# Bed Headboard



## joel28 (Jul 20, 2012)

How can i improve this bed headboard image?

The camera meter says that the exposure is correct...


----------



## LizardKing (Jul 20, 2012)

Well... I pretty much don't have much experience with lightning, but this is a white-on-white image and that's a tricky one to do it right... So be patient if it takes several tries to get it right.
Wait for someone more experienced to tell you what you can do in this particular scene, but other than that try to do a Google search on white-on-white lightning and you'll find lots of great options to work with this kind of situations.


----------



## Derrel (Jul 20, 2012)

I think it needed MORE light...a longer, more-generous exposure would probably have helped.


----------



## joel28 (Jul 20, 2012)

Derrel said:


> I think it needed MORE light...a longer, more-generous exposure would probably have helped.



1) What do u do when your image is way underexposed and the meter tells you the exposure is correct?

2) If you try to photograph your bed headboard in your bedroom, would u bring in extra lighting for the shot? or would u be able to take the image like the room was bright if u played with aperture, shutter speed, ISO?


----------



## KmH (Jul 20, 2012)

The camera meter is calibrated to middle gray. When presented with a mostly white scene the camera meter reduces the exposure to match it's calibration.


----------



## joel28 (Jul 20, 2012)

KmH said:


> The camera meter is calibrated to middle gray. When presented with a mostly white scene the camera meter reduces the exposure to match it's calibration.



So what would you do in such situation?

To be honest, i felt stupid posting this question, but I do think its an important question and learning foundation for newbies.


----------



## ItsDaveTime (Jul 20, 2012)

Definitely underexposed.  Also, you can see the shadows of the headboard, so you have some light coming in from an angle, which you don't want.  If this is in a bedroom with nice light coming in from a window, I would take the picture in the early morning when the sun is coming up, or in the evening when the sun is going down (depending on what direction that window is facing of course).  This will give you some nice light to shoot with.  I assume you have only one window in that room on one side of the bed, so you will need a reflector on the other side so you get even light.  If you don't have one, you can simply use a large piece of white board as a reflector.  Since you are taking a picture of white on white, I would change your camera from auto white balance to daylight.  Also your ISO should be around 100/200 and probably around f/8 so you get everything in focus.


----------



## KmH (Jul 20, 2012)

joel28 said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > The camera meter is calibrated to middle gray. When presented with a mostly white scene the camera meter reduces the exposure to match it's calibration.
> ...


You have to increase the exposure to compensate.

Most scenes we photograph do average out to a middle gray, exposure wise, which is why the camera light meter is calibrated the way it is.


----------



## Superfitz (Jul 20, 2012)

...


----------



## Superfitz (Jul 20, 2012)

Edit...I must of been typing as Kmh was typing


----------



## 480sparky (Jul 20, 2012)

The histogram is showing all the data crammed into the middle, with just a little at the black end.  Bring the white point down, maybe to 150 or 160.


----------



## Trever1t (Jul 20, 2012)

This is where the EC (exposure compensation) button can come into play if you are shooting a semi-auto mode like A or S priority. A positive compensation for mostly white scenes or negative compensation for dark scenes. If in Manual mode just adjust accordingly.


----------



## tirediron (Jul 20, 2012)

To start with, don't worry about what the camera tells you is correct.  If it looks wrong to the eye, it's wrong!  White can be dificult to expose well; there's two ways that you could have improved this.  One was by using an incident meter to determine an exposure based on the amount of light falling on the subject rather than the amount of light reflected from the subject (which is known as a reflectance reading, what all camera meters are).  This would have probably been a long-ish exposure requiring a tripod and remote release.  A better solution would have been to add more light.  One or two well diffused off-camera speedlights and a few test shots would have solved the problem fairly quickly.


----------



## Derrel (Jul 20, 2012)

Here is a little memory device I have just come up with for you Joel. BTW, Joel and I spoke by telephone yesterday, and I have agreed to mentor him via PM, and via a photography instruction book we will have in common. As far as how to shift, or "compensate" exposure to get black or white subjects to render properly, and not as a middle-gray value, remember this simple rhyme:

Meter,meter, why do you lead me astray?
Why do not my pictures turn out the right way?
Oh, the fault is mine, for I forgot:
If you want it white, you must add more light!
And if you want it black, you need to dial it back


----------



## ann (Jul 20, 2012)

The meter makes recommendation, it isn't an absolute, and as you see it isn't correct. As others have already indicated how the meter works, you will need to open up a stop or maybe even two. You need to test your equipment to see what works best .


