I do a fair number of white birds and have developed a technique that give me spot-on exposure going into LightRoom then into Photoshop.

I work using a NEC MultiSync calibrated monitor. Anal retentive is my adopted middle name. My last stage before publishing an image is to convert to sRGB color space

and fix any adverse problems caused by that conversion, including hot-spots, should they now exist. My last step is a levels clipping mask to insure that my whites do not

exceed RGB 248,,,a number that I've found to be quite acceptable in the hot areas of these birds.

My problem is that the simple fact of uploading these images to our site seems to be causing image overexposures with these birds.

And...I've noticed the same problem with a fair number of the images on which I've offered C&C. FYI, my browser is IE which is supposedly color correct.

Any enlightenment from this august community?

Hi Chauncey

 

I don't really understand about the mask you are making, Once you blow the whites in the RAW image nothing is going to bring them back. The area has zero pixel information, empty.

 

That type mask does have its uses but for different purposes. btw you have an excellent monitor and its calibrated, a monitor not in the same quality league will not be able to display detail at 248. I know many photographers posting particularly white birds, that don't let the image go higher then 228 in order not to have hot pixel complaints.

 

I'm glad we don't have that problem in this site. If an area is blown out it will be pointed out but not for just a few pixels .. and believe me, have seen in other places comments just like it ... you seem to have a few hot pixels on the head :)

 

No secrets to uploading, just as you do, convert to sRG, have the image to maximum allowed size, when downsizing use bicubic sharper for best results and use save as with the highest possible quality. As far as seeing images looking different regarding burnt areas have not had that experience.

 

al

Thanks for responding Alfred...trust me when I say that nothing is blown in the RAW image or anyplace along the line, regarding my few hot pixels...I will return to the originals and do some checking. I was not aware of that 228 number...thanks for that hint.

Hi Chauncey, if the problem only appears after having uploaded the pictures to websites, it could be a problem of screen management. Also a calibrated monitor might still use for IE a default setting that is optimized for reading text and not for photographs.

Cheers, Andreas

Chauncey I think there are a number of reasons for these over exposures.

 

.Limited knowledge of conventions.

.Limited knowledge of colour

.Limited understanding of histograms

.Limited understanding of using camera RAW/Lightroom/PS

.Limited understanding of how available light impacts exposure

.Use of spot metering is not always the answer

.Shooting time of day

 

I would not ever regard myself as an expert I leave that to experts but I have developed a pretty good understanding of exposure in both sport (shooting cricketers playing in cream/white kit playing on a natural reflector ) and shooting bird life over the past 5 or more years.

 

The first issue for me is time of day that people take images. Almost all nature photographers will tell you that best times are at first light and last light. Early morning and late afternoon evening. I would add that the best time of year in the nothern hemisphere is between Oct and Mar simply because of the angle of the sun. Out side of these months the sun progressively rises to peak at midday and once the sun gets above a certain point it is virtually impossible to compensate for birds with white feathers in amongst darker feathers without using a lot of PP work. I often see images taken outside this magic period that are struggling with hot spots (cannot give examples).

 

We come back to the age old problem that because those of us that choose to shoot nature and have developed our skills around it thats our choice others dipping in or just starting out have just as much right to. Unfortunately it is not an exclusive club and not everybody gets the should and should nots (as always rules are there to be broken so if it works fine).

 

Your monitor only acts as a screen to view an image the original RAW file holds all the detail and will be translated to the maths when it is transferred through Camera RAW or whatever software you use. Camera will show blown out areas though its always marginal as I often shot against white skies white is white if you get my drift even if I I have pulled the numbers back to as Fab suggests 228. This is more precise (?) in PS if you go to view and check info you can pick any tool and hover over a possible hot spot and it will declare the colour data in RGB etc.

 

Its all a learning curve. In winter I pray for sun in summer I pray for flat grey skies! In between I rarely get images that will be of any use to me unless ultra drama negates any relative issues with light.