Photography "white out"

[Justin Smith]

I have a Panasonic TZ70 which I like, it's small enough to keep with me in my man bag and still has a pretty powerful zoom and wide angle capability.
However, it and my previous TZ60, tends to "white out" bright areas in some pictures. And I mean "white out" because even editing can't bring back the correct hues as it is, err, white !
I could expect this of the sky when taking a pic in low light conditions but it also "whites out" faces sometimes which is a bit frustrating.
Is there any setting, of the many available on the camera, to minimise it ?
I have tried turned down the exposure compensation but that doesn't really seem to work that well for this problem.
Is this normal for cameras (whereas the human eye doesn't suffer from this sort of thing) ?

 

[Mintchocs]

Insufficient dynamic range of the sensor plus its probably saving as JPEGS so you can’t improve the file post processing.

 

[Sangoma]

Yes, it is normal, the dynamic range of the eye is far greater than that of any digital camera.

Try using the in camera HDR setting.

I have both the TZ60 and TZ70 (rarely use the TZ70, it was a bit of a flop, the TZ60 is better) and I have never experienced anything as extreme as you talk about.

 

[Deleted member 95743]

I have a Panasonic TZ70 which I like, it's small enough to keep with me in my man bag and still has a pretty powerful zoom and wide angle capability.
However, it and my previous TZ60, tends to "white out" bright areas in some pictures. And I mean "white out" because even editing can't bring back the correct hues as it is, err, white !
I could expect this of the sky when taking a pic in low light conditions but it also "whites out" faces sometimes which is a bit frustrating.
Is there any setting, of the many available on the camera, to minimise it ?
I have tried turned down the exposure compensation but that doesn't really seem to work that well for this problem.
Is this normal for cameras (whereas the human eye doesn't suffer from this sort of thing) ?

It is very difficult to give meaningful advice without seeing a picture and knowing under what conditions the photograph was taken.

 

[ecoleman]

Are you using flash?

 

[john.margetts]

So is your camera set to P, A, S, M pr one of the fancy modes? It sounds like over-exposure but why that should be will depend on the exposure mode setting.

 

[Justin Smith]

So is your camera set to P, A, S, M pr one of the fancy modes? It sounds like over-exposure but why that should be will depend on the exposure mode setting.

It's not over exposure because the rest of the picture are OK.
I suspect it's just the dynamic range issue.

 

[Justin Smith]

Yes, it is normal, the dynamic range of the eye is far greater than that of any digital camera.

Try using the in camera HDR setting.

I have both the TZ60 and TZ70 (rarely use the TZ70, it was a bit of a flop, the TZ60 is better) and I have never experienced anything as extreme as you talk about.

The worst, most annoying, aspect is when taking pictures of my 9 year old son. He's quite fair skinned so, if taking a picture of him in certain light conditions his face is over exposed relative to the rest of the pic.
This is my second TZ70 and I had a TZ60 before, all were just as bad. In fact I have just checked and the TZ18 before even them was just the same.

 

[Sangoma]

It's not over exposure because the rest of the picture are OK.
I suspect it's just the dynamic range issue.

What would cause a face to do that?
Very odd, why not post an examplpe or two

 

[Sangoma]

The worst, most annoying, aspect is when taking pictures of my 9 year old son. He's quite fair skinned so, if taking a picture of him in certain light conditions his face is over exposed relative to the rest of the pic.
This is my second TZ70 and I had a TZ60 before, all were just as bad. In fact I have just checked and the TZ18 before even them was just the same.

I started with the TZ1 when it came out, and have never seen a face over expose like that, I currently have the TZ60 and TZ70. Also have has several FZ starting with the FZ20

Have you tried setting the metering to centre and exposing on the face?

 

[john.margetts]

It's not over exposure because the rest of the picture are OK.
I suspect it's just the dynamic range issue.

It is clearly overexposure. You do not expose a picture for the rest of the picture, you expose it for the subject. Exposure mode is relevant as is metering mode.

 

[woof woof]

The worst, most annoying, aspect is when taking pictures of my 9 year old son. He's quite fair skinned so, if taking a picture of him in certain light conditions his face is over exposed relative to the rest of the pic.
This is my second TZ70 and I had a TZ60 before, all were just as bad. In fact I have just checked and the TZ18 before even them was just the same.