----------



## mjhoward (Jul 20, 2012)

Derrel said:


> BTW, Joel and I spoke by telephone yesterday, and I have agreed to mentor him via PM, and via a photography instruction book we will have in common.



Derrel is off the market?!  Dam*it!


----------



## TCampbell (Jul 20, 2012)

The camera's meter was "fooled" by the fact that nearly everything in this photo is "white".  

A true "incident" light meter (a hand-held device that you hold in the same light where you plan to shoot your subject) measures the amount of light falling on the scene.  It's measuring only the amount of light delivered to that location from the light source.  It is always correct.

A camera doesn't have an "incident" light meter.  It has a "reflected" light meter.  Whereas an "incident" light meter measures light falling onto the scene from the source, a "reflected" light meter measures light falling onto a scene from the source and then REFLECTING off that scene, into the camera lens, and ultimately to the camera's meter.  The "problem" with a "reflected" meter is that not all materials reflect the same amount of light.  A matte black fabric doesn't reflect much light at all.  A solid white scene reflects quite a bit of light.  This happens EVEN if both subjects were placed in identical lighting (so the true amount of light isn't changed... only the subject is changed, and yet the camera's "reflected" light meter will report that the two scenes metered differently when they SHOULD have metered identically.

Camera's are calibrated to a "middle" gray.  It's a bit arbitrary as to what this means, but Ansel Adams claimed that "middle" gray was a gray with 18% reflectivity.  More modern interpretations suggest the number is closer to 12% -- and different cameras are calibrated differently -- but usually in this range.

The key takeaway for YOU is that different subjects reflect a different amount of light even if the light source was the same for both.  Realize that since dark scenes hardly reflect any light, the camera (which is struggling to achieve "middle gray") will tend to over-expose dark scenes.  And since white scenes should rightly produce a histogram with most of the pixels to the far right (to the whites) the camera ... again, trying to achieve middle grey, will tend to under-expose those white scenes.

Now that you know this is happening (and why), there's a feature on your camera called exposure compensation.  You can tell the camera to deliberately over-expose or underexpose a shot ... by several stops if you want.  If you shoot in manual, just shoot the scene so that you're over-exposing the white head-board by at least 1 full stop (maybe a 1-1/3 stops.)  If the headboard and wall were completely black, then you'd be deliberately underexposing by the a stop (or more).  If using any of the auto-modes (program, aperture, or time/shutter value) then the computer will control the exposure... so instead you have to use the aperture compensation control on your camera to tell it to either overexpose or underexpose the shot.

Sekonic (maker of hand-held incident light meters) has a series of instruction videos (extolling the virtues of their products) but they are actually VERY educational and, if you watch them, you WILL understand why that white headboard looks rather dingy and dim.  The link is here:  Control the Light and Improve Your Photography: Part I


----------



## baturn (Jul 20, 2012)

Place a naked lady in front of the headboard and meter off her.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Jul 20, 2012)

ItsDaveTime said:


> ... so you have some light coming in from an angle, which you don't want.



Actually, light at an angle shows more detail and depth than straight on light. :thumbup:


----------



## bratkinson (Jul 21, 2012)

Years ago when I was shooting 35mm, I had an incident meter.  I used it very little, as most of my work was outdoors back then.  When I sold it all off about 2002, the meter was part of the package deal.

Since I don't have an incident meter now, for the headboard shot, I'd go with the 'keep trying until I get what I like' method.  Fortunately, headboards don't move and don't fall into the category of 'missed opportunity' shots.  So there's lots of time to keep trying.

As mentioned above, adjusting exposure compensation on your camera is a quick and effective solution.  But if you're shooting in A, P, Av or Tv modes where the camera decides all or most all settings for you, it may not come up with the what could be the best choice.  For example, if you adjust the EC, the camera may simply increase the ISO, when a longer exposure at the same ISO might produce a better result.

