Solving Overexposed Photos from Kodak P&S Camera

  • Thread starter Thread starter z-component
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Pictures
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
8 replies · 3K views
z-component
Messages
494
Reaction score
2
I went around campus last week to take some pictures, and I remember the sun was really bright that day. When I saw them at full size I noticed most of them were overexposed. When I took some from in shadows, I expected the white balance of the surroundings to be off because of the light difference, but even ones taken in equal lighting were this way. Here are some examples:

Overexposed in shadow:
http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/5033/1004589ml4.jpg

Overexposed in equal light:
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/9594/1004590ko0.jpg

Ideal exposure:
http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/3773/1004615tg7.jpg

I use a Kodak Point & Shoot 4.0 megapixel camera, which I know isn't supposed to give me the best shots; however, I'm wondering if anyone knows any tips or special ways of editing that can correct this type of problem.

(Sorry that the pictures are large-- you can save them for viewing and have them appear at screen size in Windows Picture Viewer.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
on Phys.org
Actually, I think that the last one looks great just the way it is.
I've found that overexposure is very difficult to correct, even in Photoshop 6. Conversely, I've had some that were so dark you couldn't see anything, and they came out almost perfect.
Anyhow, just go into your 'brightness' and 'contrast' settings in PS and start tweaking. Always make sure to save the changes under a different file name so you can return to the original if you don't like the results.
 
The first one looks ok to me if you're just looking at the tree. The second one has the building exposed properly, which makes the sidewalk overexposed. Unless you have manual exposure settings (a +/- setting) or more advanced manual controls, that can be tough to correct.

For the first one, I'm not sure if you are close enough to the tree for it, but using a flash outside during the day can eliminate shadows and drop the exposure, reducing the overexposure in the background.
 
russ_watters said:
For the first one, I'm not sure if you are close enough to the tree for it, but using a flash outside during the day can eliminate shadows and drop the exposure, reducing the overexposure in the background.
Nice idea - might just work.
 
Thanks everyone.

Danger said:
Actually, I think that the last one looks great just the way it is.
Gokul43201 said:
pic#3 is very good.
Thanks to the both of you. I really like how this one turned out and that's the balance of exposure that I want in all of my pictures. It's the other two that disappointed me.
russ_watters said:
Unless you have manual exposure settings (a +/- setting) or more advanced manual controls, that can be tough to correct.
I have control over exposure compensation, that ranges from +2 to -2 that goes in increments of .5. I'm going to check the manual about that setting, and I guess it's a good idea to go out and experiment with it on objects.
Gokul43201 said:
Model number/name?
It's a Kodak EasyShare LS743
 
From playing around years ago I would say the building shot needed a UV filter. Cameras don't "see" the same spectral range that you do and UV is often a problem in outdoor shots.

The filter might have helped with the tree as well, but this kind of shot is difficult at best. Always a trade off between subject too dark and background to bright.
An extreme example would be a silhouette.