I don't know if the cameras you're using have a spot meter but if they do it may be possible to meter off your sons face and thus reduce the chances of it blowing. This may cause other portions of the picture to blow but your son may be the main subject so you may not mind so much. It's worth reading the manual or going through the menus to see if this is possible.

 

[ancient_mariner]

We have a TZ70 or 90 kicking around here somewhere. I'd make sure you have turned off any of the modes/styles that boost contrast or saturation.

 

[Justin Smith]

I started with the TZ1 when it came out, and have never seen a face over expose like that, I currently have the TZ60 and TZ70. Also have has several FZ starting with the FZ20

Have you tried setting the metering to centre and exposing on the face?

The problem there is that almost all of the pictures are not just of my son, almost all are of other things but with him in it.
Those on here saying just adjust the exposure so my son's face (or whatever) is correct - and so doesn't "white out" - are surely correct, but then all the rest of the picture may well be under exposed.
Thus the suggestion that the dynamic range of the human eye is so much higher than any camera is the reality, and therefore there is no way to get all the picture (in one of great brightness variation) at the correct exposure is not possible with current technology ?

The attached pic is not the best I could find to illustrate the point, without having other people in it who might not want a pic of themselves in the internet, you know what some people are like.... I wanted be able to see the detail on the loco and the cars in the background and if I had lowered the exposure setting so my son's face would not "white out" that would not be the case.
The significant thing here is that when I was actually there my eyes could see my lad's face without over exposing ( ! ) but also see the cars in the background were not in dark or "under exposed".

 

[Justin Smith]

We have a TZ70 or 90 kicking around here somewhere. I'd make sure you have turned off any of the modes/styles that boost contrast or saturation switched on..

As far as I am aware I do not have any fancy modes in operation.

 

[Sangoma]

The problem there is that almost all of the pictures are not just of my son, almost all are of other things but with him in it.
Those on here saying just adjust the exposure so my son's face (or whatever) is correct - and so doesn't "white out" - are surely correct, but then all the rest of the picture may well be under exposed.
Thus the suggestion that the dynamic range of the human eye is so much higher than any camera is the reality, and therefore there is no way to get all the picture (in one of great brightness variation) at the correct exposure is not possible with current technology ?

Yes, that is the reality, but it would be very odd, but people are a little in the dark without seeing an example, it is very hard to understand how just one face is being so totally over exposed as you say.
We all have situations where lighting is difficult, but to the extent you describe it is hard to see how it is, so people are trying to help, as you asked.

Unless the situation is extremely unusual, which you haven't suggested, it just seems like DR is not the only issue.

Did you try bracketing the exposure, then combining the images?

 

[ancient_mariner]

The problem there is that almost all of the pictures are not just of my son, almost all are of other things but with him in it.
Those on here saying just adjust the exposure so my son's face (or whatever) is correct - and so doesn't "white out" - are surely correct, but then all the rest of the picture may well be under exposed.
Thus the suggestion that the dynamic range of the human eye is so much higher than any camera is the reality, and therefore there is no way to get all the picture (in one of great brightness variation) at the correct exposure is not possible with current technology ?

A TZ70 is fairly old-tech at 7 or 8 years now, and the tiny sensor - which wasn't the best even when new - isn't helping in the least.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS50 sensor review: Few pixels equals better dynamics?

With a 24-720mm equivalent zoom and built-in electronic finder housed in a pocket-friendly body, the Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS50 occupies what manufacturers call the “travel zoom” compact category. At first sight these models look promising, but the small body and large zoom range mean they house...

www.dxomark.com

Something you may need to do is to become pro-active in your approach to picture taking, looking for lighting conditions that favour the situation, rather than just snapping and then being disappointed afterwards. You've mentioned this has been a problem with multiple cameras, so you will need to take more control for better pictures.

 

[Justin Smith]

A TZ70 is fairly old-tech at 7 or 8 years now, and the tiny sensor - which wasn't the best even when new - isn't helping in the least.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS50 sensor review: Few pixels equals better dynamics?

With a 24-720mm equivalent zoom and built-in electronic finder housed in a pocket-friendly body, the Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS50 occupies what manufacturers call the “travel zoom” compact category. At first sight these models look promising, but the small body and large zoom range mean they house...

www.dxomark.com

So when I next change my camera, probably about two years away when my current camera's extended warranty runs out (I nearly always claim, sometimes multiple times, my cameras get some right hammer.....) what would you suggest ? There is one caveat, it must be capable of replaying pics and videos shot on my Panasonic cameras. Will a non Panasonic camera do that ?

