Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Help with this picture

profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,328
Hey guys, last year I took this picture, and I just wanted to know how I can get the snow to actually look like snow, not just a white sheet.
Click for larger image
 I think if I under exposed it a bit the snow would look better, but then I would have other problems.  So what should I do next time to not have this problem?
Oct 24 2010 10:21PM
0 0
profile picture
WillStart
Posts: 3955 - Karma: 3,192
ND filter can help. will darken the overall image but doesn't change the colors
Oct 24 2010 10:27PM
0 0
profile picture
wynnyk
Posts: 1638 - Karma: 555
haha that snow looks like it was coloured white in MS paint, but maybe a UV filter would help? and that rail is lots of fun haha.
Oct 24 2010 10:43PM
0 0
profile picture
Sklar
Posts: 8864 - Karma: 31,612
uv doesn't do much except for protect the lens
ND or polarizer would help
Oct 24 2010 10:47PM
0 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,328
Yeah I know haha.  This was shot on my 10.5 which doesn't take filters.
Oct 24 2010 10:48PM
0 0
profile picture
Sklar
Posts: 8864 - Karma: 31,612
that there is a dilemma
Oct 24 2010 10:52PM
0 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,328
Thanks
Oct 24 2010 11:12PM
0 0
profile picture
FreeBallin
Posts: 1845 - Karma: 17
Shoot in raw, correct white balance in post

Same goes for ice hockey....boards /ice do the same thing
Oct 26 2010 10:17AM
0 0
profile picture
thisandthatfilms
Posts: 7714 - Karma: 526
yeah a ND filter is like sunglasses for your lens
Oct 26 2010 11:29AM
0 0
profile picture
icantskiiFILM
Posts: 2113 - Karma: 140
yeah this. a polarizer would prob work just as well but without reducing the amount of light allowing for higher shutter speeds because it will tone down the highs like crazy so the snow will pop a little more
Oct 26 2010 11:47AM
0 0
profile picture
.jr
Posts: 5313 - Karma: 356
If you shoot auto, set your camera to underexpose around a stop and half. If not, still shoot to underexpose, I think that shot could get away with it. But since you can't use filters, either switch lenses, or shoot at different times of the day/different angles. Its not optimal, but if you shoot into the sun, you will likely have some shadow of the rail or skier to give some idea of foreground. I would just say its best to switch lenses or shoot when the sun is lower in the sky.
Oct 26 2010 12:08PM
0 0
profile picture
action_shot
Posts: 1646 - Karma: 97
To all of you suggesting an ND filter, that will make everything dark. 

To the OP, do you want to have the skier and snow properly exposed?  If so then you will have to use on camera or strobes to light the skier and underexpose the background.

ND filters are primarily for getting shallower depth of field in bright light or when using strobes that you can't power down anymore.  Another popular use for them is to get longer shutter speeds.  Unless his camera was maxed out shutter speed, aperture and lowest iso possible, an nd filter wouldn't do much for him.
Oct 26 2010 2:38PM
0 0
profile picture
Jordan
Posts: 4079 - Karma: 2,122
You can get a graduated ND filter... that way the snow will be a stop or two darker depending on what ND filter you have. You can also stack them if you're really maxed out - but I can usually shoot 1/2000 at f/8 without a filter or such, just depends on the lightttttt
Oct 26 2010 3:11PM
0 0
profile picture
action_shot
Posts: 1646 - Karma: 97
Graduated filters are an option but when the subject isn't a landscape it can look awkward with certain parts being darker than others.
Oct 26 2010 3:13PM
0 0
profile picture
WillStart
Posts: 3955 - Karma: 3,192
an ND filter would darken the overall image so as to bring out detail in the snow without altering the colors of the image. he could then bring out the colors of the skier and the sky in post. however, you are right that using a strobe would be the best way to fix that problem.

also, to the person saying to white balance, this image looks pretty white balanced to me. the white is a true white. the problem isn't white balance, it's overexposure
Oct 26 2010 3:16PM
0 0
profile picture
BlackcountryBill
Posts: 955 - Karma: 576
Underexpose it with the ISO as low as possible so you get a some room to brighten up the subject in post. That's what I do. A grad filter there would look odd as only half the snow would be a little darker.
Oct 26 2010 3:28PM
0 0
profile picture
Aenigma
Posts: 11256 - Karma: 424
Underexposing would do the same thing. All an ND filter does is block light, it doesn't do anything to change the tonal range unless you're using a graduated ND. Digital doesn't give you a whole lot of latitude in post if you care very much about image quality.

