, the light should come from the side rather than the top. This is why landscape tutors talk about the magic hour, where closer to sunrise and sunset, there's different atmospheric degradation* and a nicer directional feel to the light. *Bright reds and gold in the sky and no UV 'haze' knocking out the colour definition out in the distance.

None of this is to say that magic hour is the only time to take great photo's, but you should start to see why people would think that. Other great landscape images will be driven by cloud formations (which can have dramatic effect on lighting) or other weather phenomena. Remember I'm no expert on landscapes - I'd consider my landscape work to be below average.

Have a look at the work of Joe Cornish (again, I'm no expert, there are probably better photographers in the genre). Learn to read lighting in images, it's probably the single thing that will improve your photography (whatever genre).

The only tip I can give is to look at the direction and definition of shadows. Large soft shadows from large soft light - small hard shadows from point light source. This is the lesson we teach portrait photographers; The bright sun with no cloud acts a a point source and gives harsh shadows - rubbish light for portraits. On an overcast day the cloud diffuses the sunlight, creating a massive softbox, which is what we try to copy in the portrait studio.

 

[simonkit]

I agree with the above comment but I think that Phil's point that "it starts with light, quantity, quality and direction" and that you need to make best of 'not the best' light and then pp (in or out of camera) to work on your images is a very valid one. Up until Phil's post, the advice given was on how to rescue the image pp without addressing or offering understanding of the cause of poor colours at the point of capture and, imho, Phil's post drew attention to this and offered valuable insight.

I'm with Phil on this one too,

For me the whole point of landscape photography is being able to capture nature at it's best and unfortunately this does often take quite a bit of effort and wasted trips - that's what also makes it that bit more rewarding when you actually get one of those "special" shots.

Obviously the above is just my own view of landscape photography so, back to the OP, it really depends what you want to achieve.

1. If it's the satisfaction of being there at the right time/right place and capturing a special shot as you saw it then Phil's point is pretty much spot one - it's all about the light which could be produced by a wonderful sunrise/sunset, a dramatic stormy sky, a misty winter morning - the list is endless. I don't really agree with the comment "we don't get the light in this country", we almost certainly do - the problem is that it's so difficult to predict.

2. If you don''t have the time, or perhaps inclination, to "chase the light" and it's making the most of the shots you have taken then evidently photoshop does help make them better, my own skills here are relatively basic though so I'll leave that to others.

Simon

 

[TCR4x4]

You are all completely missing my point and I cant be arsed trying to explain it any further..
Maybe I should go sit in a a field and wait for that 10 seconds of light to get an amazing photograph?

 

[AJQS]

You've all gone way off the point really!

Anyway, to get the pop you desire comes down t oa few things. Have you got an example because there's no hard and fast rule. However generally speaking, one or more of these thinsg can help:

Light: Everyone above has been arguing about it, but you can work with less than perfect light quite easily. There are 2 situations that should really be avoided like the plague though - the typical british overcast day where there is no definition or break in the cloud cover. Everything will appear very dull as a photo and you cannot make it look good no matter how good your photoshop (NB: It can work for some very, very specific shots but they are so specialised theres no point eworrying about them now). The other is cloudless blue sky, especially if it's a bit hazy. Why? because the light is so harsh it just bleaches everything into bland nothingness. Anything in between can work wonders.

Exposure: Generally following the cameras meter blindly will give a very bland landscape. Set it down 2-3 to 1 stop negative Exposure compensation, you should now find that colours appear a lot stronger.

Contrast. Higher contrast will make things seem to pop more. use with a pinch of salt as it will kill shadow and highlight detail at the same time.

Saturation: Best avoided unless it's a sunset, too much saturation just makes things look sickly.

Learning how to use Curves and a histogram will help you no end - I'll let you do your own research into them but the idea you need to keep in mind is to bring down the midtones, which gives them a lot of punch.

That'll be enough food for though for you now.