Why can't my KP photograph a rainbow?

**johnde** · 08-30-2020, 08:45 AM

Thanks for all the comments. I know I had not set the camera specifically for the shot but I did not know how long the rainbow would last. I took the couple of quick shots and saw no rainbow so I just ditched it an went for the iPhone. I needed that to get the full rainbow in pano mode anyway. Time to learn more about the camera!

**FozzFoster** · 08-30-2020, 09:10 AM

Originally posted by johnde

I needed that to get the full rainbow in pano mode anyway. Time to learn more about the camera!

Take multiple pictures with your dSLR and stitch them together in post-production to create panos!

jack002 · 08-30-2020, 09:25 AM - **3 Likes**

I find that underexposure shooting raw can be fixed in post, overexposure can not. So under is always better

**DWS1** · 08-30-2020, 09:40 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Wheatfield

Polarizing filters have an annoying habit of making rainbows dissappear.

Correct, polarizing filters can easily make rainbows disappear. But, they can also enhance the colors. Under many conditions there is a very small and fine point in adjusting the filter where the colors can really pop. They can cut the glare out of the atmosphere but leave the colors. This point in the adjustment range is very, very small and can easily be missed. The same thing can happen with images reflected off water, cuts the glare out but leaves the reflected image. It took me a lot of practice and experimentation to figure this out.

stevebrot · 08-30-2020, 10:00 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by johnde

Time to learn more about the camera!

In case you missed it, the shot is probably salvageable in Lightroom.

Steve

Wasp · 08-30-2020, 11:51 AM

This is one of those times where sunny f/11 does not apply. You start with a meter reading, take a shot, replay, adjust exposure and repeat until you get the desired result. Isn't digital great? On film you had to bracket and hope for the best.

**steamloco76** · 08-30-2020, 12:34 PM

The KP sensor holds recoverable detail in shadows several stops underexposed, highlights? Once highlights are clipped, there is nothing there to recover. I’ve shot sunsets with my KP. Pattern metering, ISO usually set to 400 and I start with the exposure set by the camera and then bracket down to 3 stops under. Same would work for a rainbow. Often the best exposure is -2 or -3 stops.

**mikesbike** · 08-30-2020, 09:12 PM

I've had fine results for rainbows from my KP just with the camera set to the "P" mode, and JPEG images with the usual segmented metering. Custom Image processing set to the most common "Bright" category. Your shots were definitely overexposed. And I agree a UV filter would not be a good idea, and a polarizing filter worse.

---------- Post added 08-30-20 at 09:19 PM ----------

Originally posted by thazooo

Chimp. Take your shot, Chimp it and the Histogram. Adjust and shoot again. Rainbow is Landscape so you have the time for a Chimp and adjust. I do it every time

Yep- check results and change exposure accordingly I generally expose for the scene below the rainbow because I plan to have the rainbow over that scene anyway, then adjust accordingly. If in "P" mode, I just use the +/_ exposure comp button.

Wheatfield · 09-01-2020, 09:25 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Wasp

This is one of those times where sunny f/11 does not apply. You start with a meter reading, take a shot, replay, adjust exposure and repeat until you get the desired result. Isn't digital great? On film you had to bracket and hope for the best.

It used to be Sunny 16 when it was film. Does digital work better starting at f11?

pschlute · 09-01-2020, 01:06 PM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

It used to be Sunny 16 when it was film. Does digital work better starting at f11?

Depends on how strong the sun is

stevebrot · 09-01-2020, 03:20 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Wheatfield

It used to be Sunny 16 when it was film. Does digital work better starting at f11?

High latitude and it is still winter there.

Steve

**robgski** · 09-01-2020, 05:04 PM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

Polarizing filters have an annoying habit of making rainbows dissappear.

I have never had that problem with a polarizer.

---------- Post added 09-01-20 at 20:07 ----------

Originally posted by mikesbike

I agree a UV filter would not be a good idea, and a polarizing filter worse.

