How to stop my camera from exaggerating differences in skin colour?Is it better to continue shooting in JPEGs instead of RAW if you are not planning to do post processing?Why can software correct white balance more accurately for RAW files than it can with JPEGs?How do I find the right white balance value to set in my camera?How to edit photos shot in fluorescent lightWhy does my subject's skin have such a red cast — did my auto white balance fail me?Why and how capturing RAW image instead of JPEG helps with editingWhy is my photo partially colour imbalanced?How can I desaturate reds in post-processing using Rawtherapee (or Gimp)?CFL and LED mixedWhat is colour correction, and how does it work?How can I use CMYK values to white balance skin?How can I correctly adjust skin color in Photoshop when I have a color vision deficiency?How can I achieve consistent skin tones in my photographs?How do you make a skin tone metallic brown?Skin very red, blotchy in front of cameraHow to correct skin tone using PhotoshopHow do I achieve these tanned skin tones in Lightroom?How to get these rich skin tones in black and whiteHow to make sky more green grey and skin more golden?
Is purchasing foreign currency before going abroad a losing proposition?
Modeling, view and projection transformation using vector and point in homogenous form
Filtering fine silt/mud from water (not necessarily bacteria etc.)
About the number of real roots
Data standardization vs. normalization for clustering analysis
Did any of the founding fathers anticipate Lysander Spooner's criticism of the constitution?
How to determine port and starboard on a rotating wheel space station?
Can I intentionally omit previous work experience or pretend it doesn't exist when applying for jobs?
Are there any double stars that I can actually see orbit each other?
does ability to impeach an expert witness on science or scholarship go too far?
Too many spies!
Why would an Inquisitive rogue choose to use Insightful Fighting as opposed to using their Cunning Action to Hide?
How might the United Kingdom become a republic?
Why limit to revolvers?
Why did the Japanese attack the Aleutians at the same time as Midway?
Is `curl something | sudo bash -` a reasonably safe installation method?
How to repair a laptop's screen hinges?
Rearranging the formula
Why does the trade federation become so alarmed upon learning the ambassadors are Jedi Knights?
How do Windows version numbers work?
Won 50K! Now what should I do with it
Why did my rum cake turn black?
What to put after taking off rear stabilisers from child bicyle?
Why the term 'unified' in "unified mass unit"?
How to stop my camera from exaggerating differences in skin colour?
Is it better to continue shooting in JPEGs instead of RAW if you are not planning to do post processing?Why can software correct white balance more accurately for RAW files than it can with JPEGs?How do I find the right white balance value to set in my camera?How to edit photos shot in fluorescent lightWhy does my subject's skin have such a red cast — did my auto white balance fail me?Why and how capturing RAW image instead of JPEG helps with editingWhy is my photo partially colour imbalanced?How can I desaturate reds in post-processing using Rawtherapee (or Gimp)?CFL and LED mixedWhat is colour correction, and how does it work?How can I use CMYK values to white balance skin?How can I correctly adjust skin color in Photoshop when I have a color vision deficiency?How can I achieve consistent skin tones in my photographs?How do you make a skin tone metallic brown?Skin very red, blotchy in front of cameraHow to correct skin tone using PhotoshopHow do I achieve these tanned skin tones in Lightroom?How to get these rich skin tones in black and whiteHow to make sky more green grey and skin more golden?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
The skin colour of my subject is widely inconsistent and I am not sure what the reason for it is. To me it looks like the side of the face suffers from a colour shadow thrown by the bright hair. At the same time, the skin colour closer towards the centre of the face seems like an exaggeration of minor differences in colour of the subject's skin. Those reddish/pink spots aren't really visible to my eye.
What is the best approach to avoid such issues as I am taking a photo so I don't have to try and fix it in Photoshop afterwards? Is it something with my settings?
Picture is taken in JPG in manual mode with automatic white balance and spot-metering. No filters or special camera modes.
color-correction skin-tones
edited Apr 15 at 9:02
xiota
15.3k4 gold badges22 silver badges74 bronze badges
asked Apr 14 at 17:26
HarisHaris
1213 bronze badges
add a comment |
The skin colour of my subject is widely inconsistent and I am not sure what the reason for it is. To me it looks like the side of the face suffers from a colour shadow thrown by the bright hair. At the same time, the skin colour closer towards the centre of the face seems like an exaggeration of minor differences in colour of the subject's skin. Those reddish/pink spots aren't really visible to my eye.
What is the best approach to avoid such issues as I am taking a photo so I don't have to try and fix it in Photoshop afterwards? Is it something with my settings?
Picture is taken in JPG in manual mode with automatic white balance and spot-metering. No filters or special camera modes.
color-correction skin-tones
edited Apr 15 at 9:02
xiota
15.3k4 gold badges22 silver badges74 bronze badges
asked Apr 14 at 17:26
HarisHaris
1213 bronze badges
2
More info is needed. What camera settings are you using ? Are you shooting in raw so that you get all the data possible unchanged by the cameras software or are you set to capture JPG's ? Are you using a "mode" ( such as portrait ) on the camera that makes editing decisions about how the data the camera is capturing is changed ? PLEASE add as much detail to your question as possible.
– Alaska Man
Apr 14 at 17:57
1
It may not be your camera. It may be your perception. You rarely look at people's skin that close, and that long. Your dermatologist could agree with the camera.
– xenoid
Apr 14 at 20:01
In addition to settings, what camera and lens models are you using? Different cameras and lenses render images differently.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 20:44
2
Why does my subject's skin have such a red cast — did my auto white balance fail me?
– xiota
Apr 14 at 20:49
What kind of light was illuminating your subject? It all starts with the light.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:35
add a comment |
The skin colour of my subject is widely inconsistent and I am not sure what the reason for it is. To me it looks like the side of the face suffers from a colour shadow thrown by the bright hair. At the same time, the skin colour closer towards the centre of the face seems like an exaggeration of minor differences in colour of the subject's skin. Those reddish/pink spots aren't really visible to my eye.
What is the best approach to avoid such issues as I am taking a photo so I don't have to try and fix it in Photoshop afterwards? Is it something with my settings?
