# How do you take a representative photo of a red or purple bloom?



## Yoyo_Jo (Aug 26, 2011)

I thought this had been discussed in a thread somewhere, but I can't find it.

Can someone tell me how to take a decent shot of a red or purple bloom with my DSLR? Thanks in advance!


----------



## JeanLux (Aug 26, 2011)

Unfortunately Joanne I don't have (and am waiting with you for) the miracle solution!!!

In practice what I try to do is getting a lot of pics of the blooms from different angles and with different light conditions: flash/natural light (with some sun if possible) and then finally hope to be able for at least one of the pics (sometimes with a little help from my photo software) to show a reasonably near to reality coloring  !!! Jean


----------



## Ricky (Aug 26, 2011)

You can use a grey card and adjust the white balance in your RAW or grafic program (sometimes it´s called color balance). That´s your only chance, but if parts of the flowers color are outside of the color space of the camera chip the picture will never fit.

I use this one: http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Image...QR8A/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1314349830&sr=8-6

Hold the grey card near the flower (this part of the picture you will cut away later) like on this picture:


----------



## Shiva (Aug 26, 2011)

That's a great picture Ricky. I think red and purple flowers require more light than for any other color. I'm still experimenting with this, I bought a couple of 85W compact 5000°k lamps but I need more red flowers to really test them. I only use a small digital Canon camera.


----------



## Kavanaru (Aug 26, 2011)

Shiva said:


> That's a great picture Ricky. I think red and purple flowers require more light than for any other color. I'm still experimenting with this, I bought a couple of 85W compact 5000°k lamps but I need more red flowers to really test them. I only use a small digital Canon camera.



normally, with a small digital camera you can also adjust the white balance. Use either the grey card method, or take several pics with different white adjustments and compare. You can normally also make a final white balance adjustment with Photoshop.


----------



## John Boy (Aug 26, 2011)

Oh well, one has to ask stupid questions too:

Sorry for my ignorace, but what does that grey card do? Would you "white balance" the grey card, to fool the chip?, or how does it work?


----------



## Erythrone (Aug 26, 2011)

Sometimes I mesure the white balance with a white card. The pic are always in NEF (RAW) and sometimes I adjust in Photoshop. And sometimes I do both...

With reds, I always underexposed the pic since I want to catch details of the flower.


Shiva: I think Ramon is right. I had Power Shot Canon a few years ago and there was a white balance fonction.


----------



## Ray (Aug 26, 2011)

John Boy said:


> Oh well, one has to ask stupid questions too:
> 
> Sorry for my ignorace, but what does that grey card do? Would you "white balance" the grey card, to fool the chip?, or how does it work?


Very simply (because that's all I've got!):

The sensor that picks up the light for the image may not be as sensitive to some parts of the spectrum as others, so will "skew" the colors somewhat. A good gray card reflects all parts of the visible spectrum equally, so you can adjust the spectrum of your sensor's absorption to compensate - the "white balance" - giving you an image that is closer to the "true" colors your eyes see.


----------



## Shiva (Aug 26, 2011)

Erythrone said:


> Shiva: I think Ramon is right. I had Power Shot Canon a few years ago and there was a white balance fonction.


 
My problem is not the white balance but the lack of light. It takes very good light to get a good red, then, as you say, you can ajust the intensity of the light in photoshop or a similar program to get more details, something you can't do very well if the light is insufficient to begin with. Now that I have much brighter lights available, I find it a lot more easier to get more accurate colours. But I'll read the guide again, I always find something new when I read it.


----------



## SlipperFan (Aug 29, 2011)

I just spent a half hour putting together a response to this thread, and then when I went to post it, I was kicked off (logged off) Slippertalk. Frustrating -- all that post is gone into cyberspace!


----------



## JeanLux (Aug 30, 2011)

SlipperFan said:


> I just spent a half hour putting together a response to this thread, and then when I went to post it, I was kicked off (logged off) Slippertalk. Frustrating -- all that post is gone into cyberspace!



Too bad Dot 

I believe that this would have been very important for all of us :clap: !!!! Jean


----------



## Shiva (Aug 30, 2011)

Please try again. I want to know what you have to say.


