1. justin44

    justin44

    Messages:
    58
    Name:
    Justin
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    ok so I understand about depth of field and use of aperture for that but last night was prom and I tried to get some nice pictures of my son but it was bright hard sunlight so when I look now the colours aren’t that flattering.

    Am I doing something wrong, could I be using aperture as a way of helping or should I be looking at just stopping down and under exposing (if that’s the correct term?)

    Any help please.

    Justin
     
  2. ecoleman

    ecoleman

    Messages:
    4,457
    Name:
    Elliott
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Aperture controls the depth of field and shouldn't affect colour.

    Probably best to post a couple of images so people can see what your are talking about.

    What was your aperture, shutter speed and ISO?
     
    rob-nikon likes this.
  3. andy1868

    andy1868

    Messages:
    1,254
    Name:
    Andy
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Hard sunlight is hard sunlight I’m afraid, regardless of camera settings. As above, post a couple so we can see, if it is colour that’s off it may be a white balance issue that can be sorted after the photograph has been taken :)
     
  4. KIPAX

    KIPAX Waldorf

    Messages:
    19,820
    Name:
    KIPAX
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    or before the picture is taken eh ? :)
     
    omens, Ploddles, Phil V and 1 other person like this.
  5. andy1868

    andy1868

    Messages:
    1,254
    Name:
    Andy
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Of course, as is advised, I was meaning more of we could help out with the photographs that have already been taken (y)
     
    KIPAX likes this.
  6. KIPAX

    KIPAX Waldorf

    Messages:
    19,820
    Name:
    KIPAX
    Edit My Images:
    Yes

    Sorry.. just a bugbear of mine... see so many people advising shoot in raw and fix WB later....which is the same as.. take a bad picture on purpose and fix on a computer ... i thought you where heading that way.. i was too quick on the buzzer :)
     
  7. andy1868

    andy1868

    Messages:
    1,254
    Name:
    Andy
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I wholeheartedly agree :) Especially when it’s a simple one! No apology required or necessary :)
     
  8. vetonbike

    vetonbike

    Messages:
    873
    Name:
    Melvyn
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I always find for relativity close subjects. A little bit of fill in flash helps on sunny days.
     
  9. Kodiak Qc

    Kodiak Qc Suspended / Banned

    Messages:
    20,425
    Name:
    French Canadian living in Europe since 1989!
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    With the info you give, I guess WB settings may need tweaking if
    you shot JPGs. JPGs are pictures so WB is indeed very critical.
    True.
    Correct.
    In RAW yes but in JPG in a waaaaay lesser measure.
    1, WB being a less critical tweak when shooting RAW because there
    is no picture yet… just recorded data. The great advantage in setting
    WB in camera when shooting RAW is that it is less work in PP.

    2, When JPGs are shot, yes, pictures are taken and WB is very
    consequential… because it is a picture.
     
    Tom Green and Derek897 like this.
  10. shapeshifter

    shapeshifter

    Messages:
    1,136
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Post a photo so we can see. That's the only way anyone can give proper advice. (y)
     
  11. PhilH04

    PhilH04

    Messages:
    645
    Name:
    Phil
    Edit My Images:
    No
    As many have said, it is only possible to offer any form of advice if we can see what your problem is
    Thing is you are not fixing White Balance later since a raw file is White Balance agnostic.
     
    Bebop, jakeblu and Phil V like this.
  12. DG Phototraining

    DG Phototraining Woof

    Messages:
    4,337
    Name:
    Dave
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I'm taking KIPAX's use of "fix" to mean 'set' or 'choose' not necessarily meaning to 'correct' :D

    Dave
     
  13. PhilH04

    PhilH04

    Messages:
    645
    Name:
    Phil
    Edit My Images:
    No
    If you take the full statement...
    I do read it differently...
     
  14. KIPAX

    KIPAX Waldorf

    Messages:
    19,820
    Name:
    KIPAX
    Edit My Images:
    Yes

    OK here goes.. i see things in really simplistic terms...

    A) If you take a picture and do everyhting you can to take a good picture.. thats the correct way

    B) to purposely take a picture knowing its not going to look good but its OK you can fix later in software is the wrong way


    thats my simplistic view on shooting raw and setting WB later.. i don't have anythign against RAW unless its being used as a crutch..
     
    omens and Nod like this.
  15. PhilH04

    PhilH04

    Messages:
    645
    Name:
    Phil
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Absolutely agree....
    But as I said raw is WB agnostic, i.e it does not have a WB value baked in, so you are not correcting or fixing anything... the setting on the camera is simply referenced in the file and that is sometimes used by the chosen translation software to present its own version and not all software is equal in its interpretation here.

    When converting the file the option to select a suitable WB is only the same as what the cameras internal software is doing.

    Choosing/selecting/dialling in your desired WB is a part of the conversion process even if you have been lucky enough to get it all right in camera and as such should not be considered to be a 'fix' after the image is taken....
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2018
    jerry12953 likes this.
  16. Kodiak Qc

    Kodiak Qc Suspended / Banned

    Messages:
    20,425
    Name:
    French Canadian living in Europe since 1989!
    Edit My Images:
    Yes

    Right… nor does it have a colour space!
     
