What You Should Know … when Photographing Snow
Ever notice that quite often, in photographs that include large areas of snow … how gray or blue the snow appears, this despite how white and bright our common sense and experience knows to be otherwise?
• The WHY
Camera LIGHT METERS are CALIBRATED to ADJUST EXPOSURE FACTORS (Shutter Speed, Aperture and ISO-light sensitivity Settings) to "read" what's in front of the lens, based on a so-called NEUTRAL LIGHT VALUE or "18% Gray."
In photography, painting, and other visual arts, middle gray is a tone that is perceptually about halfway between black and white on a lightness scale ; in photography, it is typically defined as 18 % reflectance in visible light. Therefore, the camera light meter assumes a 18 % gray level.
When a camera's light meter evaluates the overall scene in front of the lens, as either too light or too dark as compared to 18% … it will, based on your settings (or your PROGRAMMED MODE SETTINGS) adjust to shoot a scene to photograph as "18% gray."
Unless a scene is OVERLY BRIGHT or EXCESSIVELY DARK, or of HIGH CONTRAST, most of the time, the 18% gray will yield "acceptably exposed" pictures. That's why, unless the photographer does something in advance of taking a shot of, i.e. snow, there's a good chance the snow in the shot will be gray (or blue … a subject for another discussion).
Before I continue with • The WHAT TO DO ABOUT GRAY SNOW PICTURES … l want to make sure anyone is interested, and/or, answer possible questions, so, let me know.
A Restored Vintage Photo
© A. Mac/A.G.
Tags
Who is online
51 visitors
Let it snow!
Took huge amounts of photos when I was in Antarctica. I found using filters on the lens made for much better looking photos of the snow and ice. I think I used a rose colored filter primarily.
Ed, I am going to assume those photos were taken with a 35mm film camera?
Do you have any in digitized form?
Yes they were. Cannon T 50 with Vivitar telephoto. Unfortunately, all my pictures were in slide format. Have not figured out how to properly digitize them onto the internet.
I have no idea how to do that either.
Maybe some of the folks here would?
Glad to see you here; do you have access to a film scanner that can scan 35mm slides?
If not, let me know .. or, let me know either way; I may be able to help you out.
No I don't. I have some pretty incredible pictures that I really wish o.o could share. Anything you could do would be greatly appreciated.
Let's tlk about it tomorrow; tell me about the slides … 35mm? Kodachrome? Ektachrome? Color? Condition.
I do have the expertise to scan and create digital files from 35mm slides.
If there are still any photo-labs in your area, and maybe professional photographers may have the facility, they might have the necessary appliance that would transfer slides onto a flash drive (memory stick) - since A.Mac has that ability there must be such an item available.
At the early stages of digital photography, there were businesses generically referred to as "service bureaus" that did printing, scanning, film processing, slide duplicating and other related jobs. These many years later into digital photography and art, "camera shops" that once sold (duh!) cameras, lenses, accessories … sold, processed and made prints from film … had to transform themselves to accommodate all things digital.
In the mid-nineties, if someone wanted to create a digital image file (jpeg, TIFF, etc.) from a 35mm slide, I recall that ONE FILE FROM ONE SLIDE = $12.
Screw that! I bought a FILM SCANNER and scan my own slides @ resolutions up to 4500 pixels/inch … and go from there. I got a good deal on a Nikon Scanner and it gives fine results … BUT … as Apple upgrades its operating systems, some scanners … LIKE MINE … cease being compatible with upgraded machines. Consequently, I keep one Apple computer with an older system, and so far, I can still use my scanner.
I keep bitching to Nikon … "CREATE A DRIVER FOR MY SCANNER THAT WILL WORK WITH ALL APPLE/MAC Operating Systems, OR, IF/WHEN I BUY ANOTHER SCANNER … IT WON'T BE A NIKON PRODUCT!"
Maybe I'll try again today.
For those who don't own, don't have the knowledge, nor a long-range need to buy a scanner and scan their slides/film negatives, I sometimes make a WIN/WIN OFFER …
• SLIDES must be of publishable subject matter (and high quality)
• Because SLIDES are SCANNED AT HIGH RESOLUTION in order to create digital files for quality printing, going from A SINGLE SCAN>HIGH RESOLUTION DIGITAL FILE (which may require post-scan adjustments … as many scans do), can generally take anywhere from 10 minutes or longer … rather than price a client and myself out of the picture (literally) … I make this offer …
√ In exchange for any/all SCANS/DIGITAL FILES I create or the slide owner …
• I CHARGE ZERO ($ 0.00 SCAN/FILE)
• The slide owner agrees in writing that I am given copyrights permission to represent and market digital file copies, independently of the slide owner
• The original slides are returned to the owner along with the digital files for which the owner maintains his/her copyrights
But … we can discuss and negotiate.