I disagree, I take it similar to wearing sunglasses, both cut out unnecessary light/glare and make it easier to see the scene.

---------- Post added 09-01-20 at 20:13 ----------

Originally posted by johnde

Time to learn more about the camera!

When all else fails I use manual aperture and shutter speed and try different combinations until I get it right

**ramseybuckeye** · 09-02-2020, 06:20 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by robgski

I have never had that problem with a polarizer.

---------- Post added 09-01-20 at 20:07 ----------

I disagree, I take it similar to wearing sunglasses, both cut out unnecessary light/glare and make it easier to see the scene.

---------- Post added 09-01-20 at 20:13 ----------

When all else fails I use manual aperture and shutter speed and try different combinations until I get it right

I’ve never shot a rainbow with a polarizer, but I have read that they can make a rainbow disappear and they can enhance the colors, it’s a very fine line and you have to be very careful in turning the filter. So I guess everyone is right.

stevebrot · 09-02-2020, 01:38 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by ramseybuckeye

I’ve never shot a rainbow with a polarizer,

I have and with excellent results.

Originally posted by ramseybuckeye

I have read that they can make a rainbow disappear

With a polarizer, as with rainbows, angle is everything. My experience has not been that the rainbow disappears so much as the glare increases.

Steve

**robgski** · 09-07-2020, 04:01 PM

FWIW, K-1 and FA 24-90 IF AL with a CPL, the most vivid rainbow I ever saw, on Friday 4 September.

08-30-2020, 09:12 PM	#23
mikesbike Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Southeastern Michigan Posts: 4,549	I've had fine results for rainbows from my KP just with the camera set to the "P" mode, and JPEG images with the usual segmented metering. Custom Image processing set to the most common "Bright" category. Your shots were definitely overexposed. And I agree a UV filter would not be a good idea, and a polarizing filter worse. ---------- Post added 08-30-20 at 09:19 PM ---------- Originally posted by thazooo Chimp. Take your shot, Chimp it and the Histogram. Adjust and shoot again. Rainbow is Landscape so you have the time for a Chimp and adjust. I do it every time Yep- check results and change exposure accordingly I generally expose for the scene below the rainbow because I plan to have the rainbow over that scene anyway, then adjust accordingly. If in "P" mode, I just use the +/_ exposure comp button. Last edited by mikesbike; 08-30-2020 at 09:20 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
KP vs K-70 - to KP or not to KP, that is the question	OldChE	Pentax DSLR Discussion	28	11-02-2019 05:29 AM
Why Pentax KP? Para que la Pentax KP?	ZeaFoto	Pentax KP	16	06-14-2018 08:53 AM
Night Why Why Why	eccentricphotography	Pentax K-3 Photo Contest	3	06-02-2014 09:36 AM
Burning of the Koran ... ! Why? Why? Why?	jpzk	General Talk	128	09-14-2010 04:45 PM

08-30-2020, 08:45 AM	#16
johnde Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2015 Posts: 10 Original Poster	Thanks for all the comments. I know I had not set the camera specifically for the shot but I did not know how long the rainbow would last. I took the couple of quick shots and saw no rainbow so I just ditched it an went for the iPhone. I needed that to get the full rainbow in pano mode anyway. Time to learn more about the camera!

08-30-2020, 09:10 AM	#17
FozzFoster Custom User Title Join Date: Jan 2016 Location: Alberta Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by johnde I needed that to get the full rainbow in pano mode anyway. Time to learn more about the camera! Take multiple pictures with your dSLR and stitch them together in post-production to create panos!

08-30-2020, 09:25 AM - 3 Likes	#18
jack002 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Missouri Photos: Albums Posts: 727	I find that underexposure shooting raw can be fixed in post, overexposure can not. So under is always better

08-30-2020, 09:40 AM - 1 Like	#19
DWS1 Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2018 Location: Arkansas, USA Posts: 1,169	Originally posted by Wheatfield Polarizing filters have an annoying habit of making rainbows dissappear. Correct, polarizing filters can easily make rainbows disappear. But, they can also enhance the colors. Under many conditions there is a very small and fine point in adjusting the filter where the colors can really pop. They can cut the glare out of the atmosphere but leave the colors. This point in the adjustment range is very, very small and can easily be missed. The same thing can happen with images reflected off water, cuts the glare out but leaves the reflected image. It took me a lot of practice and experimentation to figure this out.