However, the tonal range in a situation like that is so broad that if you expose for the snow properly, everything else is going to be horrendously noisy if you lighten it. So yeah, strobes or waiting for different light are really the only options.
Oct 26 2010 3:29PM
0 0
profile picture
.jr
Posts: 5313 - Karma: 356
I think you are overestimating what an ND filter can do. An ND filter will darken the entire image, causing the camera to compensate shutter speed or fstop, but it will give you the same image. An ND filter isn't selective, it wont darken just the highlights, it darkens the entire image. An ND filter wont do anything to help this shot.

A weak graduated filter might be one option, but it might make the image look awkard, and is far from an end all fix. But you guys do realize that he is using the 10.5 which has no filter ring right? He cant use filters on this lens.
Oct 26 2010 3:32PM
0 0
profile picture
WillStart
Posts: 3955 - Karma: 3,192
yea but if he had his aperture wide open, ISO as low as possible, and shutter speed maxed out, an ND filter would help a little. I often shoot on sunny days with an open aperture and I'm forced to use an ND filter; that's not even on snow.

It wouldn't hurt to darken the skier a little bit anyways, it would give the pants a more rich color. So if the whole image was darkened a little to bring out some detail in the snow and maybe darken the skier a little too, that wouldn't be the worst thing. If he's not going to be using a strobe, he is going to have to probably accept some noise in his image when he fixes it in post.

i did forget about the 10.5 thing though, good catch. so all of this is kind of irrelevant anyways
Oct 26 2010 3:41PM
0 0
profile picture
WillStart
Posts: 3955 - Karma: 3,192
i do know what an ND filter does too, I've been using them for years, albeit for video. I know that they darken everything, but they're really handy on super sunny days when the snow is completely blown out. I usually have to adjust mids and blacks later, but I'm willing to trade blown out snow for some noise in the image
Oct 26 2010 3:44PM
0 0
profile picture
BlackcountryBill
Posts: 955 - Karma: 576
There's no real interest in DOF control here, stopping thp appeture would be better here than a filter. Why would you want to shoot wide open for this shot? I'd imagine ISO 100 1/1500th and f16 ISH is what is needed here.
Oct 26 2010 4:12PM
0 0
profile picture
FreeBallin
Posts: 1845 - Karma: 17
so did we get him an answer yet since the filter is going to work?

I am still with shoot raw, post process white balance, layer work in PS. Is this not normal for blown out whites(snow/ice rink for example)?
Oct 26 2010 4:30PM
0 0
profile picture
.jr
Posts: 5313 - Karma: 356
Exif data says f8@ 1/250th @ ISO 100, close.. 2 stops off.

OP, you need to shoot at a faster shutter speed, theres slight motion blur, and it seems misfocused. But that's besides the point.
Oct 26 2010 4:33PM
0 0
profile picture
skinnylove
Posts: 6807 - Karma: 167
HA grouse.
Oct 26 2010 5:30PM
0 0
profile picture
action_shot
Posts: 1646 - Karma: 97
Use strobes, as I said before.
Oct 26 2010 5:37PM
0 0
profile picture
action_shot
Posts: 1646 - Karma: 97
I shot this using a 1200 watt balcar aq pack.

Click for larger image

That's what it would look like with strobes.
Oct 26 2010 5:40PM
0 0
profile picture
.jr
Posts: 5313 - Karma: 356
Thats a bit ambitious of you to say ha, shooting with a strobe in shadow is different than shooting near high noon with the sun to your back.
Oct 26 2010 5:44PM
0 0
profile picture
action_shot
Posts: 1646 - Karma: 97
I was in broad daylight.
Oct 26 2010 5:50PM
0 0
profile picture
WillStart
Posts: 3955 - Karma: 3,192
stopping down would be the same as a filter
Oct 26 2010 6:00PM
0 0
profile picture
Aenigma
Posts: 11256 - Karma: 424
The white balance is fine on that photo, I don't see why you would need to work on it?

Layer work also won't do anything because the whites are blown out. There is no information to recover, so all you could really do is turn the white slate into an off-white slate.
Oct 26 2010 6:00PM
0 0
profile picture
FreeBallin
Posts: 1845 - Karma: 17
I was answering his question "What to do next time"wasnt talking about just that photo....sorry!

Strobe is correct as well..just alot to deal with on the hill!

Oct 26 2010 6:14PM
0 0
profile picture
WillStart
Posts: 3955 - Karma: 3,192
but he asked what to do next time so he won't have that problem. white balancing won't prevent his problem since white balance was never a part of his problem in the first place
Oct 26 2010 6:23PM
0 0
profile picture
BlackcountryBill
Posts: 955 - Karma: 576
Exactly, rendering a filter useless in this scenario.
Oct 26 2010 6:44PM
0 0
profile picture
WillStart
Posts: 3955 - Karma: 3,192
yea but you said stopping down is better. my point was that they'll both do the same thing; one isn't better than the other
Oct 26 2010 6:46PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)