Picture is taken in JPG in manual mode with automatic white balance and spot-metering. No filters or special camera modes.
color-correction skin-tones
edited Apr 15 at 9:02
xiota
15.3k4 gold badges22 silver badges74 bronze badges
asked Apr 14 at 17:26
HarisHaris
1213 bronze badges
The skin colour of my subject is widely inconsistent and I am not sure what the reason for it is. To me it looks like the side of the face suffers from a colour shadow thrown by the bright hair. At the same time, the skin colour closer towards the centre of the face seems like an exaggeration of minor differences in colour of the subject's skin. Those reddish/pink spots aren't really visible to my eye.
What is the best approach to avoid such issues as I am taking a photo so I don't have to try and fix it in Photoshop afterwards? Is it something with my settings?
Picture is taken in JPG in manual mode with automatic white balance and spot-metering. No filters or special camera modes.
color-correction skin-tones
color-correction skin-tones
edited Apr 15 at 9:02
xiota
15.3k4 gold badges22 silver badges74 bronze badges
asked Apr 14 at 17:26
HarisHaris
1213 bronze badges
edited Apr 15 at 9:02
xiota
15.3k4 gold badges22 silver badges74 bronze badges
asked Apr 14 at 17:26
HarisHaris
1213 bronze badges
edited Apr 15 at 9:02
xiota
15.3k4 gold badges22 silver badges74 bronze badges
edited Apr 15 at 9:02
xiota
15.3k4 gold badges22 silver badges74 bronze badges
edited Apr 15 at 9:02
xiota
15.3k4 gold badges22 silver badges74 bronze badges
15.3k4 gold badges22 silver badges74 bronze badges
asked Apr 14 at 17:26
HarisHaris
1213 bronze badges
asked Apr 14 at 17:26
HarisHaris
1213 bronze badges
asked Apr 14 at 17:26
HarisHaris
1213 bronze badges
1213 bronze badges
2
More info is needed. What camera settings are you using ? Are you shooting in raw so that you get all the data possible unchanged by the cameras software or are you set to capture JPG's ? Are you using a "mode" ( such as portrait ) on the camera that makes editing decisions about how the data the camera is capturing is changed ? PLEASE add as much detail to your question as possible.
– Alaska Man
Apr 14 at 17:57
1
It may not be your camera. It may be your perception. You rarely look at people's skin that close, and that long. Your dermatologist could agree with the camera.
– xenoid
Apr 14 at 20:01
In addition to settings, what camera and lens models are you using? Different cameras and lenses render images differently.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 20:44
2
Why does my subject's skin have such a red cast — did my auto white balance fail me?
– xiota
Apr 14 at 20:49
What kind of light was illuminating your subject? It all starts with the light.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:35
add a comment |
2
More info is needed. What camera settings are you using ? Are you shooting in raw so that you get all the data possible unchanged by the cameras software or are you set to capture JPG's ? Are you using a "mode" ( such as portrait ) on the camera that makes editing decisions about how the data the camera is capturing is changed ? PLEASE add as much detail to your question as possible.
– Alaska Man
Apr 14 at 17:57
1
It may not be your camera. It may be your perception. You rarely look at people's skin that close, and that long. Your dermatologist could agree with the camera.
– xenoid
Apr 14 at 20:01
In addition to settings, what camera and lens models are you using? Different cameras and lenses render images differently.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 20:44
2
Why does my subject's skin have such a red cast — did my auto white balance fail me?
– xiota
Apr 14 at 20:49
What kind of light was illuminating your subject? It all starts with the light.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:35
2
2
More info is needed. What camera settings are you using ? Are you shooting in raw so that you get all the data possible unchanged by the cameras software or are you set to capture JPG's ? Are you using a "mode" ( such as portrait ) on the camera that makes editing decisions about how the data the camera is capturing is changed ? PLEASE add as much detail to your question as possible.
– Alaska Man
Apr 14 at 17:57
More info is needed. What camera settings are you using ? Are you shooting in raw so that you get all the data possible unchanged by the cameras software or are you set to capture JPG's ? Are you using a "mode" ( such as portrait ) on the camera that makes editing decisions about how the data the camera is capturing is changed ? PLEASE add as much detail to your question as possible.
– Alaska Man
Apr 14 at 17:57
1
1
It may not be your camera. It may be your perception. You rarely look at people's skin that close, and that long. Your dermatologist could agree with the camera.
– xenoid
Apr 14 at 20:01
It may not be your camera. It may be your perception. You rarely look at people's skin that close, and that long. Your dermatologist could agree with the camera.
– xenoid
Apr 14 at 20:01
In addition to settings, what camera and lens models are you using? Different cameras and lenses render images differently.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 20:44
In addition to settings, what camera and lens models are you using? Different cameras and lenses render images differently.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 20:44
2
2
Why does my subject's skin have such a red cast — did my auto white balance fail me?
– xiota
Apr 14 at 20:49
Why does my subject's skin have such a red cast — did my auto white balance fail me?
– xiota
Apr 14 at 20:49
What kind of light was illuminating your subject? It all starts with the light.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:35
What kind of light was illuminating your subject? It all starts with the light.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:35
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
You are likely not getting the colors you want because of the color profile on your camera or raw processing software does not match your preferences. Camera and lens selection may also play a role. Lighting as well (see Michael C's answer).
Lens Selection
Lenses may transmit different frequencies differently. For instance, some produce warmer colors, while others are cooler. Some lenses also have defects, such as "glow", when shot wide open. Some people find that a soft-focus look is pleasant in portraits.
Auto white balance in some cameras normalizes color differences between lenses. In other cameras, it does not. Setting custom white balance typically neutralizes many lens color differences.
Camera Settings
If you are disciplined, you should set custom white balance. However, if you shoot in conditions with varied lighting, forgetting to change white balance can result in dozens of subsequent shots being ruined or wasting your time in post processing. (How significant this is depends on your workflow.)
Some cameras allow color-shift adjustments to auto white balance. Since AWB on my camera tends to produce images with more magenta than I'd like, I adjust AWB to increase the complementary color, green.
You should also select the color profile on your camera that best matches your preferences. Usually one or two profiles will subdue magenta-red colors. Available options vary by camera maker:
FujiFilm: Provia, Velvia, Astia, Classic Chrome, ProNeg-High, ProNeg-Low.
