Is there a way to fix the WAY overblown highlights

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS for Canon

01/01/2007 07:11:12 PM · #1

Is there any way to fix the WAY overblown highlights in this picture ?

magnus

Canon EOS-30D

01/01/2007 07:41:43 PM · #2

You'd have to very carefully clone in skin from a shoulder or somewhere the the highlights aren't blown. But it's a lot of work, with many, many strokes of a brush at low opacity (10-15%). Since the image isn't really sharp in the first place, I'd just enjoy it as it is.

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

01/01/2007 08:08:16 PM · #3

Originally posted by magnus:

Maybe she wouldn't mind the kids looking like they have leprosy! heh

Edit to add: (The kids don't currently look like they have leprosy, but they would if I were to try to clone their skin to get rid of the glare.)

Message edited by author 2007-01-01 20:12:44.

Nikon D200

01/01/2007 08:15:07 PM · #4

Hi Kashi,

I think Magnus and Aliqui are right, it's going to be way too much work to do what you'd need to, and the results aren't likely going to be what you are looking for.

Have you considered conversion to black and white? That might be my quick and dirty way to help it - it won't bring back the detail that's gone but it might be less noticeably blown out.

Good luck!

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

01/01/2007 08:19:55 PM · #5

I think I'm going to hold out for a reshoot - IF the kids will co-operate.

I tried a B&W conversion, but didn't get anything I was happy with doing that.

I started some cloning, but don't have the patience for it tonight (and not the knowledge or talent in general)

dwterry

Canon EOS-1D Mark III

01/01/2007 09:05:57 PM · #6

The main thing that is noticeably wrong with an overblown image is the lack of details in the highlights. So here's something for you to try:

Lower the overall exposure a few notches, and then select the blown out area and add a little bit of noise. Just a tiny bit at first. This will add some texture to the blown highlights. Now... hide what you did by adding noise to the rest of the image and make it look like it's on purpose!!! :-)

Here's a before and after:

By the way, I also sharpened the image before I did anything. And then I used the history brush to erase some of the noise that I had added.

kteach

Nikon D50

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6

01/01/2007 09:30:32 PM · #7

I just started playing around with it, so I don't remember everything I did. But, I used some adjustment layers with the highlights and shadows (one was changed to soft light), converted to duotone, added a gothic glow action, then reduced the contrast.

Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro for Canon

01/01/2007 09:37:23 PM · #8

I just spend about an hour playing with this photo in Photoshop. No matter what I did I couldn't figure out how to really tone down the glare without doing a clone. (I did however accidentally give the wee girl a 3rd eye with the Spot Healing Brush. I've never played with that.. give me a break! heh) When I'd adjust the brightness I'd always lose detail in the faces, so then I realized something. If I blow out the whole face and adjust the brightness I retain the face detail and the forehead/cheek glare is less obvious!

I'm sure there's better ways to do this, but here's what I did.

Image/Adjustments/Selective color (on Relative or Absolute):
Colors: Choose White then slide the Black bar to -100
Brightness/Contrast: Brightness -40ish / Contrast -10ish

This doesn't necessarily solve the problem, but it makes it look a little more intentional I think.

I did a b&w while I was at it like L2 had suggested.

Tranquil

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

01/01/2007 09:52:52 PM · #9

Here's my rendition:

A little bit more subtle but the good thing about my technique is that you can easily adjust the variability of it and continue to add to the effect.

I just created a new blank layer, selected the Clone Stamp and set the mode to Darken with the Sample All Layers option clicked. I then brought the opacity down to about 30% and started to clone the highlights by sampling from the skin tones around their heads and on their necks/shoulders. The good thing about this technique is firstly, you work on a separate layer not on the pixels, and also if you want it darker, you go over the same spot more than once with the low opacity brush to make the effect more significant. Also with this technique, if you make a mistake and don't want to undo, you can simple erase that part of the layer and start over again.

If you have any other questions feel free to post here or PM me.

- Lee

Sunniee

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

01/01/2007 10:57:47 PM · #10

Yet another attempt

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

01/01/2007 11:11:27 PM · #11

If the highlights are totally blown as in this example, you can always draw or paint back in the detail as best you can...

I think I reproduced the underlying image here with astonishing accuracy. :)

On a serious note, my first inclination would be to clone skin as first suggested. If that didn't work out, Black & White or High Key might be the way to go. Of course, if a reshoot is an option, that would be best since there are some other issues with the pic (i.e. focus). Try a range of exposures or use exposure bracketing if you have that.

idnic

Canon EOS-60D

01/01/2007 11:33:40 PM · #12

Blown highlights are in this season. :)

01/01/2007 11:56:07 PM · #13

Here's a reasonable attempt:

I didn't clone skin - just used the paint brush at 20% and sampled areas around the blown area for the color and painted it, keeing it darker around the outer parts. Then added some noise, then blurred the noise a little, then some desat - about 10% overall and more desat on the red. Sharpened and netimaged as well. It's one of those things you sit there and keep tweaking til it looks good.

Simple desat, sharpen, adjust levels & curves, neatimage and a little dodge & burn.

01/02/2007 05:35:20 AM · #14

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Here's a reasonable attempt:

I didn't clone skin - just used the paint brush at 20% and sampled areas around the blown area for the color and painted it, keeing it darker around the outer parts. Then added some noise, then blurred the noise a little, then some desat - about 10% overall and more desat on the red. Sharpened and netimaged as well. It's one of those things you sit there and keep tweaking til it looks good.

Simple desat, sharpen, adjust levels & curves, neatimage and a little dodge & burn.

While the blown highlights are gone, they now kinda look like dolls in those edits. The skin looks a little too smooth and powdered to me.

01/02/2007 05:42:16 AM · #15

Originally posted by aliqui:

While the blown highlights are gone, they now kinda look like dolls in those edits. The skin looks a little too smooth and powdered to me.

Lesser of two evils, I suppose. Unless you prefer the white blotches. ;-)
I could spend a couple hours and make it somehwat better, but working with a small pic that also has focus issues to begin with, it's not worth it - for me anyway - you're free to take a shot. :)

01/02/2007 05:47:05 AM · #16

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

It's for the kids! Look at those eyes. You must edit until perfect! No sleep for you, sir.

01/02/2007 05:49:45 AM · #17

what is this "sleep" of which you speak?

01/02/2007 05:53:25 AM · #18

Thanks everyone - there are some really good edits in here, and I'll take a better look at the techniques later today to see what I have the ability to reproduce on my own.

I am going to try to do a reshoot - but if any of you have worked with children, you'll understand that just getting that one shot took effort (add in that the older one is mildly autistic, and just wanted lay there and make faces and squeal at me).

Hopefully I'll get them to co-operate at some point when the baby is sleeping soon !

01/03/2007 02:27:56 PM · #19

Okay - the kids weren't too interested in staying still today - so the pose and expressions are not so good.

Recharged the camera batteries, and had the kids on the floor instead of a bed this time.

So - disregard the pose and expressions - are the technicals any better in this picture ?

fotomann_forever

01/03/2007 02:31:03 PM · #20

Technicals are MUCH better!