Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

RonHendriks1966 · 09-27-2011, 12:18 PM

So I did see this before, but not to this extend. Overload on the red channel.

original image from my camera.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/20195454/_K5I2795.jpg
This is made with K-5, DA*60-250, -0,3 EV to prevent this. Dynamic Range expansion set ON (or is this the killer of my red channel?)

Anyone ideas or experiences?

Last edited by RonHendriks1966; 09-27-2011 at 01:09 PM.

amoringello · 09-27-2011, 12:59 PM

I'm unclear on the problem. Probably just missing something. :-)
The grayscale, and the linked original look fine. It looks like whatever was used to bring up the exposure pushed the red higher. Looks like you just have to drop the reds a bit, perhaps in selective areas. (I see the white is just starting to blow out as well with the adjustments, as well)

Rupert · 09-27-2011, 02:10 PM

I constantly fight the reds with my K5, I don't recall this much trouble with my K20D and reds. They blow out fast and they blow out strong. For my Cardinal bird shots I have had success in shooting in Muted mode and then adjusting the color in processing, but this is not effective in many other situations. Maybe someone will have a better plan? The problem is...when they are blown...they are gone, you can't recover them if they are too far right.
Regards!

JeffJS · 09-27-2011, 02:16 PM

What does the RAW file look like?

Rupert · 09-27-2011, 02:23 PM

Jeff, on my part, the Raw file looks worse than the Jpeg...like maybe the K5 has tried to correct the red blow out in the Jpeg result? If that makes any sense?
Regards

Wheatfield · 09-27-2011, 02:38 PM

The best method I've heard of for working around this is to underexpose sufficiently for the red channel to stay intact and then bring up things back up in post, where the curves can be worked with on an individual basis if necessary.
The very long range of the K5 sensor should make this very workable, but I haven't been in a situation yet where it's been necessary for me to try.
If it's any consolation, reds have been a problem in colour photography since long before digital imaging.

RonHendriks1966 · 09-27-2011, 02:40 PM

Originally posted by JeffJS

What does the RAW file look like?

Took this set in jpeg only.

It is only with bright colours (red, yellow, green) that I see this and the red channel is very easy to blow out to my feelings.

amoringello · 09-27-2011, 02:43 PM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

Took this set in jpeg only.

It is only with bright colours (red, yellow, green) that I see this and the red channel is very easy to blow out to my feelings.

Then where did the different versions come from?
Again, the red in the "original" looks great. The grayscale also looks great.
Was the topmost posted image with the blown out red processed through software? That would be my guess as the problem.

RonHendriks1966 · 09-27-2011, 02:54 PM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

original image from my camera.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/20195454/_K5I2795.jpg

Originally posted by amoringello

Then where did the different versions come from?
Again, the red in the "original" looks great. The grayscale also looks great.
Was the topmost posted image with the blown out red processed through software? That would be my guess as the problem.

Well maybe my processing in Lightroom isn't up to where it should be at the time.

The link is the original file from the camera. It seems okay, but there is texture in the white shirt where it is missing in the red shirt!

JeffJS · 09-27-2011, 02:54 PM

Originally posted by amoringello

Then where did the different versions come from?
Again, the red in the "original" looks great. The grayscale also looks great.
Was the topmost posted image with the blown out red processed through software? That would be my guess as the problem.

The Red is blown out on the left players shirt and the top part of the right players collar. The grey scale demonstrates this where it is just flat and paper-like looking. There is no detail. It looks ok but I wouldn't call it 'great'. To keep Reds (and yellows) in check, I typically underexpose by a stop and bring the rest up if necessary in post processing.

amoringello · 09-27-2011, 02:58 PM

If you are using Lightroom to push up the exposure, you're going to have to use the brush tool to bring it back down in the reds.
Just more give and take in photography. :-) Although Lightroom is great in many ways, it can only do so much when you're pushing the exposure boundaries. This sort of problem might be better controlled in Photoshop or other bigger,badder program, but only because you can better mask off and control were changes are being made.

(You might also drop exposure a tad in the shoulder of the girl in white, as it is getting blown out there... although honestly not out of acceptable range... its not an important part of the photo... but its noticeable.)

amoringello · 09-27-2011, 03:03 PM

Quote:

but there is texture in the white shirt where it is missing in the red shirt!

Sorry, sort of glossed over this... but yeah... reds can do that.
Nothing says all colors reflect the sun equally or captures the same by the camera. :-)
The white shirt also appears to be more oblique to the camera and may not be reflecting as much direct light as the red shirt.
Although I'm no expert on such things thats how it looks to me.

cali92rs · 09-27-2011, 03:14 PM

Ken Rockwell would loooove that pic

rawr · 09-27-2011, 03:56 PM

Originally posted by cali92rs

Ken Rockwell would loooove that pic

I am guessing for the +111 level saturation.

cali92rs · 09-27-2011, 04:03 PM

Originally posted by rawr

I am guessing for the +111 level saturation.

He calls it "wild colors"

09-27-2011, 12:18 PM	#1
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Red Channel overload! So I did see this before, but not to this extend. Overload on the red channel. original image from my camera. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/20195454/_K5I2795.jpg This is made with K-5, DA60-250, -0,3 EV to prevent this. Dynamic Range expansion set ON (or is this the killer of my red channel?) Anyone ideas or experiences? Last edited by RonHendriks1966; 09-27-2011 at 01:09 PM.*

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K7, Kx, Kr, Information overload	jerryleejr	Pentax DSLR Discussion	14	09-07-2011 04:29 PM
blue/red channel diffraction test	Nass	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	5	09-01-2011 07:48 AM
People christmas stupor / overload....	dcmsox2004	Post Your Photos!	2	12-31-2010 03:33 PM
What's with the red channel at high ISOs?	robgo2	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	9	11-24-2010 03:00 AM
How to reduce red channel saturation?	jms698	Photographic Technique	8	12-01-2008 09:09 PM

09-27-2011, 12:59 PM	#2
amoringello Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Virginia, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,562	I'm unclear on the problem. Probably just missing something. :-) The grayscale, and the linked original look fine. It looks like whatever was used to bring up the exposure pushed the red higher. Looks like you just have to drop the reds a bit, perhaps in selective areas. (I see the white is just starting to blow out as well with the adjustments, as well)

09-27-2011, 02:10 PM	#3
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	I constantly fight the reds with my K5, I don't recall this much trouble with my K20D and reds. They blow out fast and they blow out strong. For my Cardinal bird shots I have had success in shooting in Muted mode and then adjusting the color in processing, but this is not effective in many other situations. Maybe someone will have a better plan? The problem is...when they are blown...they are gone, you can't recover them if they are too far right. Regards!

09-27-2011, 02:16 PM	#4
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	What does the RAW file look like?

09-27-2011, 02:23 PM	#5
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Jeff, on my part, the Raw file looks worse than the Jpeg...like maybe the K5 has tried to correct the red blow out in the Jpeg result? If that makes any sense? Regards

09-27-2011, 02:38 PM	#6
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,991	The best method I've heard of for working around this is to underexpose sufficiently for the red channel to stay intact and then bring up things back up in post, where the curves can be worked with on an individual basis if necessary. The very long range of the K5 sensor should make this very workable, but I haven't been in a situation yet where it's been necessary for me to try. If it's any consolation, reds have been a problem in colour photography since long before digital imaging.

09-27-2011, 02:40 PM	#7
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675 Original Poster	Originally posted by JeffJS What does the RAW file look like? Took this set in jpeg only. It is only with bright colours (red, yellow, green) that I see this and the red channel is very easy to blow out to my feelings.

09-27-2011, 02:43 PM	#8
amoringello Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Virginia, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,562	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 Took this set in jpeg only. It is only with bright colours (red, yellow, green) that I see this and the red channel is very easy to blow out to my feelings. Then where did the different versions come from? Again, the red in the "original" looks great. The grayscale also looks great. Was the topmost posted image with the blown out red processed through software? That would be my guess as the problem.

09-27-2011, 02:54 PM	#9
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675 Original Poster	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 original image from my camera. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/20195454/_K5I2795.jpg Originally posted by amoringello Then where did the different versions come from? Again, the red in the "original" looks great. The grayscale also looks great. Was the topmost posted image with the blown out red processed through software? That would be my guess as the problem. Well maybe my processing in Lightroom isn't up to where it should be at the time. The link is the original file from the camera. It seems okay, but there is texture in the white shirt where it is missing in the red shirt!

09-27-2011, 02:54 PM	#10
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Originally posted by amoringello Then where did the different versions come from? Again, the red in the "original" looks great. The grayscale also looks great. Was the topmost posted image with the blown out red processed through software? That would be my guess as the problem. The Red is blown out on the left players shirt and the top part of the right players collar. The grey scale demonstrates this where it is just flat and paper-like looking. There is no detail. It looks ok but I wouldn't call it 'great'. To keep Reds (and yellows) in check, I typically underexpose by a stop and bring the rest up if necessary in post processing.

09-27-2011, 02:58 PM	#11
amoringello Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Virginia, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,562	If you are using Lightroom to push up the exposure, you're going to have to use the brush tool to bring it back down in the reds. Just more give and take in photography. :-) Although Lightroom is great in many ways, it can only do so much when you're pushing the exposure boundaries. This sort of problem might be better controlled in Photoshop or other bigger,badder program, but only because you can better mask off and control were changes are being made. (You might also drop exposure a tad in the shoulder of the girl in white, as it is getting blown out there... although honestly not out of acceptable range... its not an important part of the photo... but its noticeable.)

09-27-2011, 03:03 PM	#12
amoringello Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Virginia, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,562	Quote: but there is texture in the white shirt where it is missing in the red shirt! Sorry, sort of glossed over this... but yeah... reds can do that. Nothing says all colors reflect the sun equally or captures the same by the camera. :-) The white shirt also appears to be more oblique to the camera and may not be reflecting as much direct light as the red shirt. Although I'm no expert on such things thats how it looks to me.

09-27-2011, 03:14 PM	#13
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Ken Rockwell would loooove that pic

09-27-2011, 03:56 PM	#14
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by cali92rs Ken Rockwell would loooove that pic I am guessing for the +111 level saturation.

09-27-2011, 04:03 PM	#15
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Originally posted by rawr I am guessing for the +111 level saturation. He calls it "wild colors"

Red Channel overload!

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!