----------



## Ricky (Aug 30, 2011)

John Boy said:


> Sorry for my ignorace, but what does that grey card do? Would you "white balance" the grey card, to fool the chip?, or how does it work?



In most cases the chip isn´t able to recognize the correct color temperature of the light you are using. Using the grey card you can adjust this later in your RAW or grafic program. This works with every camera you will use.


----------



## emydura (Aug 30, 2011)

Ricky said:


> In most cases the chip isn´t able to recognize the correct color temperature of the light you are using. Using the grey card you can adjust this later in your RAW or grafic program. This works with every camera you will use.



That is right. You just use the gray card to calibrate your colours.

There are other ways you can do it. One is the expodisc -

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/expodisc.htm

David


----------



## hchan (Aug 30, 2011)

Shiva said:


> Please try again. I want to know what you have to say.



Yeah try again, maybe do it in Word or something, that way you can save as you go


----------



## koshki (Aug 30, 2011)

I have my *fingers crossed* that my husband heard my suggestion of a photography class for my birthday!

Most of this stuff still goes over my head...and I really want to learn how to photograph my orchids!

PS, Please Dot, try again!!


----------



## SlipperFan (Aug 30, 2011)

OK -- second try:

I find a gray card to be indispensable for accurate rendition of both color and value of difficult flower color. 

Gray card value is what meters are calibrated to see. It's like as if you could take all the values (lightness/darkness) of a scene and pour them into a jar and shake it up. The value that results in an "average" scene is a middle gray, the value of a gray card. If that scene's value turns out to be lighter than a middle gray (like a bright snow scene), the meter still sees it as gray and the result will be underexposure. Conversely, if you take the values of a black cat in a coal bin and average them, they will be darker than a middle gray, and the result will be overexposure because the meter thinks they should look middle gray. So the point here is that if you use a gray card to meter from in that scene, the meter sees that value and will render the scene correctly.

So I will take a gray card, place it behind the difficult flower, take a reading with the shutter button depressed slightly, holding it there while I take away the card and then depress the shutter all the way. Most cameras should allow you to do this, or they will have some way to "lock" the exposure.

The gray card doesn't really have anything to do with rendering color, as such. But if you get the value right, chances are better than the color will also be right.

So how do you get the color right? That is a matter of the color sensors in a digital camera. Some are better than others, but most have the ability to set the "white balance." In the days of film photography, you had to match the kind of film you wanted to use to the kind of light you were taking the photo under. With digital photography, you set this with "white balance." It really doesn't matter whether you use a white card or a gray card to do this. The point is that it must be a neutral value.

Someone mentioned they underexpose a bit when photographing red. I suspect this works because the meter is not quite calibrated, or it's seeing red as a dark value and so is overexposing it. Using a gray card should help in this situation. That's assuming the meter is accurate. When I used to teach photography technology, calibrating our meters was among the first things we did. It was interesting: most meters were pretty close, but some were "off" a stop or more.

I find that it's not so much the quantity of light as the quality. A good tripod goes a long way to enable the photographer to use longer exposures to make up for light quantity. For quality, that's why I like to use daylight but not direct sun. Direct sun tends to make shadows and highlights that are too far apart for a good rendition. It does make for some nice and dramatic photos, though (think Rembrandt). Some of the light sources that we use for growing orchids don't make for very good photos, even with white balance.


----------



## SlipperFan (Aug 30, 2011)

OK, here's some more:

So even with a gray card and white balance, I almost always have to make some adjustments with Photoshop. I suppose any image editing program will allow these adjustments, but I taught Photoshop for a number of years and so I feel very comfortable using it.

So with red, for instance, I might do a little color correction if the red is too "red" or too bright or without detail. In Photoshop, under Image>Adjust>Color Balance, you will see 3 sliders:
Cyan/Red
Magenta/Green
Yellow/Blue
If you take the slider slightly toward Cyan, or better yet, Green, you will tone down the red a bit and bring in some detail in the darker areas. Small adjustments can do big things.

Well, see -- that was rather long-winded. I hope it helps a little.


----------



## SlipperFan (Aug 30, 2011)

Just a little more.

Where do you get a gray card? Can you use any piece of gray cardboard? 