Canon: Standard, Portrait, Landscape, Neutral, Faithful.
Nikon: Standard, Neutral, Vivid, Portrait, Landscape, Flat.
Olympus (Picture Modes): i-Enhance, Vivid, Natural, Muted, Portrait.Sony (Creative Style): Standard, Vivid, Neutral, Clear, Deep, Light, Portrait, Landscape, Sunset, Night Scene, Autumn leaves.
(Feel free to suggest edits with camera makers and profile names...)
Cameras also typically allow adjustments to saturation, contrast, highlight, shadows, noise reduction, and sharpness.
Post Processing
The objectionable skin tones are most likely magenta, less so red. Even if the colors are accurate, you may still prefer less magenta.
Many tools do the same thing. The concepts underlying curves and levels apply to nearly every other color adjustment tool. Aside from that, use whatever tool is available or that you like best. Regardless of what you choose, it's helpful to know which primary and complementary colors go together (Red-Cyan, Green-Magenta, Blue-Yellow), as well as distinguish Red-Magenta and Blue-Cyan.
You can reduce the magenta by adjusting curves to increase the complementary color, green, in relevant areas. Use color-layer blending to avoid changing the overall luminosity of the image. Use layer masks to isolate changes.
You can do the same thing by adjusting levels. You can use the "auto" button or select white, gray, and black points with the dropper tool. Then look at each channel to see what the software did to use as a starting point for your own adjustments.
Sometimes desaturating slightly is enough to fix skin tones. Use a layer mask to isolate changes.
Michael C states that he likes HSL/HSV/HSB adjustments. I don't use it at all because I don't know how to adjust "Hue" to get intended results consistently.
You can also try adjusting temperature and tint. (These, along with saturation, are the main color adjustment tools available in Google Photos.)
Some editors include skin-tone specific tools. If these are available to you, experiment with them until you find settings you like.
In your sample image, the "whites" of the girl's eyes are pinkish. I used the gray dropper of the levels tool to select a point within her sclera. This gave RGB gamma adjustments of (0.71, 1.08, 1.26). Different points give slightly different values, but this is just a starting point, so it doesn't have to be "perfect".
I changed the gamma values to (0.85, 1.08, 1.1) because I thought the result was too blue/cyan. Then I changed it to (0.85, 1.15, 1.1) to decrease the magenta a bit. Her cheeks are still pinkish, but it should appear more natural and perhaps more to your liking.
Another approach is to use auto white balance on a copy of the image. Then use color layer blending to preserve luminosity. Adjust opacity of the color layer to taste. (I used 50%.) The result is slightly different. (This is an extended version of Laurence Payne's approach.)
answered Apr 14 at 21:52
xiotaxiota
15.3k4 gold badges22 silver badges74 bronze badges
For me, it's a lot easier to use an HSL/HSV/HSB tool to pull back the saturation and slightly increase the luminance of the magenta band to get rid of the color cast than doing all of that work with curves.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:19
@juhist The OP did say they were shooting to JPEG, not raw.
– Michael C
Apr 16 at 4:02
add a comment |
Photoshop may seem like a bit of a drudge, but makeup aside, there's not a lot you can do about complexion problems when shooting colour. And complexion problems are the main issue here. Fortunately, the fix is a quick and easy one, taking under two minutes if you have a reasonably suitable computer and a little bit of practice under your belt.
The key is targeted (and masked) Hue/Saturation adjustment layers. Use the hand tool from the adjustment layer's setting panel to click on the worst area of redness, then select the "minus" tool (because the first step will have selected all of the skin to one degree or another) and click on a patch of "good" skin. Slide the hue adjustment crazily to one side to highlight the selected area with weird colour. Use the colour sliders at the bottom to rein in the selection to get as much "good" skin showing as you can manage. Then reset the hue adjustment to centre, and pull it towards green gradually until things even out as much as desired. Then mask out lips, eyes, and whatever else (in this case, hair) that would have been caught up in the colour selection (it's easier than painting in the skin you want to fix in a tight portrait). It helps if you have a tablet, but you can do it with a mouse if that's what you've got to hand, if a little more slowly. There are several YouTube tutorials using this technique; just search for "targeted adjustment photoshop". Once you know the technique and learn to spot where it will be useful and where the best clicks can be made in the image for targeting the colour problem(s), it can save you an enormous amount of post-processing time.
This is a quickie - I haven't put in a lot of care here (and would have left more of the hair reflection in some places to make it look more natural if I had taken more care - you do need the reflections to make it look right, and not the like the hair colour was Photoshopped in):
answered Apr 16 at 0:53
user83228user83228
211 bronze badge
1
Can you format this to make it easier to follow? Maybe separate out the steps into a list?
– xiota
Apr 16 at 4:11
add a comment |
What kind of light was illuminating your subject?
It all starts with the light.
Always.
I've found that most of the time uneven skin tones are a result of:
- Too many different types of lighting mixed from different angles, so that one part of skin is influenced more by, say, the tungsten lamp to the right while another part of the skin is more influenced by the fluorescent light high overhead to the left. Color casts from highly reflective objects, such as your subject's pink wig or even a rich green lawn on a sunny day, can shift the color of human skin.
- Poor overall lighting, even if all of it is the same type, with a low CRI (color rendering index). If there is no light present that is the same hue as parts of your subject's skin, there will be no light that color reflected from your subject. The colors that are present in the light will then be exaggerated.
- Flickering lighting, such as most "energy efficient" light sources like cheap fluorescent or LED lighting, combined with fairly fast exposure times so that as the opening between the shutter curtains transits the sensor, the intensity and color of the light is changing as the light cycles from the peak to the trough of the alternating current powering it. Flickering lights not only get brighter and dimmer with the cycle of the current powering them, they also go from bluer and fuller spectrum at peak to browner and lower spectrum at the trough.
What is the best approach to avoid such issues as I am taking a photo so I don't have to try and fix it in Photoshop afterwards? Is it something with my settings?
Control your light sources. Be sure you are using even, full spectrum lighting that does not flicker. Be sure that all of the light coming from different angles is the same, both in terms of color temperature along the amber ←→ blue axis and "tint" along the green ←→ magenta axis.
