Author Topic: Is this photo underexposed? (Read 3833 times)

Pixart · « **Reply #1 on:** March 12, 2009, 14:53 »

I'd say it's a little uneven, the bottom left seems proper and the light falls off. There is nothing wrong with it for my taste, but agencies seem to want bright and even lighting. Let me guess, Dreamstime?

takestock · « **Reply #2 on:** March 12, 2009, 15:19 »

Possibly, the blue background might give the impression that it is.
I'm not sure on this - as always it comes down to the reviewer.

travismanley · « **Reply #3 on:** March 12, 2009, 15:33 »

If it were my photo I would have probably lightened it up a bit, but I dont think it is so dark it should be rejected.

PeterChigmaroff · « **Reply #4 on:** March 12, 2009, 15:37 »

I'd pump it up a bit, give some more life.

Your copyright of course.

Dreamframer · « **Reply #5 on:** March 12, 2009, 19:06 »

It should represent a work place. Isn't it a bit dark to work with this light? The paper isn't really white and shadows are bluish. This usually happens to me when I am tired. That's why I sometimes leave to finish images tomorrow, after good sleep.

davey_rocket · « **Reply #6 on:** March 12, 2009, 19:14 »

I agree with the above, the "white" paper looks a little bluish, it could probably use a nudge.

null · « **Reply #7 on:** March 12, 2009, 23:39 »

Your cam or PS was fooled by the (I bet) blown out highlight on the pen which monopolizes the histogram at the right side. Just fill in the highlight (since it's simple) with light gray and do autolevels again. In the levels you can drag the middle cursor a bit (1.20 max) to the left to get it lighter. To get rid of the blueish shadows and objects, just adapt the white balance, or desaturate the non-colored objects.

MichaelJay · « **Reply #8 on:** March 13, 2009, 04:07 »

Underexposed rejections most likely are not based on the concept and setup but on histogram values.

Check the histogram on Luminance, your highest value is slightly below 230 and "white" paper is around 210. You certainly want those in the area of 240 without blowing out the highlight on the pen, of course. Protect the highlight with a mask and play around with levels and curves until you get to a satisfying distribution of tonal valuse.

You aren't using the low end of contrast as well, by the way. So check your post processing how to improve your contrast management.

antoniodalbore · « **Reply #9 on:** March 13, 2009, 04:35 »

Yes, it is...
Just look at the histogram and you will see that the right side (high lights) is flat.

Also the image is missing a bit of contrast or low light tone (flat left side).

bye.

leaf · « **Reply #10 on:** March 13, 2009, 04:38 »

Yep, agree with antoniodalbore

Both ends could be clipped a little more plus a little lighter in the highligts I think.

Here is my take attached (yours in the darker one

. Each to his own of course (meaning, we will all have different opinions on what looks right)

melastmohican · « **Reply #11 on:** March 13, 2009, 11:52 »

Probably next time when I shoot large white surfaces I need to overexpose by 1-2 stops.

On a histogram side I wish LR got it working like in PS. I am still confused when I have to adjust histogram. It seems like I can only do it by changing numbers or I am missing something?

Moonb007 · « **Reply #12 on:** March 20, 2009, 13:58 »

I think you got the answers to your question, but I think its good as is. But if you send it off to anywhere else you might lighten it just a little...don't want to make it look washed.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Is this photo underexposed? (Read 3833 times)

melastmohican

Pixart

takestock

travismanley

PeterChigmaroff

Dreamframer

davey_rocket

null

MichaelJay

antoniodalbore

leaf

melastmohican

Moonb007

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors