How Would You, Take a Grey-ed out background, and make it white?

gothgirl

gothgirl

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,589
Edit My Images
Yes
Until I can invest in a better lighting system.... I want to perfect my technique at getting a greyed out bacground to white as this is a problem I consistently have, I have CS5 and LR.

What I would usually do is either a levels tweak, as seen here
http://tabletopstudio.com/white_backgrounds.html
Click to expand...


Or in the past, I have used layers, to overexpose the background, on one layer until it is white, then merge the two, using the correctly exposed image and overexposed to white background

How would you do it? Which method do you find least time consuming, and which method has given best results for you?

I've been having a lot of trouble with photographing my hedgehogs especially, with the spines, they form a very uneven / awkward edge to go around

This is the sort of result I am getting, (*I notice I missed a bit near his left ear)
Splinter by Morro Fenrir, on Flickr
 
@gothgirl

If the backgound is white, why is it coming out grey? The problem is clearly a lighting issue, and not a post processing one.

I've posted this before, but it's useful here as well. It was shot as part of a tutorial for students to demonstrate why you don't need stupid amounts of lighting in a studio shot.

This was a paper cup on a white background made from a piece of A1 white paper. Lit with one Nikon SB800 speedlight.

This is straight off camera.

5K4LZom.jpg


You don't actually want a white background to be completely white as in R255, G255, B255, as it looks false, and unrealistic.

However, if lit well, if I DID want it pure white, it's already so close that doing so with a simple dodge brush is a doddle.

3iMmFwT.jpg


The problem is not your processing... it's your lighting! You should not be fixing such fundamental photography problems in post. If you need to make a white background white in post processing, then you're photography is to blame.

How was your shot lit? Post up an unedited raw image, and we'll be able to see where you are going wrong.
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
@gothgirl

If the backgound is white, why is it coming out grey? The problem is clearly a lighting issue, and not a post processing one.

I've posted this before, but it's useful here as well. It was shot as part of a tutorial for students to demonstrate why you don't need stupid amounts of lighting in a studio shot.

This was a paper cup on a white background made from a piece of A1 white paper. Lit with one Nikon SB800 speedlight.

This is straight off camera.

5K4LZom.jpg


You don't actually want a white background to be completely white as in R255, G255, B255, as it looks false, and unrealistic.

However, if lit well, if I DID want it pure white, it's already so close that doing so with a simple dodge brush is a doddle.

3iMmFwT.jpg


The problem is not your processing... it's your lighting! You should not be fixing such fundamental photography problems in post. If you need to make a white background white in post processing, then you're photography is to blame.

How was your shot lit? Post up an unedited raw image, and we'll be able to see where you are going wrong.
Click to expand...

@Pookeyhead

As stated in my first post
Until I can invest in a better lighting system....
Click to expand...

I'm aware it's a lighting issue, I don't have any decent lights nor a flashgun, only my on camera flash at present

So often white scenes I shoot, end up grey in the image.

What I wanted to know is how can I sort these images out in PP, efficiently, until I get better lighting

Can you explain your dodge technique please? I am not familiar with a lot of PP methods
 
@gothgirl

The shots I took were with a single lightsource. One light. It doesn't have to be a flashgun... any light...

I just opened the image in Photoshop, selected the dodge tool, set it to "highlight" and reduced opacity to around 10% and lightly brushed away the remaining grey.

Totally white backgrounds look silly though. White, if correctly exposed, should never be utterly white. It never is in real life, so why do it in your shots. The first image I posted is clearly a shot of a cup on a white background, but it doesn't have to be bombed out R255, G255, B255 in order to be perceived as white.

It would still be much easier if you posted the unedited image of the hedgehog, to see what you're up against, as what may work for the image I posted, may not be the best method for your shot, depending on what state the lighting is in, and how bad the background is. I'd really need to see it before I can advise accurately.

I really would NOT be using the camera's pop up flash for anything. If I were you, the best thing you could do would be to gaffa tape the b**tard down and never use it again!
 
If your background is excessively grey... you may have more luck with the dodge tool set to midtones... but it will then start to affect the tonality of the hedgehog.
 
If you want to light, and you don't have a light, you're going to have problems. Even a torch can be used...or wait for a sunny day...!
 
@gothgirl


OK.. problem is the light is head on from camera, and HARD... so you have deep shadows that will be a problem to remove. Also, the surface the hedgehog is on is not smooth, so the light that is raking across it at that low angle is casting shadows too... end result, it's no longer white. Being a hard ligt source, head on, and close to the object, you're getting light fall off due to inverse square law, so the light at the back of the set is significantly darker than the front. You need a softer (much bigger) light source, further away, and higher up. Shining a light on a piece of white card (around A1) above the set to act like a mini suspended ceiling, would help, as the light will then reflect down evenly. This is how I lit the cup image.

Your white balance is also out with this image... it's actually light magenta, not white.


Using Photoshop.....

Step one.. white balance by using the midrange dropper tool in the PS adjustment palette.

JjOgTkU.jpg


..and click on the backdrop.

HYSlD0K.jpg


Then pick up the dodge tool and set it to a large, soft brush set to 10% opacity.

D8oCsys.jpg


13qR363.jpg


and start lighty brushing the backdrop back.

When it starts to look like this....

d7CNaDP.jpg


...stop, and switch the dodge tool to midtones... and carry on gently with a smaller brush. Th trick here is to NOT remove all the shadows, as that will look sh1t, like it's cut and paste... but instead to blend them in.

rlp65nc.jpg


Then switch to highlights and around 5% opcaity, and with a smaller brush still... carefully dodge around the details.

Once it looks clean, use levels to brighten it a bit by moving the centre point to the left, and then use curves to bring the shadows back a bit.

X3ARchp.jpg


This is not good photography however... it looks OK... but it's not photography... it's arsing about rescuing a poor image. Learn to light. You don;t need expensive lights... light is light... read up on it.. research it.. learn.. practice. Good photography does NOT come from a computer. Never has... never will. I got superb results by doing NOTHING in a computer, and one light... and a couple of pieces of paper.


However.... that background is a mess, and it still looks awful. Get a smooth, clean piece of A1 paper, and form a "scoop" so you have a seamless backdrop instead of a lumpy duvet!!


Seriously... learn to light.

I recall your LAST post on this subject, with the snakes.. remember? You got similar advice from everyone in that thread. You're still polishing pop-up flashlit turds in post process though.

Good photography needs good lighting, and studio shots need good backgrounds. Plonking animals down on your bed or whatever it is, and using pop up flash is NOT photography, and will always look sh1t... always.

Sorry to be harsh... but if you want to improve your images... you improve your photography, not your post processing. You do not need expensive lights... you just need to know how to light.
 
Last edited:
@Pookeyhead

Harsh away, it's all helpful so I don't mind

I do want to improve my photography

The photo was took inside a light tent, which has since been replaced by an acrylic infinity curve shooting table , which by all accounts should be much better.

As per lighting , I don't have torches, large windows or anything at the minute I could use, so I have to deal with what I have which is on camera flash, and that is all

I rescue animals and have a lot at the minute, which costs a lot of money in vets bills, food and other consumables

a very kind member on here offered me some lights, and even offered to drop them off for me

but with ongoing work on my house, and the fact that I can be called out on a moments notice , I haven't been able to get them from him, as I just can't be certain when I'll be in and it's too far for him to drive if I'm not there, and I wouldn't do that to anyone, let alone someone who's gone out their way to do me a favour !

Sometimes I just have to prioritise, time and funding, and as much as I would love to buy what I need (and more) little lives come first...

I'm aware my lighting situation is s*** , which is why I wanted to know the best way to polish a turd for now " until I get a better lighting system "

Hence posting in post processing
And not in lighting and studio
;-)

Thank you very much for your tutorial on the dodge tool, definitely going to have a go with that



Sent from my iPhone using Talk Photography Forums
 
Last edited:
How about not turning it to white at all? I moved right away from lit backgrounds and I never had a client complain.
 
It's not for clients but for myself @The23rdman I want some "stock" type images, and I cannot see any harm in expanding my knowledge on post processing

But i do often use natural and off white backgrounds also
 
gothgirl said:
It's not for clients but for myself @The23rdman I want some "stock" type images, and I cannot see any harm in expanding my knowledge on post processing

But i do often use natural and off white backgrounds also
Click to expand...
No harm in it at all. I made the suggestion because of your lack of gear.
 
The23rdman said:
No harm in it at all. I made the suggestion because of your lack of gear.
Click to expand...

Yeah I do often use non white backgrounds, but I do need some white background shots, but I struggle with my gear (or lac of)
 
gothgirl said:
@Pookeyhead



As per lighting , I don't have torches, large windows or anything at the minute I could use, so I have to deal with what I have which is on camera flash, and that is all
Click to expand...

No.. don't use it as a sole light source... it's awful. use daylight. There must be a window in your house or flat... surely?



gothgirl said:
a very kind member on here offered me some lights, and even offered to drop them off for me
Click to expand...