Control your camera's color. Be sure the camera's white balance setting matches your light. Again, this includes both color temperature adjustment as well as white balance correction along the "tint" axis.
Shoot raw anyway. As counterintuitive as this sounds, saving the raw data will allow you to make a few, simple global adjustments in post processing to dial your color in even more precisely than the coarser settings on your camera will allow. Your raw converter's HSL/HSV/HSB tool¹ can be invaluable here! You won't be forced to do various localized adjustments to a JPEG image near as often by processing the raw data.
For further reading here at Photography SE:
CFL and LED mixed
Why and how capturing RAW image instead of JPEG helps with editing
Why can software correct white balance more accurately for RAW files than it can with JPEGs?
This answer to How to edit photos shot in fluorescent light has some detailed examples of how an HSL tool was used globally (applied to the entire image without having to use individual adjustments to different areas) to adjust for the color casts to a wide variety of skin tones shot under less-than-full-spectrum lighting.
¹ HSL stands for 'Hue-Saturation-Luminance'. Other image processing applications call the same type of tool 'HSV (Hue-Saturation-Value)' or 'HSB (Hue-Saturation-Brightness)'. Luminance/Value/Brightness are all pretty much the same thing.
answered Apr 15 at 0:49
Michael CMichael C
139k7 gold badges158 silver badges397 bronze badges
add a comment |
It's certainly a very warm colour balance. Is this more accurate? It's a simple 'Auto Color' process, available in most photo editors.
But, although it's refreshing to see a young girl not plastered in makeup, it IS rather cruelly accurate.
What shall we do about the shadow under the cheekbone? Maybe do some subtle work with the airbrush. Or just re-shoot, but reflect some light into that area?
answered Apr 14 at 21:53
Laurence PayneLaurence Payne
1,3574 silver badges6 bronze badges
I doubt "auto color" produced anything close to "accurate"... Such automatic adjustments usually need white and black points to adjust the color channels. Since the image is a crop that doesn't contain anything that is supposed to be truly white or black, the result is likely to still have a color shift. In this case, likely too much blue.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 22:10
Well, you can see what it DID produce. I'd certainly class it as 'possible', unlike the original. No?
– Laurence Payne
Apr 14 at 22:12
Depends on what you consider "possible". "Auto color" made some extreme adjustments to the image, including changing contrast. Detail in her cheeks are blown out. If you do a 50% color blend, to retain original detail and tone down the extreme color shift, the results look more reasonable, though still too blue/pink for my liking. Unless she's standing under blue lighting or Appalachian, I would not consider such coloring normal/accurate/possible.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 22:34
@xiota Based on the color of the white of her eye, I'd guess that this is actually more accurate that either the example in the OP or your modification of it. It might not be the most desireable look, but it probably is the most accurate one. That's far from saying that AWB always gets it better than manually controlling the color, though.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:53
@MichaelC - The "whites" of people's eyes are not perfectly white.
– xiota
Apr 15 at 1:45
|
show 5 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "61"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f106599%2fhow-to-stop-my-camera-from-exaggerating-differences-in-skin-colour%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
You are likely not getting the colors you want because of the color profile on your camera or raw processing software does not match your preferences. Camera and lens selection may also play a role. Lighting as well (see Michael C's answer).
Lens Selection
Lenses may transmit different frequencies differently. For instance, some produce warmer colors, while others are cooler. Some lenses also have defects, such as "glow", when shot wide open. Some people find that a soft-focus look is pleasant in portraits.
Auto white balance in some cameras normalizes color differences between lenses. In other cameras, it does not. Setting custom white balance typically neutralizes many lens color differences.
Camera Settings
If you are disciplined, you should set custom white balance. However, if you shoot in conditions with varied lighting, forgetting to change white balance can result in dozens of subsequent shots being ruined or wasting your time in post processing. (How significant this is depends on your workflow.)
Some cameras allow color-shift adjustments to auto white balance. Since AWB on my camera tends to produce images with more magenta than I'd like, I adjust AWB to increase the complementary color, green.
You should also select the color profile on your camera that best matches your preferences. Usually one or two profiles will subdue magenta-red colors. Available options vary by camera maker:
FujiFilm: Provia, Velvia, Astia, Classic Chrome, ProNeg-High, ProNeg-Low.
Canon: Standard, Portrait, Landscape, Neutral, Faithful.
Nikon: Standard, Neutral, Vivid, Portrait, Landscape, Flat.
Olympus (Picture Modes): i-Enhance, Vivid, Natural, Muted, Portrait.Sony (Creative Style): Standard, Vivid, Neutral, Clear, Deep, Light, Portrait, Landscape, Sunset, Night Scene, Autumn leaves.
(Feel free to suggest edits with camera makers and profile names...)
Cameras also typically allow adjustments to saturation, contrast, highlight, shadows, noise reduction, and sharpness.
Post Processing
The objectionable skin tones are most likely magenta, less so red. Even if the colors are accurate, you may still prefer less magenta.
Many tools do the same thing. The concepts underlying curves and levels apply to nearly every other color adjustment tool. Aside from that, use whatever tool is available or that you like best. Regardless of what you choose, it's helpful to know which primary and complementary colors go together (Red-Cyan, Green-Magenta, Blue-Yellow), as well as distinguish Red-Magenta and Blue-Cyan.
You can reduce the magenta by adjusting curves to increase the complementary color, green, in relevant areas. Use color-layer blending to avoid changing the overall luminosity of the image. Use layer masks to isolate changes.
You can do the same thing by adjusting levels. You can use the "auto" button or select white, gray, and black points with the dropper tool. Then look at each channel to see what the software did to use as a starting point for your own adjustments.
Sometimes desaturating slightly is enough to fix skin tones. Use a layer mask to isolate changes.
Michael C states that he likes HSL/HSV/HSB adjustments. I don't use it at all because I don't know how to adjust "Hue" to get intended results consistently.
You can also try adjusting temperature and tint. (These, along with saturation, are the main color adjustment tools available in Google Photos.)
Some editors include skin-tone specific tools. If these are available to you, experiment with them until you find settings you like.
In your sample image, the "whites" of the girl's eyes are pinkish. I used the gray dropper of the levels tool to select a point within her sclera. This gave RGB gamma adjustments of (0.71, 1.08, 1.26). Different points give slightly different values, but this is just a starting point, so it doesn't have to be "perfect".
I changed the gamma values to (0.85, 1.08, 1.1) because I thought the result was too blue/cyan. Then I changed it to (0.85, 1.15, 1.1) to decrease the magenta a bit. Her cheeks are still pinkish, but it should appear more natural and perhaps more to your liking.
Another approach is to use auto white balance on a copy of the image. Then use color layer blending to preserve luminosity. Adjust opacity of the color layer to taste. (I used 50%.) The result is slightly different. (This is an extended version of Laurence Payne's approach.)
answered Apr 14 at 21:52
xiotaxiota
15.3k4 gold badges22 silver badges74 bronze badges
For me, it's a lot easier to use an HSL/HSV/HSB tool to pull back the saturation and slightly increase the luminance of the magenta band to get rid of the color cast than doing all of that work with curves.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:19
@juhist The OP did say they were shooting to JPEG, not raw.
– Michael C
Apr 16 at 4:02
add a comment |
You are likely not getting the colors you want because of the color profile on your camera or raw processing software does not match your preferences. Camera and lens selection may also play a role. Lighting as well (see Michael C's answer).
Lens Selection
Lenses may transmit different frequencies differently. For instance, some produce warmer colors, while others are cooler. Some lenses also have defects, such as "glow", when shot wide open. Some people find that a soft-focus look is pleasant in portraits.
Auto white balance in some cameras normalizes color differences between lenses. In other cameras, it does not. Setting custom white balance typically neutralizes many lens color differences.
Camera Settings
If you are disciplined, you should set custom white balance. However, if you shoot in conditions with varied lighting, forgetting to change white balance can result in dozens of subsequent shots being ruined or wasting your time in post processing. (How significant this is depends on your workflow.)
Some cameras allow color-shift adjustments to auto white balance. Since AWB on my camera tends to produce images with more magenta than I'd like, I adjust AWB to increase the complementary color, green.
You should also select the color profile on your camera that best matches your preferences. Usually one or two profiles will subdue magenta-red colors. Available options vary by camera maker:
FujiFilm: Provia, Velvia, Astia, Classic Chrome, ProNeg-High, ProNeg-Low.
Canon: Standard, Portrait, Landscape, Neutral, Faithful.
Nikon: Standard, Neutral, Vivid, Portrait, Landscape, Flat.
Olympus (Picture Modes): i-Enhance, Vivid, Natural, Muted, Portrait.Sony (Creative Style): Standard, Vivid, Neutral, Clear, Deep, Light, Portrait, Landscape, Sunset, Night Scene, Autumn leaves.
(Feel free to suggest edits with camera makers and profile names...)
Cameras also typically allow adjustments to saturation, contrast, highlight, shadows, noise reduction, and sharpness.
Post Processing
The objectionable skin tones are most likely magenta, less so red. Even if the colors are accurate, you may still prefer less magenta.
Many tools do the same thing. The concepts underlying curves and levels apply to nearly every other color adjustment tool. Aside from that, use whatever tool is available or that you like best. Regardless of what you choose, it's helpful to know which primary and complementary colors go together (Red-Cyan, Green-Magenta, Blue-Yellow), as well as distinguish Red-Magenta and Blue-Cyan.
You can reduce the magenta by adjusting curves to increase the complementary color, green, in relevant areas. Use color-layer blending to avoid changing the overall luminosity of the image. Use layer masks to isolate changes.
You can do the same thing by adjusting levels. You can use the "auto" button or select white, gray, and black points with the dropper tool. Then look at each channel to see what the software did to use as a starting point for your own adjustments.
Sometimes desaturating slightly is enough to fix skin tones. Use a layer mask to isolate changes.
Michael C states that he likes HSL/HSV/HSB adjustments. I don't use it at all because I don't know how to adjust "Hue" to get intended results consistently.
You can also try adjusting temperature and tint. (These, along with saturation, are the main color adjustment tools available in Google Photos.)
Some editors include skin-tone specific tools. If these are available to you, experiment with them until you find settings you like.
In your sample image, the "whites" of the girl's eyes are pinkish. I used the gray dropper of the levels tool to select a point within her sclera. This gave RGB gamma adjustments of (0.71, 1.08, 1.26). Different points give slightly different values, but this is just a starting point, so it doesn't have to be "perfect".
I changed the gamma values to (0.85, 1.08, 1.1) because I thought the result was too blue/cyan. Then I changed it to (0.85, 1.15, 1.1) to decrease the magenta a bit. Her cheeks are still pinkish, but it should appear more natural and perhaps more to your liking.
Another approach is to use auto white balance on a copy of the image. Then use color layer blending to preserve luminosity. Adjust opacity of the color layer to taste. (I used 50%.) The result is slightly different. (This is an extended version of Laurence Payne's approach.)
answered Apr 14 at 21:52
xiotaxiota
15.3k4 gold badges22 silver badges74 bronze badges
For me, it's a lot easier to use an HSL/HSV/HSB tool to pull back the saturation and slightly increase the luminance of the magenta band to get rid of the color cast than doing all of that work with curves.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:19
@juhist The OP did say they were shooting to JPEG, not raw.
– Michael C
Apr 16 at 4:02
add a comment |
You are likely not getting the colors you want because of the color profile on your camera or raw processing software does not match your preferences. Camera and lens selection may also play a role. Lighting as well (see Michael C's answer).
Lens Selection
Lenses may transmit different frequencies differently. For instance, some produce warmer colors, while others are cooler. Some lenses also have defects, such as "glow", when shot wide open. Some people find that a soft-focus look is pleasant in portraits.
Auto white balance in some cameras normalizes color differences between lenses. In other cameras, it does not. Setting custom white balance typically neutralizes many lens color differences.
Camera Settings
If you are disciplined, you should set custom white balance. However, if you shoot in conditions with varied lighting, forgetting to change white balance can result in dozens of subsequent shots being ruined or wasting your time in post processing. (How significant this is depends on your workflow.)
Some cameras allow color-shift adjustments to auto white balance. Since AWB on my camera tends to produce images with more magenta than I'd like, I adjust AWB to increase the complementary color, green.
You should also select the color profile on your camera that best matches your preferences. Usually one or two profiles will subdue magenta-red colors. Available options vary by camera maker:
FujiFilm: Provia, Velvia, Astia, Classic Chrome, ProNeg-High, ProNeg-Low.
Canon: Standard, Portrait, Landscape, Neutral, Faithful.
Nikon: Standard, Neutral, Vivid, Portrait, Landscape, Flat.
Olympus (Picture Modes): i-Enhance, Vivid, Natural, Muted, Portrait.Sony (Creative Style): Standard, Vivid, Neutral, Clear, Deep, Light, Portrait, Landscape, Sunset, Night Scene, Autumn leaves.
(Feel free to suggest edits with camera makers and profile names...)
Cameras also typically allow adjustments to saturation, contrast, highlight, shadows, noise reduction, and sharpness.
Post Processing
The objectionable skin tones are most likely magenta, less so red. Even if the colors are accurate, you may still prefer less magenta.
Many tools do the same thing. The concepts underlying curves and levels apply to nearly every other color adjustment tool. Aside from that, use whatever tool is available or that you like best. Regardless of what you choose, it's helpful to know which primary and complementary colors go together (Red-Cyan, Green-Magenta, Blue-Yellow), as well as distinguish Red-Magenta and Blue-Cyan.
You can reduce the magenta by adjusting curves to increase the complementary color, green, in relevant areas. Use color-layer blending to avoid changing the overall luminosity of the image. Use layer masks to isolate changes.
You can do the same thing by adjusting levels. You can use the "auto" button or select white, gray, and black points with the dropper tool. Then look at each channel to see what the software did to use as a starting point for your own adjustments.
Sometimes desaturating slightly is enough to fix skin tones. Use a layer mask to isolate changes.
Michael C states that he likes HSL/HSV/HSB adjustments. I don't use it at all because I don't know how to adjust "Hue" to get intended results consistently.
You can also try adjusting temperature and tint. (These, along with saturation, are the main color adjustment tools available in Google Photos.)
Some editors include skin-tone specific tools. If these are available to you, experiment with them until you find settings you like.
In your sample image, the "whites" of the girl's eyes are pinkish. I used the gray dropper of the levels tool to select a point within her sclera. This gave RGB gamma adjustments of (0.71, 1.08, 1.26). Different points give slightly different values, but this is just a starting point, so it doesn't have to be "perfect".
I changed the gamma values to (0.85, 1.08, 1.1) because I thought the result was too blue/cyan. Then I changed it to (0.85, 1.15, 1.1) to decrease the magenta a bit. Her cheeks are still pinkish, but it should appear more natural and perhaps more to your liking.
Another approach is to use auto white balance on a copy of the image. Then use color layer blending to preserve luminosity. Adjust opacity of the color layer to taste. (I used 50%.) The result is slightly different. (This is an extended version of Laurence Payne's approach.)
answered Apr 14 at 21:52
xiotaxiota
15.3k4 gold badges22 silver badges74 bronze badges
You are likely not getting the colors you want because of the color profile on your camera or raw processing software does not match your preferences. Camera and lens selection may also play a role. Lighting as well (see Michael C's answer).
Lens Selection
Lenses may transmit different frequencies differently. For instance, some produce warmer colors, while others are cooler. Some lenses also have defects, such as "glow", when shot wide open. Some people find that a soft-focus look is pleasant in portraits.
Auto white balance in some cameras normalizes color differences between lenses. In other cameras, it does not. Setting custom white balance typically neutralizes many lens color differences.
Camera Settings
If you are disciplined, you should set custom white balance. However, if you shoot in conditions with varied lighting, forgetting to change white balance can result in dozens of subsequent shots being ruined or wasting your time in post processing. (How significant this is depends on your workflow.)
Some cameras allow color-shift adjustments to auto white balance. Since AWB on my camera tends to produce images with more magenta than I'd like, I adjust AWB to increase the complementary color, green.
You should also select the color profile on your camera that best matches your preferences. Usually one or two profiles will subdue magenta-red colors. Available options vary by camera maker:
FujiFilm: Provia, Velvia, Astia, Classic Chrome, ProNeg-High, ProNeg-Low.
Canon: Standard, Portrait, Landscape, Neutral, Faithful.
Nikon: Standard, Neutral, Vivid, Portrait, Landscape, Flat.
Olympus (Picture Modes): i-Enhance, Vivid, Natural, Muted, Portrait.Sony (Creative Style): Standard, Vivid, Neutral, Clear, Deep, Light, Portrait, Landscape, Sunset, Night Scene, Autumn leaves.
(Feel free to suggest edits with camera makers and profile names...)
Cameras also typically allow adjustments to saturation, contrast, highlight, shadows, noise reduction, and sharpness.
Post Processing
The objectionable skin tones are most likely magenta, less so red. Even if the colors are accurate, you may still prefer less magenta.
Many tools do the same thing. The concepts underlying curves and levels apply to nearly every other color adjustment tool. Aside from that, use whatever tool is available or that you like best. Regardless of what you choose, it's helpful to know which primary and complementary colors go together (Red-Cyan, Green-Magenta, Blue-Yellow), as well as distinguish Red-Magenta and Blue-Cyan.
You can reduce the magenta by adjusting curves to increase the complementary color, green, in relevant areas. Use color-layer blending to avoid changing the overall luminosity of the image. Use layer masks to isolate changes.
You can do the same thing by adjusting levels. You can use the "auto" button or select white, gray, and black points with the dropper tool. Then look at each channel to see what the software did to use as a starting point for your own adjustments.
Sometimes desaturating slightly is enough to fix skin tones. Use a layer mask to isolate changes.
Michael C states that he likes HSL/HSV/HSB adjustments. I don't use it at all because I don't know how to adjust "Hue" to get intended results consistently.
You can also try adjusting temperature and tint. (These, along with saturation, are the main color adjustment tools available in Google Photos.)
Some editors include skin-tone specific tools. If these are available to you, experiment with them until you find settings you like.
In your sample image, the "whites" of the girl's eyes are pinkish. I used the gray dropper of the levels tool to select a point within her sclera. This gave RGB gamma adjustments of (0.71, 1.08, 1.26). Different points give slightly different values, but this is just a starting point, so it doesn't have to be "perfect".
I changed the gamma values to (0.85, 1.08, 1.1) because I thought the result was too blue/cyan. Then I changed it to (0.85, 1.15, 1.1) to decrease the magenta a bit. Her cheeks are still pinkish, but it should appear more natural and perhaps more to your liking.
Another approach is to use auto white balance on a copy of the image. Then use color layer blending to preserve luminosity. Adjust opacity of the color layer to taste. (I used 50%.) The result is slightly different. (This is an extended version of Laurence Payne's approach.)
answered Apr 14 at 21:52
xiotaxiota
15.3k4 gold badges22 silver badges74 bronze badges
edited Apr 16 at 4:13
answered Apr 14 at 21:52
xiotaxiota
15.3k4 gold badges22 silver badges74 bronze badges
answered Apr 14 at 21:52
xiotaxiota
15.3k4 gold badges22 silver badges74 bronze badges
answered Apr 14 at 21:52
xiotaxiota
15.3k4 gold badges22 silver badges74 bronze badges
15.3k4 gold badges22 silver badges74 bronze badges
For me, it's a lot easier to use an HSL/HSV/HSB tool to pull back the saturation and slightly increase the luminance of the magenta band to get rid of the color cast than doing all of that work with curves.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:19
@juhist The OP did say they were shooting to JPEG, not raw.
– Michael C
Apr 16 at 4:02
add a comment |
For me, it's a lot easier to use an HSL/HSV/HSB tool to pull back the saturation and slightly increase the luminance of the magenta band to get rid of the color cast than doing all of that work with curves.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:19
@juhist The OP did say they were shooting to JPEG, not raw.
– Michael C
Apr 16 at 4:02
For me, it's a lot easier to use an HSL/HSV/HSB tool to pull back the saturation and slightly increase the luminance of the magenta band to get rid of the color cast than doing all of that work with curves.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:19
For me, it's a lot easier to use an HSL/HSV/HSB tool to pull back the saturation and slightly increase the luminance of the magenta band to get rid of the color cast than doing all of that work with curves.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:19
@juhist The OP did say they were shooting to JPEG, not raw.
– Michael C
Apr 16 at 4:02
@juhist The OP did say they were shooting to JPEG, not raw.
– Michael C
Apr 16 at 4:02
add a comment |
Photoshop may seem like a bit of a drudge, but makeup aside, there's not a lot you can do about complexion problems when shooting colour. And complexion problems are the main issue here. Fortunately, the fix is a quick and easy one, taking under two minutes if you have a reasonably suitable computer and a little bit of practice under your belt.
The key is targeted (and masked) Hue/Saturation adjustment layers. Use the hand tool from the adjustment layer's setting panel to click on the worst area of redness, then select the "minus" tool (because the first step will have selected all of the skin to one degree or another) and click on a patch of "good" skin. Slide the hue adjustment crazily to one side to highlight the selected area with weird colour. Use the colour sliders at the bottom to rein in the selection to get as much "good" skin showing as you can manage. Then reset the hue adjustment to centre, and pull it towards green gradually until things even out as much as desired. Then mask out lips, eyes, and whatever else (in this case, hair) that would have been caught up in the colour selection (it's easier than painting in the skin you want to fix in a tight portrait). It helps if you have a tablet, but you can do it with a mouse if that's what you've got to hand, if a little more slowly. There are several YouTube tutorials using this technique; just search for "targeted adjustment photoshop". Once you know the technique and learn to spot where it will be useful and where the best clicks can be made in the image for targeting the colour problem(s), it can save you an enormous amount of post-processing time.
This is a quickie - I haven't put in a lot of care here (and would have left more of the hair reflection in some places to make it look more natural if I had taken more care - you do need the reflections to make it look right, and not the like the hair colour was Photoshopped in):
answered Apr 16 at 0:53
user83228user83228
211 bronze badge
1
Can you format this to make it easier to follow? Maybe separate out the steps into a list?
– xiota
Apr 16 at 4:11
add a comment |
Photoshop may seem like a bit of a drudge, but makeup aside, there's not a lot you can do about complexion problems when shooting colour. And complexion problems are the main issue here. Fortunately, the fix is a quick and easy one, taking under two minutes if you have a reasonably suitable computer and a little bit of practice under your belt.
The key is targeted (and masked) Hue/Saturation adjustment layers. Use the hand tool from the adjustment layer's setting panel to click on the worst area of redness, then select the "minus" tool (because the first step will have selected all of the skin to one degree or another) and click on a patch of "good" skin. Slide the hue adjustment crazily to one side to highlight the selected area with weird colour. Use the colour sliders at the bottom to rein in the selection to get as much "good" skin showing as you can manage. Then reset the hue adjustment to centre, and pull it towards green gradually until things even out as much as desired. Then mask out lips, eyes, and whatever else (in this case, hair) that would have been caught up in the colour selection (it's easier than painting in the skin you want to fix in a tight portrait). It helps if you have a tablet, but you can do it with a mouse if that's what you've got to hand, if a little more slowly. There are several YouTube tutorials using this technique; just search for "targeted adjustment photoshop". Once you know the technique and learn to spot where it will be useful and where the best clicks can be made in the image for targeting the colour problem(s), it can save you an enormous amount of post-processing time.
This is a quickie - I haven't put in a lot of care here (and would have left more of the hair reflection in some places to make it look more natural if I had taken more care - you do need the reflections to make it look right, and not the like the hair colour was Photoshopped in):
answered Apr 16 at 0:53
user83228user83228
211 bronze badge
1
Can you format this to make it easier to follow? Maybe separate out the steps into a list?
– xiota
Apr 16 at 4:11
add a comment |
Photoshop may seem like a bit of a drudge, but makeup aside, there's not a lot you can do about complexion problems when shooting colour. And complexion problems are the main issue here. Fortunately, the fix is a quick and easy one, taking under two minutes if you have a reasonably suitable computer and a little bit of practice under your belt.