35 mm Fujifilm color. have been stored for 25 years in a cool dry place. They are in good condition.
It should not be a problem; let me make sure my scanner is working with my current operating system, and, assuming it is, I certainly would be happy to create some digital files based on hoe you intend to use them, that is, low resolution for internet posts, and/or high resolution for print or marketing.
If you only want a small number, I'll do them with no conditions … as a gesture of friendship; I'll let you know before the day is out and we can work out the particulars.
Understood. They are currently in storage and I will have to dig them out so it will take a few days or so. I will have to pick and choose the small number I would like. The only thing I would ask is credit as the photographer. I will get back oto you when I have done so. My thanks Sir.
Scanner is working!
Let's do this; obviously I need the slides to scan them. In Private notes, I will give you my mailing address, full name and other details … and, I will need your details as well.
We can start with just a few from which I can make small, digital files that I can send to your private e-mail, and/or via NT Private Notes for your inspection. In the event we get to high resolution files, we can mutually agree on attribution, marketing, etc. . I certainly would agree to combined copyrights, and share any/all royalties 50/50 (minus my tax liabilities … generally 28%).
On a mutual trust basis, if/when an image is leased by a publisher, I would send copies of sales spreadsheets and/or direct market print, etc. sales from my personal website. In all instances, submissions that go through agents representing my images, or those I post and market directly, both of our names would appear in the copyrights meta data. I will need your written consent giving me the right to represent all such images.
Anyway, first things first!
Keep up the tutorial, Mac.
Will do; this will work for white, sandy beaches too.
No snow here but a lot of white sandy beaches.
Don't have the snow, but do have white sandy beaches.
Don't have the snow OR white sandy beaches but I'm still interested. I believe better cameras have a "White Balance" setting adjustment that will provide compensation. I have never adjusted it.
"White Balance" compensates for lighting that might alter the appearance of colors in a photo that might not be "true" to the reality.
Simply put, white balance in digital photography means adjusting colors so that the image looks more natural .
We go through the process of adjusting colors to primarily get rid of color casts, in order to match the picture with what we saw when we took it.
Why do we have to do this? Because most light sources (the sun, light bulbs, flashlights, etc) do not emit purely white color and have a certain “ color temperature “ . The human brain processes the information that comes from our eyes and automatically adjusts the color temperature, so we normally see the colors correctly. If you took a white sheet of paper and looked at it outside, it would most likely look as white as if you were to look at it indoors. What most people do not realize, however, is that there is a huge difference in color temperature between bright sunlight and indoors tungsten light.
While somewhat akin to "exposure," "white balance" has to do with color rather than brightness or darkness.
I will get to the t he WHAT TO DO ABOUT GRAY SNOW PICTURES, but I hasten to add that I'm glad you broached the "white balance" factor … those not familiar with it may have wondered why some of their pictures are unnaturally orange or magenta or yellow-green.
Thanks for raising the issue.
Here is a before and after of a photo I took with a lot of snow, that Mac enhanced for me. He saw something in the picture that I did not.
Before:
After enhancement:
So, Mac, these enhancements were made after taking the photo, rather than adjusting the camera prior to taking the photo.
How did you know what changes would bring out the effect seen?
In the age of digital photography, digital camera processors make certain decisions about how image information is processed before being recorded to the memory card, etc. .
Unless a digital photo is taken in RAW file format as opposed to jpeg and other formats, information is kept from the final image primarily to save memory.
That’s the short explanation.
Some of the lost information can be interpolated back into the image with post-processing editors like Photoshop ... BUT ... the end product’s quality is dependent on both the quality of the original and the knowledge and skill of the person doing the editing.
There are so many nuances involved in editing that it would take hours to explain every incremental step in bringing any one image to its edited best.
It can not be overstated that there was enough basic good stuff in dave’s photo to get it to its new state.
I hope I have explained This satisfactorily.
I appreciate that information Mac.
Sounds like good old fashioned practice and a learned eye are a couple necessary ingredients.
