Travis
Nothing to see here
Staff member
- Messages
- 7,224
- Reaction score
- 323
Merged as it looks like we lost JonB's title and it put them together by the dates created.
JonB
Active Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 328
- Reaction score
- 5
One time, i had to shoot the Mrs. Georgia Pageant from the middle center of the auditorium. I struggled with the light about half the night - it was mostly dim and gelled to a very red cast. Nothing in the Auto WB settings would work and I tried all of the user defined color temps to no avail as well. Nothing was close.
I didn't have a grey card or a white towel and I had left my Expodisc at home. So while I fumbled around and tried to think of a solution - it came to me to shoot the wall when the lights were at their brightest. I couldn't get the whole frame filled with wall without something along the edge or corner - but it was over 75%.
I set the WB to Custom and told the camera to use that image as the reference shot and i got good shots the rest of the night.
The images are here - but i warn you - it was MRS Georgia not MISS!
Mrs. Georgia Pageant & Shauna Rowland - Jon Berry Photography - Jon Berry - Atlanta
I didn't have a grey card or a white towel and I had left my Expodisc at home. So while I fumbled around and tried to think of a solution - it came to me to shoot the wall when the lights were at their brightest. I couldn't get the whole frame filled with wall without something along the edge or corner - but it was over 75%.
I set the WB to Custom and told the camera to use that image as the reference shot and i got good shots the rest of the night.
The images are here - but i warn you - it was MRS Georgia not MISS!
Mrs. Georgia Pageant & Shauna Rowland - Jon Berry Photography - Jon Berry - Atlanta
Last edited:
JonB
Active Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 328
- Reaction score
- 5
That looks like it will work just fine, Travis - thanks!
johngimpelcdt
New Member
- Messages
- 7
- Reaction score
- 0
"1) an Expodisc is a type of filter you hold in front of your lens and aim at the dominant light source and take a pict. Then you tell your camera to use that as the white balance image. Your camera will automatically set the white balance for all shots from then on. Every time the light changes - you have to take a new image and reset the white balance."
Can you please explain how you set your camera to the new white balance by taking a photo of a white item?
Thanks.
John P. Gimpel, CDT, TE
Can you please explain how you set your camera to the new white balance by taking a photo of a white item?
Thanks.
John P. Gimpel, CDT, TE
JonB
Active Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 328
- Reaction score
- 5
Hi John,
Sure - the Gardner technique recommends using a gray card - but I and others have found the white towel method works as well.
The camera "sees" everything in black and white - then extrapolates the data into frequencies that are represented by colors - and then you get a color image. If you shoot a scene that is predominantly white or black - the camera will try to force it into a shade of gray. I found this out one day in Haleiwa, Oahu while shooting the small black crabs against the black lava rocks along the jetti. I couldn't get them to look black in the camera like they looked in life no matter what temp i used. That explains why.
This also explains why it is so difficult in using the camera as a shade device - as the camera always works against us.
Now - the basic steps are easy - get a white towel or card or reflector, set your camera settings to properly expose (iso, shutter speed and aperture) and your white balance to the AWB setting.
Take the image - then check it to be sure the histogram shows a proper exposure. (I had mentioned before to be sure the "hump" in the histogram is centered or right centered for proper exposure)
On a Canon camera, hit the "Review" button to pull up the image you just took - then the "Info" button to show the histogram. You may need to hit the Info button twice to get to the screen that shows the histogram.
The image will probably exhibit a slight shade cast to the towel - incandescent will be slightly orange, florescent will be greenish and so on. Now - to correct that so its white again.
Look at the back of your camera. There is a menu button - usually at the top of the column of buttons. Click it.
(please excuse the use of these images - i have only one camera at the office right now - as soon as I can, I'll shoot my own series and give you better images)
Scroll down to the Custom White Balance menu item
Select the image you wish to use (the image of the white towel you just shot)
Set your White Balance to the "Custom" icon
that's it - you now have a custom white balance for the predominant color of light where you are shooting.
If you are using a ring flash - sometimes it is set so high in power that it will overwhelm whatever you are pointing it at. You can turn it down so it doesn't do that - but the more you allow other light into the scene, the more you need to set a custom white balance. Turning down the ring flash can reduce the specular highlights that often obscure tooth surfaces. The amount of ambient light determines how much to turn the flash power down. Most of the time I am at either 0/0 or -1/3 on both tubes. If you use a twin light, the same principles apply.
Another problem with just using the "Flash" WB setting on your camera is that it is an average "flash" color temp. Age of your ring flash tubes, battery strength and condition and ambient light will affect exactly what the real color temp is - so a custom WB will alleviate any variables.
Balance your light and it will even out the highlights and smooth off the color casts.
Again - i used images from the Expodisc tutorial for this response - only because I don't have two cameras handy to shoot them myself. I will replace these images with my own ASAP so as to not step on anyone's toes. I highly recommend buying an Expodisc since it works very well. If you do buy one - buy the largest size you can afford and just hold it in place with your hand. I use a 77mm - cost is about $129.00 If anyone is offended that i used these photos - please let me know and i will eliminate them immediately and we'll have to wait till i can shoot my own. Thanks.
If you have any questions or need clarification - please ask.
Sure - the Gardner technique recommends using a gray card - but I and others have found the white towel method works as well.
The camera "sees" everything in black and white - then extrapolates the data into frequencies that are represented by colors - and then you get a color image. If you shoot a scene that is predominantly white or black - the camera will try to force it into a shade of gray. I found this out one day in Haleiwa, Oahu while shooting the small black crabs against the black lava rocks along the jetti. I couldn't get them to look black in the camera like they looked in life no matter what temp i used. That explains why.
This also explains why it is so difficult in using the camera as a shade device - as the camera always works against us.
Now - the basic steps are easy - get a white towel or card or reflector, set your camera settings to properly expose (iso, shutter speed and aperture) and your white balance to the AWB setting.
Take the image - then check it to be sure the histogram shows a proper exposure. (I had mentioned before to be sure the "hump" in the histogram is centered or right centered for proper exposure)
On a Canon camera, hit the "Review" button to pull up the image you just took - then the "Info" button to show the histogram. You may need to hit the Info button twice to get to the screen that shows the histogram.
The image will probably exhibit a slight shade cast to the towel - incandescent will be slightly orange, florescent will be greenish and so on. Now - to correct that so its white again.
Look at the back of your camera. There is a menu button - usually at the top of the column of buttons. Click it.
(please excuse the use of these images - i have only one camera at the office right now - as soon as I can, I'll shoot my own series and give you better images)
Scroll down to the Custom White Balance menu item
Select the image you wish to use (the image of the white towel you just shot)
Set your White Balance to the "Custom" icon
that's it - you now have a custom white balance for the predominant color of light where you are shooting.
If you are using a ring flash - sometimes it is set so high in power that it will overwhelm whatever you are pointing it at. You can turn it down so it doesn't do that - but the more you allow other light into the scene, the more you need to set a custom white balance. Turning down the ring flash can reduce the specular highlights that often obscure tooth surfaces. The amount of ambient light determines how much to turn the flash power down. Most of the time I am at either 0/0 or -1/3 on both tubes. If you use a twin light, the same principles apply.
Another problem with just using the "Flash" WB setting on your camera is that it is an average "flash" color temp. Age of your ring flash tubes, battery strength and condition and ambient light will affect exactly what the real color temp is - so a custom WB will alleviate any variables.
Balance your light and it will even out the highlights and smooth off the color casts.
Again - i used images from the Expodisc tutorial for this response - only because I don't have two cameras handy to shoot them myself. I will replace these images with my own ASAP so as to not step on anyone's toes. I highly recommend buying an Expodisc since it works very well. If you do buy one - buy the largest size you can afford and just hold it in place with your hand. I use a 77mm - cost is about $129.00 If anyone is offended that i used these photos - please let me know and i will eliminate them immediately and we'll have to wait till i can shoot my own. Thanks.
If you have any questions or need clarification - please ask.
Last edited:
JonB
Active Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 328
- Reaction score
- 5
Using the above advice - here are two examples from my 20D here at the office.
First is the shot i used to white balance - its a plain white piece of paper, lit by the ring light and florescent in the ceiling. Notice it looks more gray than white - that is because the camera is trying to force the image to 18% gray. While the first guess would be it is under-exposed - it is actually a little over exposed by looking at the histogram.
And this is the image of some teeth with the power output down 1/3 and the ring light taken off the lens and held above at an angle to the teeth to reduce the specular highlights.
The images below demonstrate what I was talking about a couple days ago. I took the ring flash off of the lens and held it about an inch or two away from the patient's lips. Then I stretched the camera back as far as the cord would let me and shot through the hole.
Why?
Because the closer the light source is to the subject - the less harsh the specular highlights will be.
Notice the highlights in the above image are hard and obscure the important areas of the tooth for shade purposes.
Then look at the softer highlights around the edges in the image below.
It is next to impossible to eliminate all specular highlights - but you can reduce them by holding the light closer to the subject and at an angle that doesn't bounce the light directly back at the focal plane.
First is the shot i used to white balance - its a plain white piece of paper, lit by the ring light and florescent in the ceiling. Notice it looks more gray than white - that is because the camera is trying to force the image to 18% gray. While the first guess would be it is under-exposed - it is actually a little over exposed by looking at the histogram.
And this is the image of some teeth with the power output down 1/3 and the ring light taken off the lens and held above at an angle to the teeth to reduce the specular highlights.
The images below demonstrate what I was talking about a couple days ago. I took the ring flash off of the lens and held it about an inch or two away from the patient's lips. Then I stretched the camera back as far as the cord would let me and shot through the hole.
Why?
Because the closer the light source is to the subject - the less harsh the specular highlights will be.
Notice the highlights in the above image are hard and obscure the important areas of the tooth for shade purposes.
Then look at the softer highlights around the edges in the image below.
It is next to impossible to eliminate all specular highlights - but you can reduce them by holding the light closer to the subject and at an angle that doesn't bounce the light directly back at the focal plane.
Last edited:
JonB
Active Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 328
- Reaction score
- 5
Just curious if anyone has seen one of these or has any experience with one?
Ring Ray Flash Adapter - Blog - DigitalCamerainfo.com
Seems like it may offer a larger light source than your regular ring flash and may reduce specular highlights.
The problem is it requires a pop-up flash and I don't know if all or any cameras let you reduce the amount of output from the pop-up.
Ring Ray Flash Adapter - Blog - DigitalCamerainfo.com
Seems like it may offer a larger light source than your regular ring flash and may reduce specular highlights.
The problem is it requires a pop-up flash and I don't know if all or any cameras let you reduce the amount of output from the pop-up.
JonB
Active Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 328
- Reaction score
- 5
If you ever want to peek at what someone's camera settings were in an image - you can download a browser plug-in like Opanda iExif 2.3 for Firefox to show you info like this:
dmonwaxa
Well-Known Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 2,740
- Reaction score
- 233
Using the above advice - here are two examples from my 20D here at the office.
First is the shot i used to white balance - its a plain white piece of paper, lit by the ring light and florescent in the ceiling. Notice is looks more gray than white - that is because the camera is trying to force the image to 18% gray. While the first guess would be it is under-exposed - it is actually a little over exposed by looking at the histogram.
And this is the image of some teeth with the power output down 1/3 and the ring light taken off the lens and held above at an angle to the teeth to reduce the specular highlights.
The images below demonstrate what I was talking about a couple days ago. I took the ring flash off of the lens and held it about an inch or two away from the patient's lips. Then I stretched the camera back as far as the cord would let me and shot through the hole.
Why?
Because the closer the light source is to the subject - the less harsh the specular highlights will be.
Notice the highlights in the above image are hard and obscure the important areas of the tooth for shade purposes.
Then look at the softer highlights around the edges in the image below.
It is next to impossible to eliminate all specular highlights - but you can reduce them by holding the light closer to the subject and at an angle that doesn't bounce the light directly back at the focal plane.
Jon first off let me say thank you for what you have shared with us so far. I've started experimenting a little so far and I'm impressed with some of the results. I never thought of repositioning the ring flash off the camera, wow!. what a difference that made,,,,thanks for that tip. In the 2nd image fight after your WB test; what would be the advantage of capturing the image this way? Thanks again
JonB
Active Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 328
- Reaction score
- 5
Do you mean this one?
The purpose was to show the extreme angle of the light greatly reduced the amount of specular highlights being reflected back at the camera.
Another example is the dreaded "red-eye" in some flash pics. It happens because the light goes straight in, hits the back of the eye - the retina - picks up the color of the blood back there and sends it straight back into the lens at the same focal plane. If you bounce the flash or move it off camera - you never see the red-eye.
Same idea with keeping that highlight off of the middle of the tooth surface.
The purpose was to show the extreme angle of the light greatly reduced the amount of specular highlights being reflected back at the camera.
Another example is the dreaded "red-eye" in some flash pics. It happens because the light goes straight in, hits the back of the eye - the retina - picks up the color of the blood back there and sends it straight back into the lens at the same focal plane. If you bounce the flash or move it off camera - you never see the red-eye.
Same idea with keeping that highlight off of the middle of the tooth surface.
dmonwaxa
Well-Known Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 2,740
- Reaction score
- 233
Yes, this one JonB. Ok so you wont get the dramatic specular highlights, but is this example usable for shade matching?Do you mean this one?
The purpose was to show the extreme angle of the light greatly reduced the amount of specular highlights being reflected back at the camera.
Another example is the dreaded "red-eye" in some flash pics. It happens because the light goes straight in, hits the back of the eye - the retina - picks up the color of the blood back there and sends it straight back into the lens at the same focal plane. If you bounce the flash or move it off camera - you never see the red-eye.
Same idea with keeping that highlight off of the middle of the tooth surface.
Sorry for the edit:
There might be an advantage for use in mapping the teeth, but as far as shade reference I think the M-I 1/3 is shadowed, dont you think?
Last edited:
JonB
Active Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 328
- Reaction score
- 5
I'm not ready to say there is any way to "shade match" with any digital camera. Your eyes tell you far more than any machine will do. That said - removing specular highlights from your images is always better than having that glare right in the middle of the tooth. Seeing the tooth without the highlight lets you see the characteristics that are inside. That's a good thing.
My solution to the above "shadow" is using the macro-twin light with one head positioned above the mouth set at the 2 of the 2:1 ratio we talked about in another thread and the other head set at 1 in the ratio, below and possibly at a little more distance from the mouth. This is where the on-lens mount that came with the twin-light is useless and an RSS mounting bracket would do wonders.
I don't have my twin-light handy right now but as soon as I can - i'll try to do some shots and post them so you can see what I'm talking about.
Hope this helps.
btw - I don't have the RSS brackets - but i do take donations!
My solution to the above "shadow" is using the macro-twin light with one head positioned above the mouth set at the 2 of the 2:1 ratio we talked about in another thread and the other head set at 1 in the ratio, below and possibly at a little more distance from the mouth. This is where the on-lens mount that came with the twin-light is useless and an RSS mounting bracket would do wonders.
I don't have my twin-light handy right now but as soon as I can - i'll try to do some shots and post them so you can see what I'm talking about.
Hope this helps.
btw - I don't have the RSS brackets - but i do take donations!