It was Kodak, I believe, that introduced the gray card for sale. Any good camera store should carry them. They are made out of cardboard, and the gray is a specific value. So no, not any piece of gray cardboard or paper will give accurate readings, but you might be able to find something that is comparable. I've not tried recently. There used to be a product from Unicolor that was a gray card made out of plastic that was supposed to last forever. I still have one, but I scratched it badly trying to clean it. It's probably better to get the Kodak cards and dispose of them when they get dirty.

BTW, the reverse side of the gray card is white.

As for white balance, every camera I've seen does it differently. You'll have to consult your manual for specifics.


----------



## Yoyo_Jo (Aug 30, 2011)

Excellent, thanks Dot for taking the time to repost! :clap:

I have a gray card that I've never used. Guess it's time to get it out. 

Thanks again Dot and everyone who responded to this thread. Your time and effort is most appreciated!


----------



## Shiva (Aug 31, 2011)

Thanks for taking the time Dot. I'm steadily improving my photo set up and this really helps.


----------



## Lanmark (Aug 31, 2011)

Thanks Dot!


----------



## Erythrone (Aug 31, 2011)

Shiva said:


> My problem is not the white balance but the lack of light. It takes very good light to get a good red, then, as you say, you can ajust the intensity of the light in photoshop or a similar program to get more details, something you can't do very well if the light is insufficient to begin with. Now that I have much brighter lights available, I find it a lot more easier to get more accurate colours. But I'll read the guide again, I always find something new when I read it.



When there is no enough light it is difficult for the camera to adjust itself to the color of the light.


----------



## Erythrone (Aug 31, 2011)

"Why do bright red flowers overexpose?"

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1036&message=38349987&changemode=1


----------



## SlipperFan (Aug 31, 2011)

Erythrone said:


> When there is no enough light it is difficult for the camera to adjust itself to the color of the light.


True, when the light is very low.



Erythrone said:


> "Why do bright red flowers overexpose?"
> 
> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1036&message=38349987&changemode=1


To simplify this a bit:
http://www.kollewin.com/blog/electromagnetic-spectrum/
Notice that red is at the low end of the visible spectrum. Red is a dark color, hence the meter's tendency to overexpose it.


----------



## Ricky (Sep 2, 2011)

SlipperFan said:


> The gray card doesn't really have anything to do with rendering color, as such.



Sorry Dot, but that is definitely wrong.

"A gray card is a middle gray reference, typically used together with a reflective light meter, *as a way to produce consistent* image exposure and/or *color in film and photography*." (Wikipedia)

I don´t want to write so much, please read here:
http://www.digitalartsphotography.com/instructions.htm
https://www.ehow.com/how_5986275_use-grey-card.html
http://www.photoshop-tutorials-plus.com/grey-card.html


----------



## SlipperFan (Sep 2, 2011)

My point, Ricky, is that it is not the gray card that renders color accurately, whether digitally or film. If it were true, then one would not need to match the film with the light source, and white balance would be unnecessary.

What happens if you use a gray card under florescent lights, without fixing the white balance for that light source. Will you get accurate color?

One of your sources clearly states: "The grey card is put into the image _*so that the light falling on the subject also falls on the grey card*_. _*The white balance reading*_ is taken from the card..." (Emphasis mine)

None of your sources negate that concept, so sorry, Ricky. my statement that the gray card doesn't really have anything to do with rendering color,_* as such*_, stands. It's white balance, whether with a gray card or a white card, that determines color accuracy.

I didn't check Wikipedia, but if it leaves out matching film to light source and white balance, it certainly is incomplete.


----------



## Ricky (Sep 3, 2011)

SlipperFan said:


> What happens if you use a gray card under florescent lights, without fixing the white balance for that light source. Will you get accurate color?



If you use a modern 3-band fluorescent light - yes !

The automatic camera white balance will surely fail, but the correction afterwords with a RAW program, Photoshop or another grafic program will correct this. That´s the advantage of the digital work flow instead of the photografic film: you fix the white balance after taking the picture on your computer using the grey card as a standard.

If you look at the picture I showed some messages above, it was made under fluorescent light. The raw picture was totally wrong (the flower color was nearly blue) but after the white balance on the grey card in my RAW program the color was the the same as under natural light.