My method is to look at what settings the camera actually DID use on the shot, and then go full manual, using those settings as a starting point.  That way, I can play with exposure, aperture, and ISO to my hearts content, and if I am using flash, play with the power settings there, too.  I may end up taking 50, 60, even 100 shots if I have the time and motivation.  Then its simply pick the best one once I can look at each of them more closely on my computer.  If you have the option of having your computer hooked directly to the camera (I dont), you can decide which way to go on each of the settings with fewer results out in left field somewhere.

For what its worth, I consider myself a well experienced rookie, even with 30+ years of film and 10 or so digital shooting behind me.  I still delete far more pictures than I keep.  Not having to pay for rolls of film and processing is so much better!  These days, I do most of my indoor shooting in aperture priority, although if the shutter speed the camera chooses is too slow (for handheld or moving subjects), Ill either go to a monopod or crank up the ISO to get the shot.  

If you have a fast lens (f2.8 or lower f-number) and a tripod, Id consider trying a few wide open to get a super thin depth of field, focused right on the headboard.  Precision focusing would be an absolute requirement, and would require the sensor and the headboard be perfectly parallel with each other.


----------



## enzodm (Jul 22, 2012)

In addition to previous hints, I tried to just enhance your original image. It is possible that there are two light sources, e.g., sun from a window + electric light on? If so, remember that is better not to mix light sources, because white balancing becomes very difficult. Here I had to decrease saturation to have a more or less neutral color: one side tends to orange, the other to light blue.


----------



## SoCalTiger (Jul 22, 2012)

enzodm said:


> In addition to previous hints, I tried to just enhance your original image. It is possible that there are two light sources, e.g., sun from a window + electric light on? If so, remember that is better not to mix light sources, because white balancing becomes very difficult. Here I had to decrease saturation to have a more or less neutral color: one side tends to orange, the other to light blue.
> 
> View attachment 14506



The problem with adjusting a badly underexposed image like this is that is generates a lot of noise in the darker areas though which you can see in the shadows. Definitely would be much easier for OP to just reshoot and expose properly in this case since it is a static object.


----------



## Theninjaseal (Jul 22, 2012)

A different way of saying what everyone else is:
When your camera sees white, it tries to even it out to gray.  Often when something is "white," it's because it's a blown highlight or something of that nature.  The camera sees white in either case, and darkens the picture.  If the white is a blown highlight, this is good and beneficial.  But since your _subject_ is actually the color white, you have to tell the camera "no really, this isn't a blown highlight or anything, it's supposed to be bright white so let it stay that way"

The way you do that, exactly, depends on your camera.  Posting your brand/line/model would be helpful.  Often there is a button for EC - it usually looks like this


Once you hit that, move the slider to the right with your weapon of choice - dial, scroll button, touch screen, etc. - and let the good times roll
Take a few test shots and see how you like them
Tweak the exposure in post (usually photoshop or lightroom) so that it looks the best
Use the histogram as a reference, not a guide.  Not sure if that makes sense, but what looks best is what should determine exposure. Not what it auto-exposes to


Also, are you using your camera in a semi-manual mode? Av, Sv, Man? Because if you're in Auto mode then you're SOL til you learn how to use some others 

Happy shooting,
   Jimbo


----------



## 50mm (Jul 23, 2012)

WOW!
This thread is just what I need.  Thanks everyone for the best lesson of the day.


----------



## truephotoga (Jul 31, 2012)

This also might depend on what metering mode your camera was set to.  Were you set to evaluative or spot metering?


----------



## cgipson1 (Oct 5, 2012)

Yoeli,

As suggested above....try about +2 Exposure compensation... and set a custom white balance, if there is any "artificial" light source. Make sure there is only one light source... otherwise you can get color cast issues. For instance, if you mix daylight and incandescent, it is hard to correct for.


----------



## dbeeler (Mar 22, 2013)

pin or tape a sheet to the wall behind the headboard, if you have a green screen even better.  if you have a black sheet great otherwise pick something darker than white.


----------



## JOSHardson (Mar 22, 2013)

The JPEG compression didn't play nicely, but this is your photo (mostly) corrected in post. As other have stated, to get it to look like this in camera, you need consistent light temperature and a little more light. I would also suggest flash with a lot of diffusion to cut some of the hard shadows.


----------