08-30-2020, 10:00 AM - 2 Likes	#20
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by johnde Time to learn more about the camera! In case you missed it, the shot is probably salvageable in Lightroom. Steve

08-30-2020, 11:51 AM	#21
Wasp Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2017 Location: Pretoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,661	This is one of those times where sunny f/11 does not apply. You start with a meter reading, take a shot, replay, adjust exposure and repeat until you get the desired result. Isn't digital great? On film you had to bracket and hope for the best.

08-30-2020, 12:34 PM	#22
steamloco76 Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Pennsylvania Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,710	The KP sensor holds recoverable detail in shadows several stops underexposed, highlights? Once highlights are clipped, there is nothing there to recover. I’ve shot sunsets with my KP. Pattern metering, ISO usually set to 400 and I start with the exposure set by the camera and then bracket down to 3 stops under. Same would work for a rainbow. Often the best exposure is -2 or -3 stops.

09-01-2020, 09:25 AM - 1 Like	#24
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Originally posted by Wasp This is one of those times where sunny f/11 does not apply. You start with a meter reading, take a shot, replay, adjust exposure and repeat until you get the desired result. Isn't digital great? On film you had to bracket and hope for the best. It used to be Sunny 16 when it was film. Does digital work better starting at f11?

09-01-2020, 01:06 PM	#25
pschlute Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Surrey, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,202	Originally posted by Wheatfield It used to be Sunny 16 when it was film. Does digital work better starting at f11? Depends on how strong the sun is

09-01-2020, 03:20 PM - 1 Like	#26
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by Wheatfield It used to be Sunny 16 when it was film. Does digital work better starting at f11? High latitude and it is still winter there. Steve

09-01-2020, 05:04 PM	#27
robgski Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Shenandoah Valley, Virginia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,799	Originally posted by Wheatfield Polarizing filters have an annoying habit of making rainbows dissappear. I have never had that problem with a polarizer. ---------- Post added 09-01-20 at 20:07 ---------- Originally posted by mikesbike I agree a UV filter would not be a good idea, and a polarizing filter worse. I disagree, I take it similar to wearing sunglasses, both cut out unnecessary light/glare and make it easier to see the scene. ---------- Post added 09-01-20 at 20:13 ---------- Originally posted by johnde Time to learn more about the camera! When all else fails I use manual aperture and shutter speed and try different combinations until I get it right

09-02-2020, 06:20 AM - 1 Like	#28
ramseybuckeye Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Hampstead, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 17,292	Originally posted by robgski I have never had that problem with a polarizer. ---------- Post added 09-01-20 at 20:07 ---------- I disagree, I take it similar to wearing sunglasses, both cut out unnecessary light/glare and make it easier to see the scene. ---------- Post added 09-01-20 at 20:13 ---------- When all else fails I use manual aperture and shutter speed and try different combinations until I get it right I’ve never shot a rainbow with a polarizer, but I have read that they can make a rainbow disappear and they can enhance the colors, it’s a very fine line and you have to be very careful in turning the filter. So I guess everyone is right.

09-02-2020, 01:38 PM - 2 Likes	#29
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by ramseybuckeye I’ve never shot a rainbow with a polarizer, I have and with excellent results. Originally posted by ramseybuckeye I have read that they can make a rainbow disappear With a polarizer, as with rainbows, angle is everything. My experience has not been that the rainbow disappears so much as the glare increases. Steve

09-07-2020, 04:01 PM	#30
robgski Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Shenandoah Valley, Virginia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,799	FWIW, K-1 and FA 24-90 IF AL with a CPL, the most vivid rainbow I ever saw, on Friday 4 September.