Digital workfow, fast computer and modern software (HDR, stacking, ...) gives us so many new possibilities to create more natural pictures than a pure camera could ever do.


----------



## Ricky (Sep 3, 2011)

SlipperFan said:


> One of your sources clearly states: "The grey card is put into the image _*so that the light falling on the subject also falls on the grey card*_. _*The white balance reading*_ is taken from the card..."



Right, that´s what I say all the time.

Maybe we have a misunderstanding, in the digital world the words "white balance" and "color balance" stay for the same: the correction of the color temperature of the light source, it has nothing to do with the brightness.

The link will make all clear: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/white-balance.htm


----------



## SlipperFan (Sep 3, 2011)

Certainly there is a big difference between what I term as "taking" a picture (camera) and "making" a picture (computer). Certainly using a neutral gray in Photoshop RAW or jpeg using the RAW setting in Photoshop will help with color correction *after* the photo has been made by the camera.

My discussion was about "taking" the picture. Not everyone has Photoshop, so I chose to keep that aspect of image-making pretty much out of my comments. I only brought in the sliders concept because I think that is fairly common to image-editing programs.

Perhaps we do have a misunderstanding. But I stand by my statement that in "taking" a picture, the gray card controls exposure and white balance controls color. That is the essence of that quote. Light "quantity" is measured by the meter, using a gray card; light "quality" (or color) is controlled digitally by how the camera sensors "see" the light, or white balance.


----------



## Ricky (Sep 4, 2011)

SlipperFan said:


> Certainly there is a big difference between what I term as "taking" a picture (camera) and "making" a picture (computer). Certainly using a neutral gray in Photoshop RAW or jpeg using the RAW setting in Photoshop will help with color correction *after* the photo has been made by the camera.



Using RAW instead of JPG or TIF there is no difference between "taking" and "making" a (digital) picture. You get all the information directly from the camera chip without the preprocessing of the camara software and without loosing any information.
In a RAW program (not Photoshop) you do these things, that the camera would do automatically if you let decide the camera software and prefer to get JPF and TIF. But with a RAW program you have the full control over the picture.
All the informations of the camera chip remains in a RAW picture until you decide to "process" the picture into TIF or JPG. I think it´s better to forget the "old analog" way of picture development, learn how the "new digital" way works and use it´s powerful possibilities.

The best thing ist when taking a picture you can focus youself on the scene not on the camera technic.


----------



## SlipperFan (Sep 4, 2011)

Let us not lose sight of the fact that not everybody's camera does RAW, and not every image editing program can import every RAW format. Not even Photoshop, unless you always have the latest upgrade. Remember that Nikon's RAW format is somewhat different from Fuji's which is all not the same as Canon's, etc., etc.

Let us not lose old knowledge just because we have new.


----------



## Ricky (Sep 6, 2011)

Dot, you don´t need a expensive camera, a RAW program or photoshop to correct the color with the help of a grey card.

You can do this with a JPG or TIF image almost as good, using a cheap grafic program (PSP or PhotoLine) or even freeware (Gimp, ....). If your camera makes RAW but you won´t pay money for Adobe Lightroom (or others) there exist RawTherapee as a very good freeware. RawTherapee works with nearly every RAW file.

Working with RAW makes life easier, because you can use the full information of the chip not only the 8 bit of a image file. That´s all.

I don´t have a DSLR, LightShop or PhotoShop. I use the RAW program that came with my camera, PSP as grafic program and some freeware tools for the rest. I prefer to spend my money for orchids than an expensive camera and software collection.


----------



## chrismende (Sep 6, 2011)

Wonderfully clear, Dot!


----------



## chrismende (Sep 6, 2011)

Thanks for that link! I love to dive back into this stuff!


----------



## chrismende (Sep 6, 2011)

Ricky, I think Dot has addressed the basic issues very well for people who aren't skilled with their cameras or photographic software. Your mention of the freeware is nice for me (a knowledgeable photographer who isn't yet applying her knowledge to her flower images) to know, though! I'd much rather spend money now on orchids and greenhouse equipment than on more software!


----------