 

[ancient_mariner]

Just had a quick look through our historical catalogue - seems we had a TZ10!

I have an example of the *type* of problem I think you're describing, shot by my wife using the TZ10:


Camera in auto mode, the pile of sulphur has been completely blown out.

The same scene shot with an entry level Sony A58 DSLR, using spot metering to control exposure:


The same effect as using spot metering could have been had using exposure compensation, dropping a couple of stops.

So when I next change my camera, probably about two years away when my current camera's extended warranty runs out (I nearly always claim, sometimes multiple times, my cameras get some right hammer.....) what would you suggest ? There is one caveat, it must be capable of replaying pics and videos shot on my Panasonic cameras. Will a non Panasonic camera do that ?

TBH I know nothing about Panasonics *in detail* but would suggest looking at a micro four thirdsPanasonic camera with larger sensor (body only a little bigger than your present compacts) that will offer a greater dynamic range and more control over the exposure process.

 

[Sangoma]

So when I next change my camera, probably about two years away when my current camera's extended warranty runs out (I nearly always claim, sometimes multiple times, my cameras get some right hammer.....) what would you suggest ? There is one caveat, it must be capable of replaying pics and videos shot on my Panasonic cameras. Will a non Panasonic camera do that ?

Page 148 of the manual explains the metering modes.

As for your next camera, from what you are describing, you won't find one

Why would you want to replay pictures on your camera? A computer or even a phone would be better

 

[Sangoma]

Just had a quick look through our historical catalogue - seems we had a TZ10!

I have an example of the *type* of problem I think you're describing, shot by my wife using the TZ10:
View attachment 367337

Camera in auto mode, the pile of sulphur has been completely blown out.

The same scene shot with an entry level Sony A58 DSLR, using spot metering to control exposure:
View attachment 367336

The same effect as using spot metering could have been had using exposure compensation, dropping a couple of stops.



TBH I know nothing about Panasonics *in detail* but would suggest looking at a micro four thirdsPanasonic camera with larger sensor (body only a little bigger than your present compacts) that will offer a greater dynamic range and more control over the exposure process.

That is an excellent example, and the two could easily have been combined (taken on the same camera) to make the whole scene nicely exposed.

I do find it hard though to see under what circumstances a face, which has more features and is far less reflective that the sulphur, can be completely blown out to white. It would need to be near to a flash or spotlight and everything else well behind for such an extreme effect.

The M43 cameras do have a better DR, but not to that extent.

 

[Sangoma]

There are a couple of things worth checking.

In the REC menu, page 1, SENSITIVITY set at auto.
page 3, METERING MODE set it to the middle of the three options

In the SETUP menu, page 7, RESET (NOT the No Reset) this will reset any settings to default, just in case something has been accidentally changed.

If you do a reset, go back and check the first two.

 

[Justin Smith]

TBH I know nothing about Panasonics *in detail* but would suggest looking at a micro four thirdsPanasonic camera with larger sensor (body only a little bigger than your present compacts) that will offer a greater dynamic range and more control over the exposure process.

How big is that though ? I keep my camera with me at all times in my man bag or even in a pocket, therefore it cannot be any bigger than the TZ70 !

 

[Justin Smith]

As for your next camera, from what you are describing, you won't find one

From what has been said I think you are right !

 

[Justin Smith]

There are a couple of things worth checking.

In the REC menu, page 1, SENSITIVITY set at auto.
page 3, METERING MODE set it to the middle of the three options

In the SETUP menu, page 7, RESET (NOT the No Reset) this will reset any settings to default, just in case something has been accidentally changed.

If you do a reset, go back and check the first two.

Thanks I will check these out.

 

[Justin Smith]

Why would you want to replay pictures on your camera? A computer or even a phone would be better

Quite often I want to look at my previous pics or show others or whatever.
I do not have a smart phone (and I will resist it as long as possible), and I have not got my laptop with me as I am out and about !

 

[woof woof]

If that picture with your son is typical I think this is just an exposure problem as I assume the light is relatively low and the camera has exposed for that level of light.

You need to either expose for his face or dial in a touch of negative exposure compensation, if this is possible with that camera.