Did you use photoshop for this?
For a JPG, there was a LOT of info contained in that pic. more than enough to enhance it very well...
This is my shot at it with gimp....
Original.....
My attempt at enhancement.....
Too much enlargement they look much better at their natural resolution....
Every one of these "edited" images, enhances the discussion.
Hopefully, going forward, members will post photos for the purposes of …
• Showing their own BEFORE & AFTER photos
• Posting a photo and REQUESTING members to CREATE AFTERS for their BEFORES
• Requesting "TUTORIALS" on various PHOTOGRAPHIC and/or IMAGE EDITING ("Photoshopping")
• OTHER IDEAS … let's hear them
Oh wow, I have a couple beautiful before and afters Julia did when she was playing with Photolab. But there are 2 hurdles.
1. Julia's permission.
2. There is no snow.
Looks good.
Don't feel restricted by subject … anything goes regarding editing/experimentation … for example …
Two different photos combined using the Photoshop LAYERS feature … plus a few other techniques.
© A. Mac/A.G.
That galactic scene in the background looks striking.
You can even enhance old drawings.....
Very cool !!
I do a little of something like that sometimes as well, One of the "tricks" I think is to not take it too far and make a good picture "Weird" looking.
I like to enhance pictures and some do look better altered to the point they then are good pictures, but to me a good picture is like good music. Both stand pretty well as they are especially if produced with quality equipment to begin with. Professional user not always required !
Thanks for sharing all this. I may find a few I've enhanced to share as well. If I have any saved.
I also like to personalize pictures by adding bits and pieces to existing pictures. Stick a pipe in someone's mouth or some dumb stuff.
I used to make up really cool personalized greeting cards using a lot of pictures carefully placed in layers using publisher. Some came out really personalized and the people they were made for seemed to think they were very unique and pretty cool.
I don't do as much with pictures these days. If anything I play with video editing more. I have a Wondershare Filmora editing program that I use. It wasn't free but not too expensive and works pretty well. I'd recommend it.
Thanks again for sharing this !
And..Have a nice thanksgiving !
While we are awaiting approval on Julia's pictures, here is a snow picture that was taken at a pretty famous ski resort in Julia's home country.
Bukovel, which is about 200 miles north and 400 miles west of Julia's home town.
This was taken by our friend where the ski jumpers come to a stop in a circular area.She was standing right at a short fence backed by shrubs where she took a picture of the snow covered woods.
I would like to try doing something with this photo, by not sure exactly what...?
This had some minor changes to color balance, contrast, saturation, hue, gamma brightness.
Then added sepia.
I'll play around some more.
My pleasure Steve!
And you and yours have a happy Thanksgiving as well!
LOL. You did that massive frame just for me, didn't you.
Hi Dave, I took a stab at it, drawing any kind of color definition out of it was a challenge. The graycast is almost overpowering....
But the evergreens have to show a bit of green even if just a hint.... The snow on top of the greens in a scattered light situation should show a slightly yellowish cast on the highlights....
What do you think.....
Original, then enhanced...
Good job on this !
That gave it some life. I like how you did that.
Thank you NWM.
I used Photoshop for the basics ... contrast, brightness, color correction ... but for the real fine tuning, I used Luminar and Topaz.
Editing is a world unto itself.
I have heard of Topaz, but not Luminar.
Might be worth researching.
If you're looking for a good free photo-editing web site, I use 'photoscape'. It has lots of options - including framing.
I am at the PhotoScape web site now and notice a Photoscape and Photoscape X.
It looks like X is for Win10, so I will download the standard version, unless you have more insight on X comparability with older versions of Windows.
No idea. I'm on Windows 7 so I stick with the original version.
Alright then.
I should probably use the standard one as well.
Thanks.
I will look into that as well.
Thanks for the heads up Buzz.
Good night and thanks to all who participated and/or commented.
Okay, here we go. Using my Photoscape editing program here are a few examples of BEFORE & AFTER.
Example 1
It was a very misty day. To improve this photo I did the following: 1 Crop out the buildings in the background. 2. Decreased the pixel size so it would not take ages to post on NT. 3. Sharpened it. 4. enhanced the colour by increasing saturation. 5. Increased the contrast. 6. Framed it.
Example 2
For this photo of a wall-mounted Chinese painting I did the following: 1. Reduced the pixel size. 2. Leveled the subject. 3. Adjusted the perspective to remover the angled distortion. 4. Cropped out the original frame. 5. Sharpened the image (could not do any better). 6. Increased the colour saturation. 7. Increased the contrast. 8. Applied a frame.
Example 3
Finally, to extract from a photo of my wife and her mother, leaving just the ancient structure and to make it appear as a vintage photo I did the following. (Note that to convert to the appearance of a vintage photo it's best to choose a subject that is in fact vintage.) 1. Crop out the foreground. 2. Reduce the pixel size. 3. Sharpen the image. 4. De-saturate all colour to B&W. 5. Increase the contrast slightly. 6. Apply a faded tone close to sepia. 7. Apply an antique style of framing, causing age imperfections.
There are actually many many more things that can be done to photos with an editing program.
I notice how folks with experience in photo enhancement have developed a knack for bringing out the colors and contrasts, while giving focus to the important parts of the pictures.
All it takes is finding a tool you like, learning to use the tool and practicing.
Eventually your minds eye will make you aware of the proper adjustments to make...
But just play with it and have fun, as you get more practice in it becomes very enjoyable, and the difficult shots become an actual challenge rather than an impossibility....
But the most important part my friend, ENJOY THE TRIP!...
I will give it a good shot.
Thank you.
WHAT TO DO ABOUT GRAY SNOW PICTURES … BEFORE USING PHOTOSHOP, ETC.
(Depending on the Camera, Phone, etc. Capabilities)
Some Important Basics Regarding Digital Photography
√ Unlike film cameras, DIGITAL photographing devices have LCD MONITORS, allowing the photographer to see a shot almost immediately … BUT RELYING SOLELY ON THEM TO EVALUATE A SHOT CAN BE DECEPTIVE; here's why:
• Ambient light … the light in which you view the LCD monitor, can make the view unreliable
• LCD Monitor Adjustments … especially making them brighter so that images are easier to view … ONLY ADJUSTS THE MONITOR BRIGHTNESS BUT NOT THE EXPOSURE OF THE ACTUAL PHOTOGRAPH! A photo that looks to be "correctly exposed" on a MONITOR that has been adjusted up or down for brightness … may be poorly exposed on your memory card; if this happens to a "once in a lifetime/important photo," it's too late.
NOTE: Let me pause here to allow this to sink in … take questions … ( … give in to the Flomax).
NOTE: NOTE: THIS DISCUSSION WILL TAKE PRIORITY OVER THE REGULAR CREATIVE ARTS THURSDAY/FRIDAY Feature … FEEL FREE TO POST ANYTHING CREATIVE HEREIN.
To be continued.
A camera with only an LCD monitor has various problems, like being totally washed out and unviewable in bright sun, which is why I wanted and obtained a camera that had an optical eye-viewer that automatically adjusts with the zoom lens. It operates only when my eye is close to it, and although I haven't noticed it, I assume that the camera simply redirects the image from the LCD screen.
My take on dave's photo …
Mac, that looks classic.
Thank you.
My take on Dave's photo ...
I see what you did.
You used an effect I just played with to get Julia's approval to post one of her photos. It will make sense when presented.
I should also say, as used here, I get the sense of having a perspective of looking down to the woods.
If your trying the Photoscape site, what I did was play a bit with Brightness and Color - hue, then saturation, deepen, contrast, then I went to the Filter link for Pictorialization, then Swirl, then I framed it first with regular black line, then margin for the green.
Thanks for those tips, as I have no frame of reference for which way to go and where to start.
With regard to the before and after of Julia, I took a different tack.
Instead of trying to hide certain areas I started with a photo cropped to show her face and hair.
The after picture she did while playing photolab. She is a professional graphic artist. The "before"and after are of her in 2 slightly different poses. I wish I had the original before pose, because this would eliminate my problem.
"Before":
"After":
I tried the paint effect with Irfanview but can approach what she did with photolab. Hmmm? uploading to the site here, it looks like some of the "grid" lines in her hair is seen elsewhere. Would that be the texture of the canvas? I don't see that when looking at it here.
Both images are strong as they stand; I'm not quite sure what your ultimate objective is …is it a different background?
I would like to take one of her originals and apply a similar effect without it looking too amateurish.
The most common, generic mistake made in image-editing is OVER-PROCESSING!
Whatever effect is applied via editing is best done INCREMENTALLY! Go one-effect at-a-time, and, at any point along the way, do a "SAVE AS" and re-name the file; in that way, the original remains as is, and, additional edits can be applied to the "SAVED AS" file.
That is certainly good advice Mac.
I have a few months to get it right, giving me time to go in small increments!
In Gimp, that would be what the "Canvas" effect does, lightens and darkens the color matrix on a grid pattern to simulate a heavy canvas art board.......
The effect is very natural for a water color or pastel image on actual canvas... Oil paints being heavy bodied would smooth out much of the canvas pattern. it would still show in high contrast areas, (like her hair) but in gradual gradient areas, (like her arm) the pattern would be less discernable in a digital image....
The darker areas blow out the pattern where the lighter areas don't.
What is looks to me is like a digitized photograph of a matt oil painting with heavy flash....
Like Mac says, strong images, keep going.....
How's this?
Thank you.
Yes, that was her intended effect. It started as a photo from a smartphone. Then she applied the painting effect.
Your explanation makes good sense.
Now i want to make a little surprise for her birthday. But I have time.
That looks great Mac. Like something for a locket.
Many thanks.
I'd like to finish the TUTORIAL …
The WHAT TO DO ABOUT GRAY SNOW PICTURES part …
… that is not to say that other parts of the discussion can't continue, or, be introduced … so … before the day is out … I will post and explain how to keep the SNOW in snow scenes … as "white-as-snow" (to coin a phrase).
WHAT TO DO ABOUT GRAY SNOW PICTURES
• Keep in mind that CAMERA LIGHT METERS are CALIBRATED TO "SEE" 18% GRAY AS the "CORRECT EXPOSURE VALUE" AVERAGE for any given scene/subject
• Subjects that are INHERENTLY, EXCESSIVELY BRIGHT OR DARK, OR, OF HIGH CONTRAST will fool the light meter and cause it to adjust SHUTTER SPEED AND APERTURE (f-stop) combinations to shoot for 18% GRAY exposure … BRIGHT SUBJECTS WILL THUS BE "BROUGHT BACK" THUS BEING TOO DARK, DARK SCENES WILL BE PUSHED/EXPOSED TO BE BRIGHTER, THUS BEING TOO LIGHT.
Consequently …
• To KEEP A STRONGLY BRIGHT SCENE (like snow) BRIGHT … you must INTENTIONALLY OVEREXPOSE ("FOOL THE LIGHT METER) by doing any of the following … (assuming the camera has the capability) …
√ Use the EXPOSURE COMPENSATION SETTING (+ or - Setting) and TAKE Multiple SHOTS OF THE SAME SUBJECT
1) at "CORRECT" EXPOSURE (0 Compensation)
2) at +1/3 f-stop OVEREXPOSURE
3) at +2/3 " "
4) at +1 Full " "
5) at +1 1/3 " "
Remember, you just need ONE ACCEPTABLE SHOT OF ANY SUBJECT … (no one has to see the ones you delete!)
√ BRACKET EXPOSURES … Many cameras allow BRACKETING, that is, setting the camera to take MULTIPLE EXPOSURES IN A CONTINUOUS BURST … each exposure being at its own COMPENSATION LEVEL; again, YOU ONLY NEED ONE WINNER
√ If you are able to SHOOT IN MANUAL PRIORITY (whereby YOU SELECT THE APERTURE AND SHUTTER SPEED rather than any of the MODES in which the camera sets one or both …
Several elements in NATURE are inherently close to the 18% GRAY the LIGHT METER "WANTS" … a BLUE SKY and/or GREEN GRASS being the most common.
If in doubt when confronted with an excessively bright subject … METERING ON A BLUE SKY OR GREEN GRASS WILL PROVIDE A GENERALLY RELIABLE SHUTTER SPEED/APERTURE COMBINATION … meter thusly, set the combination manually and take your shots. If you're shooting for several hours, meter the same way periodically as the light changes throughout the day.
NOTE: DON'T FORGET TO SET YOU SETTINGS back to what are YOUR USUAL SETTINGS (when not photographing under moderate circumstances).
HOPE THIS IS HELPFUL.
And don't forget to have your camera save the images as Camera Raw images, it will aid your post processing greatly.....
(just remember to take along a lot of memory sticks)
It appears this discussion has run its course.
A good time, then, for you to take a look at what's been posted on your group.
Going now.
Mac, will this remain available for reference?
Mac, will this remain available for reference?
Just sent it to you in Private Notes,
Great, I can build a library now.
Thank you again Mac.