Hopefully that will help enormously.







gothgirl said:
Thank you very much for your tutorial on the dodge tool, definitely going to have a go with that
Click to expand...

You're welcome.
 
Seriously and moving on from what David and Dean said, you're really painting yourself into a corner for no good reason. You're fighting physics then trying to use PP to recover.

A window light and better background would give you an infinitely better photograph. I know that's not what you want, but sometimes we have to have a serious word with ourselves and stop fighting the obvious.

It's a simple fact that a white background takes careful lighting, and that trying to fix on camera flash in post will give you at best a 2nd rate image. Why waste time and effort trying? That effort would be better employed building a daylight 'environmental studio'.

Understanding the quality of light is the single most important thing to improve your photography, 3 sides of a large cardboard box dressed appropriately will make an adequate daylight studio. Clay plant pots, straw, old sacks, logs, autumn leaves etc will make great pictures. Then go back to the white background experiments when you've got the lights sorted.

Have you got any of the often recommended lighting books? I'd be happy to loan you the speedlighters handbook to help you get your head round the basics. IIRC you sometimes come into Donny to work?
 
gothgirl said:
Can you explain your dodge technique please? I am not familiar with a lot of PP methods
Click to expand...

Here's an alternative to the Dodge (or Burn) method - link - it does the same job but it can be undone if you make a mistake (see paragraph before 3rd pic in 'Step 7').
 
Last edited:
if you have onboard flash, can you not bounce or diffuse that with some bits and pieces from ebay?
even if it was just directed upwards onto a piece of highly reflected white card like plasticard, and then that illuminated your subject and background.
 
I understand that the PP is just putting me on until I can get better lighting, but I do not have the funding.

I live in a stone cottage that has tiny windows, it's very dark (and impossible to find curtains that fit haha) so natural light just isn't available unless I go outside

My calument shooting table had arrived , I also have ONE photo light , it's an indesit with one of the energy saving photo lights (meant to be equivalent of 100w)

Also the kind member who offered me lights still has them , so when he gets back off holiday in two weeks, hopefully we can sort something out

In the meantime I've used my new table studio , with the one overhead light (above/behind) and flash as fill (in front )

Shots aren't ideal as the light is not strong , ideally I want to get rid of on camera flash altogether

But much better than with the light box

Will post shots later

I have a book I need to read when I get a chance "lights, camera. Magic?" Or something along those lines

Thank you for the offer though @Phil V





Sent from my iPhone using Talk Photography Forums
 
@Pookeyhead & @Phil V

Here is a new example, the straight off the camera version, and the edited version

This is shot on a shooting table, instead of my old light tent, and one old indesit light, with my flash as filler

Still not ideal, but I am much happier, once I get some more lights, I believe the improvement will be dramatic!

View attachment 11983 View attachment 11984
 
Much better. If you spend a bit more time on it you could make that look decent.
 
The23rdman said:
Much better. If you spend a bit more time on it you could make that look decent.
Click to expand...
Yeah that was just a fast edit using layers and exposure, if I used the dodge method, could do really nicely.

I need to invest in a graphics tablet, instead of a 99p mouse haha
 
gothgirl said:
Yeah that was just a fast edit using layers and exposure, if I used the dodge method, could do really nicely.

I need to invest in a graphics tablet, instead of a 99p mouse haha
Click to expand...
A tablet is essential for fiddly work.
 
gothgirl said:
@Pookeyhead & @Phil V

Here is a new example, the straight off the camera version, and the edited version

This is shot on a shooting table, instead of my old light tent, and one old indesit light, with my flash as filler

Still not ideal, but I am much happier, once I get some more lights, I believe the improvement will be dramatic!
Click to expand...

Get the light away from the camera more. also, the original does not have a shadow above the hedgehog, but on the retouched version you've left the grey in all the way around the hedgehog, which makes it look like there's a shadow all the way around. You need to remove the grey from the top of the hedgehog.

You need to use the dodge tools. Don't worry about the mouse. I used a mouse to do the version the further up the thread.

You've still got the light very close to the camera though, so it still looks like on camera flash. The second image still looks very much like the first one in terms of lighting.

Have you been reading up on lighting?


pjm1 said:
Why not go outside on a cloudy day? Take your sheet of white A3 paper with you...

If it's a bit cloudy rather than overcast, you'll still some directional but diffuse light? And it's free light!
Click to expand...


This would probably give much better results. Give it a try.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top