 

[Sangoma]

The problem there is that almost all of the pictures are not just of my son, almost all are of other things but with him in it.
Those on here saying just adjust the exposure so my son's face (or whatever) is correct - and so doesn't "white out" - are surely correct, but then all the rest of the picture may well be under exposed.
Thus the suggestion that the dynamic range of the human eye is so much higher than any camera is the reality, and therefore there is no way to get all the picture (in one of great brightness variation) at the correct exposure is not possible with current technology ?

The attached pic is not the best I could find to illustrate the point, without having other people in it who might not want a pic of themselves in the internet, you know what some people are like.... I wanted be able to see the detail on the loco and the cars in the background and if I had lowered the exposure setting so my son's face would not "white out" that would not be the case.
The significant thing here is that when I was actually there my eyes could see my lad's face without over exposing ( ! ) but also see the cars in the background were not in dark or "under exposed".

Just saw the added picture now.

I don't think that is a DR problem, I wouldn't call his face "whited out" there is still good detail there.

I don't think any camera is going to help there, as woof woof said, it is just an exposure issue, and as he says, I think in that photo you could have dialed in a bit of negative correction, and there would have been a better balance.

Not only has your eye got a better dynamic range, it is also very good at correcting what you see to what you want to see, which on photos, you need to do with software

 

[Deleted member 95743]

The problem there is that almost all of the pictures are not just of my son, almost all are of other things but with him in it.
Those on here saying just adjust the exposure so my son's face (or whatever) is correct - and so doesn't "white out" - are surely correct, but then all the rest of the picture may well be under exposed.
Thus the suggestion that the dynamic range of the human eye is so much higher than any camera is the reality, and therefore there is no way to get all the picture (in one of great brightness variation) at the correct exposure is not possible with current technology ?

The attached pic is not the best I could find to illustrate the point, without having other people in it who might not want a pic of themselves in the internet, you know what some people are like.... I wanted be able to see the detail on the loco and the cars in the background and if I had lowered the exposure setting so my son's face would not "white out" that would not be the case.
The significant thing here is that when I was actually there my eyes could see my lad's face without over exposing ( ! ) but also see the cars in the background were not in dark or "under exposed".

The whole image is slightly overexposed, but the flesh tones are still there in the kids face. With a little bit of judicial editing they are very easily recoverable.

 

[Justin Smith]

The whole image is slightly overexposed, but the flesh tones are still there in the kids face. With a little bit of judicial editing they are very easily recoverable.

You are right that pic is not the best example, dropping the highlights has largely corrected it whilst just lowering overall brightness made the background detail too dark. However I have the same sort of problem, but worse, in other pics, most of which include other people so I cannot put on here.
The attached pic shows it better. The background detail is not actually important here, but let's just imagine there was some background stuff I didn't want to lose.
His face is too whited out to get back, even by just dropping the high lights.

 

[Justin Smith]

Not only has your eye got a better dynamic range, it is also very good at correcting what you see to what you want to see, which on photos, you need to do with software

Hah hah, very good point !

 

[ancient_mariner]

You are right that pic is not the best example, dropping the highlights has largely corrected it whilst just lowering overall brightness made the background detail too dark. However I have the same sort of problem, but worse, in other pics, most of which include other people so I cannot put on here.
The attached pic shows it better. The background detail is not actually important here, but let's just imagine there was some background stuff I didn't want to lose.
His face is too whited out to get back, even by just dropping the high lights.

This is a classic situation where the black background has fooled the cameras' built in meter to over-expose the subject. Metering off the subject would have saved the image, as would dropping exposure by 1 to 2 stops.

 

[Sangoma]

You are right that pic is not the best example, dropping the highlights has largely corrected it whilst just lowering overall brightness made the background detail too dark. However I have the same sort of problem, but worse, in other pics, most of which include other people so I cannot put on here.
The attached pic shows it better. The background detail is not actually important here, but let's just imagine there was some background stuff I didn't want to lose.
His face is too whited out to get back, even by just dropping the high lights.

I really don't think there is anything amiss with the camera. His face is in bright light from the window.
I think you are going to have to lose the background, set the camera metering in the centre weighted setting ( the middle one) and if that does not do enough, set it on spot (the bottom one) and expose for his face, and where the cars were, take two photos, one of him, and one for the surroundings.

There are ways to make it better, but they are not just a case of "pointing and shooting"

I don't think any camera with one shot would get whet you want, though would welcome being shown to be wrong

 

[woof woof]

I think the simplest way around this is to meter off the boys face with either metering taken from a moved focus point or by locking the exposure taken off his face and recomposing and either live with darker shadows or lift them post capture.

I did a similar thing today photographing white flowers in direct sunlight in more shadowed coldframe.

 

[Deleted member 95743]

You are right that pic is not the best example, dropping the highlights has largely corrected it whilst just lowering overall brightness made the background detail too dark. However I have the same sort of problem, but worse, in other pics, most of which include other people so I cannot put on here.
The attached pic shows it better. The background detail is not actually important here, but let's just imagine there was some background stuff I didn't want to lose.
His face is too whited out to get back, even by just dropping the high lights.

I'm sorry, but this thread is a classic example of a bad workman blaming his tools. There is absolutely nothing wrong with your camera.

 

[woof woof]

I'm sorry, but this thread is a classic example of a bad workman blaming his tools. There is absolutely nothing wrong with your camera.

People sometimes don't have in depth knowledge and may need help and advice and that is perhaps better delivered without the bluntness.

 

[Justin Smith]

I'm sorry, but this thread is a classic example of a bad workman blaming his tools. There is absolutely nothing wrong with your camera.

That's a bit harsh, I had already concluded the camera cannot be faulty because the last three of my cameras did the same thing. What you could have said is the camera (or possibly no camera) has the dynamic range of the human eye and therefore there is no "solution". I either lose the dark back ground detail by darkening the exposure or white out the highlights by brightening it.

Incidentally that phrase a bad workmen blames his tools has more than one meaning, one is a bad workmen has crap tools.
But, in actual fact I have often thought it's misleading anyway because if anyone tries to do a job with the wrong tool they will not do as good a job as someone with the right tool and, furthermore, it's a skill to know when you have the wrong tool (or a faulty tool).

 

[Justin Smith]

I think the simplest way around this is to meter off the boys face with either metering taken from a moved focus point or by locking the exposure taken off his face and recomposing and either live with darker shadows or lift them post capture.

I did a similar thing today photographing white flowers in direct sunlight in more shadowed coldframe.

Useful info, though that is hard to do on an action shot ! Also, it's hard to see when a highlight is being whited out on a compact camera's small display !

 

[ancient_mariner]

Useful info, though that is hard to do on an action shot ! Also, it's hard to see when a highlight is being whited out on a compact camera's small display !

it's a skill to know when you have the wrong tool (or a faulty tool).

Another way you could look at this is that you have a tool which can't do what you want - a compact camera with small dynamic range and limited, awkward controls, and your choices have excluded something better.. Plus it "sounds like" you yourself don't have the knowledge to compensate for the camera.

Not being harsh, but you need to see there's a lot of compromises at work.

Where can you go from here?

If you must have a tiny form factor camera like this one then you need to learn to use the exposure controls: spot metering, perhaps manual mode or at least exposure lock. This will help you manage exposure for the important bits of the image. You can learn to process more effectively, and to control noise in shadows etc. You've talked of reducing highlights, so that's a so can obviously manage a bit.

If you can cope with something a little larger with reduced zoom range then look at some of the Fuji and Sony larger sensor compacts.

If dynamic range is still what you need most then buy a Sony A7III and enjoy almost 15 stops of range, that WILL give amazing shadow recovery. But it's not cheap or quite as small as the TZ70.

 

[Justin Smith]

Another way you could look at this is that you have a tool which can't do what you want - a compact camera with small dynamic range and limited, awkward controls, and your choices have excluded something better.. Plus it "sounds like" you yourself don't have the knowledge to compensate for the camera.

Not being harsh, but you need to see there's a lot of compromises at work.

Where can you go from here?

If you must have a tiny form factor camera like this one then you need to learn to use the exposure controls: spot metering, perhaps manual mode or at least exposure lock. This will help you manage exposure for the important bits of the image. You can learn to process more effectively, and to control noise in shadows etc. You've talked of reducing highlights, so that's a so can obviously manage a bit.

If you can cope with something a little larger with reduced zoom range then look at some of the Fuji and Sony larger sensor compacts.

If dynamic range is still what you need most then buy a Sony A7III and enjoy almost 15 stops of range, that WILL give amazing shadow recovery. But it's not cheap or quite as small as the TZ70.

Is there any chance the next model of Panasonic camera will be better in this respect or is it that with a sensor and lens that small it cannot really get much better ? ?