    PhilH04 likes this.
  17. Ploddles

    Ploddles

    Messages:
    2,697
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    The OP has been back on line today but has not responded in any way.

    Why do people ask for help/advice and then just ignore everyone, not even a simple 'thank you'?
     
    Graham W likes this.
  18. Kodiak Qc

    Kodiak Qc Suspended / Banned

    Messages:
    20,425
    Name:
    French Canadian living in Europe since 1989!
    Edit My Images:
    Yes

    Life is not turning around the forum… maybe the OP is con-
    sidering seriously the answers and will come up with results
    that will say the question / responses were not in vain? :cool:
     
  19. Ploddles

    Ploddles

    Messages:
    2,697
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Could be, but just a 'thanks' never did any harm.
     
  20. Kodiak Qc

    Kodiak Qc Suspended / Banned

    Messages:
    20,425
    Name:
    French Canadian living in Europe since 1989!
    Edit My Images:
    Yes

    Yes, you could have a thanks now or, if you are patient,
    see him back with a big smile on his face… I'll wait! :)
     
  21. jerry12953

    jerry12953

    Messages:
    8,338
    Name:
    Jeremy Moore
    Edit My Images:
    No

    Possibly because s/he asks an innocent question and is confronted by a whole range of answers which seem to contradict each other and sometimes cause offence among those responding?
     
    sphexx likes this.
  22. PhilH04

    PhilH04

    Messages:
    645
    Name:
    Phil
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I am probably guilty there in trying to correct a statement that someone innocently posted....

    However no one can actually give any positive advice till we see what the problem really is... So, if the OP is reading this, please post an example.
     
    sphexx and jerry12953 like this.
  23. Kodiak Qc

    Kodiak Qc Suspended / Banned

    Messages:
    20,425
    Name:
    French Canadian living in Europe since 1989!
    Edit My Images:
    Yes

    Mea culpa too!
     
    sphexx likes this.
  24. justin44

    justin44

    Messages:
    58
    Name:
    Justin
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Sorry gentlemen, I’ve been away from my computer, thank you All for your replies what I will do when I get a chance is upload a picture then maybe it will make a bit more sense. Thanks for taking the time to offer thoughts, i’ll Get a picture up this week.
     
    Ploddles, sphexx and woof woof like this.
  25. IainDunbar

    IainDunbar

    Messages:
    16
    Name:
    Iain
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    The only reason the aperture would have an effect if the photo was over exposed and the skies etc were blown out if that's what you mean? A narrower aperture (lower number) would bring the exposure down and darken the image, albeit not only the over exposed areas but the correctly exposed areas too. May be worth checking your other settings, to see if your ISO is low enough or your shutter speed is fast enough.

    If the image isn't over exposed it's more likely to be a wb issue which is easily rectified if you've shot in RAW.

    A look at the image would help loads :)
     
  26. GTG

    GTG Suspended / Banned

    Messages:
    1,795
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Try a polarising filter next time it is very sunny
     
  27. sirch

    sirch Official Forum Numpty 2015

    Messages:
    6,776
    Name:
    Chris
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Would that make much difference for portraits?
     
  28. GTG

    GTG Suspended / Banned

    Messages:
    1,795
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Not all portraits and light conditions are the same so I cant answer that with certainty but I would imagine it is worth a try if sunny conditions are proving to be problematic.
     
  29. PhilH04

    PhilH04

    Messages:
    645
    Name:
    Phil
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Apart from helping the saturation of some colours how is a polariser going to help? Genuine question...
     
  30. GTG

    GTG Suspended / Banned

    Messages:
    1,795
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Is this some kind of joke ?
     
  31. PhilH04

    PhilH04

    Messages:
    645
    Name:
    Phil
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Of course it isn't, it is a genuine question... a polariser will help with the saturation of colours such as the greens in foliage etc, I was curious as to what other benefits there are...
     
  32. john.margetts

    john.margetts

    Messages:
    1,800
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Polarisers are dark and so cut out some of the light - so long as the camera's exposure system does not compensate for it.
     
  33. PhilH04

    PhilH04

    Messages:
    645
    Name:
    Phil
    Edit My Images:
    No
    So use a 2 stop ND, I am just wondering what you will gain from using a polariser under the conditions described, if there is a benefit I am not aware of, I am quite happy to take that on board.
     
  34. john.margetts

    john.margetts

    Messages:
    1,800
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    One gain in using a polarising filter is that you do not have to buy a ND filter. Of course, if you have a ND filter and no polariser, that is not a gain.
     
  35. Box Brownie

    Box Brownie

    Messages:
    6,011
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Though isn't an ND filter more predictable (?) in usage........whereas a polariser you will need to experiment with the extinction point positioning to judge the level of the effect???
     
  36. DG Phototraining

    DG Phototraining Woof

    Messages:
    4,337
    Name:
    Dave
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    And this is a bugbear of mine cos that's nothing like what it means to shoot raw and sort WB later - but don't let facts spoil your constant ranting about this point ;)

    Dave
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice