Blown out reds?

[MeSess]

I cannot show a screen view of this effect.... I suppose a movie camera could capture it, but a screen capture only captures the Levels tool.

On the top image (which is less seriously clipped)... Hold down ALT or OPTION key and while holding, then slightly touch the Levels White Point slider (you do have to move it, but only the slightest amount), and the preview image goes all black, except ONLY the bright lower red leaf is shown. The full lower bright leaf, and several more higher above it.

That is saying those pixels are being clipped at the, say 254 position of the slider, which says those pixels you can see are brighter than the 254 (or whatever value). Which if 254, those pixels are clipped (perhaps just one channel, red here).

Yes, I just Copied and Pasted (clipboad) your two images to my editor, and used the levels tool there.

Also try it on an image that is NOT CLIPPED, and you will see you have to slide the slider very much lower, much less than 254 probably, to see any pixels other than black. This is then telling you the pixel value of those pixels.

The regular color Eyedropper can also tell you this. That bright lower leaf is about color (255, 0, 74), which is clipped in the red channel.

Ok so this is what I see when I do what you're saying:

 

[WayneF]

I guess that is similar to what I see. Mine seems better defined, but maybe you had to be here. This is full image of your top rose dsc0682.

 

[MeSess]

I guess that is similar to what I see. Mine seems better defined, but maybe you had to be here. This is full image of your top rose dsc0682.

Ok so we're seeing pretty much the same thing on that picture except yours appears to show it's clipping more than mine does. I'm going to guess and say that has something to do with your screen grab of the pictures and me having the raw files? Maybe the reds appear slightly more exposed on your computer than mine.

So now how would I fix the remaining areas that are clipping without reducing the exposure too much or would I just live with what I have now?

 

[WayneF]

Ok so we're seeing pretty much the same thing on that picture except yours appears to show it's clipping more than mine does. I'm going to guess and say that has something to do with your screen grab of the pictures and me having the raw files? Maybe the reds appear slightly more exposed on your computer than mine.

Mine is your image 0682 captured from your posting. Is your try that same JPG image copy which you posted? In my image, see the histogram spike at 255 (above the mouse pointer). The red channel is definitely very clipped (and this was the mildly clipped one). I am using Photoshop CS6.

And my point was, this is really expected. We just know that when we walk up to the red flowers.

So now how would I fix the remaining areas that are clipping without reducing the exposure too much or would I just live with what I have now?

Clipping cannot be fixed. The clipped data is gone, period. Meaning, it is overexposed, and limited at 255. You might want the rest brighter, which is then a dynamic range issue, but this image is overexposed.

Again, clipping can be called arbitrary, if that is how you want your image to look.

But the solution is to watch the RGB histogram in the camera while in the field (esp in these expected cases when we know this is going to happen), and fix it there, at the time.

 

[MeSess]

Mine is your image 0682 captured from your posting. Is your try that same image? In my image, see the spike at 255 (above the mouse pointer). The red channel is definitely very clipped (and this was the mildly clipped one).

And my point was, this is really expected.


Clipping cannot be fixed. The clipped data is gone, period. Meaning, it is overexposed. You might want the rest brighter, which is then a dynamic range problem, but this image is overexposed.

The solution is to watch the RGB histogram in the camera while in the field (esp in these expected cases when we know this is going to happen), and fix it there, at the time.

I tried that particular image using the original RAW file and by downloading it from the thread and mine still shows less clipping than yours. You can see in yours the leaf is solid at 254 but in mine is not. It showed even less clipping when I tried the jpg from the thread. Regardless, you're right there is clipping and I'm not sure I could have saved anymore of it with the direct sunlight unless I severely underexposed it.

I'll have to keep an eye out then and try to underexpose when necessary, thanks. Definitely learned quite a bit today. Love the critique and insight on this forum.

 

[WayneF]

I tried that particular image using the original RAW file and by downloading it from the thread and mine still shows less clipping than yours. You can see in yours the leaf is solid at 254 but in mine is not. It showed even less clipping when I tried the jpg from the thread. Regardless, you're right there is clipping and I'm not sure I could have saved anymore of it with the direct sunlight unless I severely underexposed it.

I have to say that I realize now that you're correct, and I do agree with you. I am slow sometimes.

I do have a calibrated monitor screen, with Spyder software that adjusts the video system and screen that I see for what it measures to be corrected response of the video system. I never really thought about it, but maybe my screen is different than the original. I did do a screen capture to acquire your image.

Here is the histogram PhotoME plots on your forum image file.

Small, but it does show less clipping. Clearly I should have done a Save Image As, to retrieve your original image file. I did not, and it was my mistake, sorry.
I won't do that again.

But which really seems to be about degree of a different point, since your own complaint was that the red was clipped. Esp the other one.

Anyway, we know this happens, and the three RGB histograms in the camera will show this at the time when it could be corrected.
And the ALT key thing is a good tool in Levels or Raw Exposure, to know we are setting exposure in a harmless way, at least to know what we are clipping.

 

[MeSess]

I have to say that I realize now that you're correct, and I do agree with you. I am slow sometimes.

I do have a calibrated monitor screen, with Spyder software that adjusts the video system and screen that I see for what it measures to be corrected response of the video system. I never really thought about it, but maybe my screen is different than the original. I did do a screen capture to acquire your image.

Small, but it does show less clipping. Clearly I should have done a Save Image As, to retrieve your original image file. I did not, and it was my mistake, sorry.
I won't do that again.

But which really seems to be about degree of a different point, since your own complaint was that the red was clipped. Esp the other one.

Anyway, we know this happens, and the three RGB histograms in the camera will show this at the time when it could be corrected.
And the ALT key thing is a good tool in Levels or Raw Exposure, to know we are setting exposure in a harmless way, at least to know what we are clipping.

Haha no harm no foul. There was clipping regardless of how it was seen. Either way it got the point across. What happened to the op of this thread? I didn't mean to hi-jack it.

 

[Moab Man]

Haha no harm no foul. There was clipping regardless of how it was seen. Either way it got the point across. What happened to the op of this thread? I didn't mean to hi-jack it.

Hi-jack or not, it was a great educational discussion.

 

[WayneF]

Regarding clipping caused by White Balance variations....

It should be said that for Raw images (which are incomplete unprocessed images), the camera RGB histogram is showing the histogram of a small JPG image embedded in the Raw file. This JPG image has the current camera settings performed on it, White Balance and Contrast and Vivid and whatever else (stuff that shifts tones in the histogram). The Raw file does not, it is still Raw. The settings you apply later may or may not match the camera settings on the JPG. I fear much of the time, we are not even aware of what settings are in the camera.

However, probably they are fairly close, since this same JPG image is also what shows on the camera rear LCD (Raw files cannot be viewed on RGB devices). Since we want to see correct color there, we probably at least use Auto WB with Raw, which of course is not necessarily correct, but probably is halfway close to the ballpark of our final settings later.

Just saying, since Raw is not complete yet, there can still be small variations in our final version. White Balance shifts can cause clipping. Hopefully, this small JPG (which was also Raw at one point) has already done about the same thing.

But also, times have changed. For Raw, when we are shooting ISO 100, and the camera does pretty well at ISO 3200, IMO, there is really no harm in backing exposure off a small safe amount in problem situations like this, and pushing exposure later in Raw (speaking of small degree at low ISO).

 

[SteveH]

Interesting tips and solutions here! Thank you!