Last edited:
dmonwaxa
Well-Known Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 2,740
- Reaction score
- 233
I'm not ready to say there is any way to "shade match" with any digital camera. Your eyes tell you far more than any machine will do. That said - removing specular highlights from your images is always better than having that glare right in the middle of the tooth. Seeing the tooth without the highlight lets you see the characteristics that are inside. That's a good thing.
My solution to the above "shadow" is using the macro-twin light with one head positioned above the mouth set at the 2 of the 2:1 ratio we talked about in another thread and the other head set at 1 in the ratio, below and possibly at a little more distance from the mouth. This is where the on-lens mount that came with the twin-light is useless and an RSS mounting bracket would do wonders.
I don't have my twin-light handy right now but as soon as I can - i'll try to do some shots and post them so you can see what I'm talking about.
Hope this helps.
btw - I don't have the RSS brackets - but i do take donations!
When you get the donations make sure you remember me,,,
JonB
Active Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 328
- Reaction score
- 5
May I ask a quick question - since you are a moderator. Is it ok if you just quote the pertinent part of the previous post and just put in ****snip*** to signify that the rest is edited? I'm sorry if that is out of line - but it might make it easier for everyone to read the thread. I'll follow your lead... and if more than one person donates a set of RSS brackets... I'll send you one!
dmonwaxa
Well-Known Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 2,740
- Reaction score
- 233
U hate reading huh? LOL... Gotcha, m a noob. Sorry for the lapse in protocol on my part and the hassle it caused. Thanks for bringing it to my attention no harm no foul here. It's all good on my end..promise to work on it..
JonB
Active Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 328
- Reaction score
- 5
Ha - no problemo... and i do hate reading - especially my own writing! I can only imagine it would be tedious to everyone else too.
Lets try to keep this thing conversational and friendly so all of us can pick up something from the exchanges in ideas. And please share what you know - cause I'm in this to learn too!
Lets try to keep this thing conversational and friendly so all of us can pick up something from the exchanges in ideas. And please share what you know - cause I'm in this to learn too!
T
thewhitelab
Active Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 193
- Reaction score
- 2
Hi Jon, i have really enjoyed looking through your portfolio in particular the aviation shots, if i was to critique anything thing it would be to use a shallower depth of field when shooting portraitures also when framing your shots you sometimes place the subject ‘point of focus’ in the centre, I am sure you know about the rule of thirds which of course do not always apply but I have found in candid shots it work well?
Adam
Adam
T
thewhitelab
Active Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 193
- Reaction score
- 2
sorry just to add........for an example looking at your thumbnails on your site shows you great examples of the potential of cropping, but then everything is subjective. thanks for all your tips keep them coming
JonB
Active Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 328
- Reaction score
- 5
Thanks for the critique kind sir.
I make no real excuses other than - most (80 to 90%) of the images (not including grip and grins and aviation shots) were shot over two years ago. There are over 20,000 images on the site and it has become a collect-all over time that desperately needs weeding. I just have no time to do it. Its sorta like the shed in the back of the farm that i never go to anymore.
My intention is to drop most of them from the site and focus on certain subjects. My original intent was to show the variety of subjects and situations. Now - since i no longer shoot NFL football or fashion shows and rarely ever shoot a wedding - there just isn't much need of a lot of that stuff. I usually don't shoot much portraiture either - but have when asked. I can say there are a number of early airshows that need complete weeding - as my skill level has improved over the years along with the equipment i now use.
And yes - i'm well aware of the rule of thirds and the composition principles drilled into me in years of art classes. Its an ongoing effort to manipulate the equipment, keep the subject where i want it and snap the shot all at the same time. I know a few guys and gals who can do it well and I rely on their mentoring as much as I possibly can. I surround myself with some world class aviation photographers for that reason - as that is where my interests lay.
Most of the last three to four years has been devoted to learning the techniques necessary to shoot aviation properly. While many folks go to airshows with their Canons and Nikons and their 50-300 zooms and get good shots - it's not quite the same thing as spending three or four days in the sun between the hot ramp and the runway, shooting as many as 15,000 images a day while holding a 500, 600 or 800mm lens and pro camera body over your head for 8 to 12 hours. Depending on the rig it can weigh between 12 to 16 pounds. By the end of day one you think your arms are going to fall out of their sockets and you usually have two more days at least with another 15,000 each day to sort through before you hit the sack. Advil is your best friend. Jets are easy - but props have to be shot at 1/80 of a second or slower to get a full disc on the prop. Helicopters at 1/20. The rule is the shutter must equal the focal length of the lens/crop factor combination - which would require a 1/1000 to be sure you get a sharp shot. But then you have what looks like a plane suspended by strings - -frozen in mid air. No one buys those. So 1/80, breathing like a marksman, conscious footwork, awareness of people around you, finger pressure on the shutter button all have to be in perfect sync. ... did i mention all this has to be done while panning the camera?
Its a challenge I really enjoy! Here is a friend of mine and i at the Ft. Worth Alliance airshow, out between the ramps. He is one of the top aviation photogs in the US.
I'm on the left and my buddy Jim is on the right.
I make no real excuses other than - most (80 to 90%) of the images (not including grip and grins and aviation shots) were shot over two years ago. There are over 20,000 images on the site and it has become a collect-all over time that desperately needs weeding. I just have no time to do it. Its sorta like the shed in the back of the farm that i never go to anymore.
My intention is to drop most of them from the site and focus on certain subjects. My original intent was to show the variety of subjects and situations. Now - since i no longer shoot NFL football or fashion shows and rarely ever shoot a wedding - there just isn't much need of a lot of that stuff. I usually don't shoot much portraiture either - but have when asked. I can say there are a number of early airshows that need complete weeding - as my skill level has improved over the years along with the equipment i now use.
And yes - i'm well aware of the rule of thirds and the composition principles drilled into me in years of art classes. Its an ongoing effort to manipulate the equipment, keep the subject where i want it and snap the shot all at the same time. I know a few guys and gals who can do it well and I rely on their mentoring as much as I possibly can. I surround myself with some world class aviation photographers for that reason - as that is where my interests lay.
Most of the last three to four years has been devoted to learning the techniques necessary to shoot aviation properly. While many folks go to airshows with their Canons and Nikons and their 50-300 zooms and get good shots - it's not quite the same thing as spending three or four days in the sun between the hot ramp and the runway, shooting as many as 15,000 images a day while holding a 500, 600 or 800mm lens and pro camera body over your head for 8 to 12 hours. Depending on the rig it can weigh between 12 to 16 pounds. By the end of day one you think your arms are going to fall out of their sockets and you usually have two more days at least with another 15,000 each day to sort through before you hit the sack. Advil is your best friend. Jets are easy - but props have to be shot at 1/80 of a second or slower to get a full disc on the prop. Helicopters at 1/20. The rule is the shutter must equal the focal length of the lens/crop factor combination - which would require a 1/1000 to be sure you get a sharp shot. But then you have what looks like a plane suspended by strings - -frozen in mid air. No one buys those. So 1/80, breathing like a marksman, conscious footwork, awareness of people around you, finger pressure on the shutter button all have to be in perfect sync. ... did i mention all this has to be done while panning the camera?
Its a challenge I really enjoy! Here is a friend of mine and i at the Ft. Worth Alliance airshow, out between the ramps. He is one of the top aviation photogs in the US.
I'm on the left and my buddy Jim is on the right.
Last edited:
TheLabGuy
Just a Member
Full Member
- Messages
- 6,249
- Reaction score
- 817
If you ever want to peek at what someone's camera settings were in an image - you can download a browser plug-in like Opanda iExif 2.3 for Firefox to show you info like this:
That's neat Jon, I use a function in Elements that does something similar. Your knowledge in photography is out of this world, seriously, thank you for taking the time and sharing it with pure unadulterated noobs like myself