The key is targeted (and masked) Hue/Saturation adjustment layers. Use the hand tool from the adjustment layer's setting panel to click on the worst area of redness, then select the "minus" tool (because the first step will have selected all of the skin to one degree or another) and click on a patch of "good" skin. Slide the hue adjustment crazily to one side to highlight the selected area with weird colour. Use the colour sliders at the bottom to rein in the selection to get as much "good" skin showing as you can manage. Then reset the hue adjustment to centre, and pull it towards green gradually until things even out as much as desired. Then mask out lips, eyes, and whatever else (in this case, hair) that would have been caught up in the colour selection (it's easier than painting in the skin you want to fix in a tight portrait). It helps if you have a tablet, but you can do it with a mouse if that's what you've got to hand, if a little more slowly. There are several YouTube tutorials using this technique; just search for "targeted adjustment photoshop". Once you know the technique and learn to spot where it will be useful and where the best clicks can be made in the image for targeting the colour problem(s), it can save you an enormous amount of post-processing time.
This is a quickie - I haven't put in a lot of care here (and would have left more of the hair reflection in some places to make it look more natural if I had taken more care - you do need the reflections to make it look right, and not the like the hair colour was Photoshopped in):
answered Apr 16 at 0:53
user83228user83228
211 bronze badge
Photoshop may seem like a bit of a drudge, but makeup aside, there's not a lot you can do about complexion problems when shooting colour. And complexion problems are the main issue here. Fortunately, the fix is a quick and easy one, taking under two minutes if you have a reasonably suitable computer and a little bit of practice under your belt.
The key is targeted (and masked) Hue/Saturation adjustment layers. Use the hand tool from the adjustment layer's setting panel to click on the worst area of redness, then select the "minus" tool (because the first step will have selected all of the skin to one degree or another) and click on a patch of "good" skin. Slide the hue adjustment crazily to one side to highlight the selected area with weird colour. Use the colour sliders at the bottom to rein in the selection to get as much "good" skin showing as you can manage. Then reset the hue adjustment to centre, and pull it towards green gradually until things even out as much as desired. Then mask out lips, eyes, and whatever else (in this case, hair) that would have been caught up in the colour selection (it's easier than painting in the skin you want to fix in a tight portrait). It helps if you have a tablet, but you can do it with a mouse if that's what you've got to hand, if a little more slowly. There are several YouTube tutorials using this technique; just search for "targeted adjustment photoshop". Once you know the technique and learn to spot where it will be useful and where the best clicks can be made in the image for targeting the colour problem(s), it can save you an enormous amount of post-processing time.
This is a quickie - I haven't put in a lot of care here (and would have left more of the hair reflection in some places to make it look more natural if I had taken more care - you do need the reflections to make it look right, and not the like the hair colour was Photoshopped in):
answered Apr 16 at 0:53
user83228user83228
211 bronze badge
answered Apr 16 at 0:53
user83228user83228
211 bronze badge
answered Apr 16 at 0:53
user83228user83228
211 bronze badge
answered Apr 16 at 0:53
user83228user83228
211 bronze badge
211 bronze badge
1
Can you format this to make it easier to follow? Maybe separate out the steps into a list?
– xiota
Apr 16 at 4:11
add a comment |
1
Can you format this to make it easier to follow? Maybe separate out the steps into a list?
– xiota
Apr 16 at 4:11
1
1
Can you format this to make it easier to follow? Maybe separate out the steps into a list?
– xiota
Apr 16 at 4:11
Can you format this to make it easier to follow? Maybe separate out the steps into a list?
– xiota
Apr 16 at 4:11
add a comment |
What kind of light was illuminating your subject?
It all starts with the light.
Always.
I've found that most of the time uneven skin tones are a result of:
- Too many different types of lighting mixed from different angles, so that one part of skin is influenced more by, say, the tungsten lamp to the right while another part of the skin is more influenced by the fluorescent light high overhead to the left. Color casts from highly reflective objects, such as your subject's pink wig or even a rich green lawn on a sunny day, can shift the color of human skin.
- Poor overall lighting, even if all of it is the same type, with a low CRI (color rendering index). If there is no light present that is the same hue as parts of your subject's skin, there will be no light that color reflected from your subject. The colors that are present in the light will then be exaggerated.
- Flickering lighting, such as most "energy efficient" light sources like cheap fluorescent or LED lighting, combined with fairly fast exposure times so that as the opening between the shutter curtains transits the sensor, the intensity and color of the light is changing as the light cycles from the peak to the trough of the alternating current powering it. Flickering lights not only get brighter and dimmer with the cycle of the current powering them, they also go from bluer and fuller spectrum at peak to browner and lower spectrum at the trough.
What is the best approach to avoid such issues as I am taking a photo so I don't have to try and fix it in Photoshop afterwards? Is it something with my settings?
Control your light sources. Be sure you are using even, full spectrum lighting that does not flicker. Be sure that all of the light coming from different angles is the same, both in terms of color temperature along the amber ←→ blue axis and "tint" along the green ←→ magenta axis.
Control your camera's color. Be sure the camera's white balance setting matches your light. Again, this includes both color temperature adjustment as well as white balance correction along the "tint" axis.
Shoot raw anyway. As counterintuitive as this sounds, saving the raw data will allow you to make a few, simple global adjustments in post processing to dial your color in even more precisely than the coarser settings on your camera will allow. Your raw converter's HSL/HSV/HSB tool¹ can be invaluable here! You won't be forced to do various localized adjustments to a JPEG image near as often by processing the raw data.
For further reading here at Photography SE:
CFL and LED mixed
Why and how capturing RAW image instead of JPEG helps with editing
Why can software correct white balance more accurately for RAW files than it can with JPEGs?
This answer to How to edit photos shot in fluorescent light has some detailed examples of how an HSL tool was used globally (applied to the entire image without having to use individual adjustments to different areas) to adjust for the color casts to a wide variety of skin tones shot under less-than-full-spectrum lighting.
¹ HSL stands for 'Hue-Saturation-Luminance'. Other image processing applications call the same type of tool 'HSV (Hue-Saturation-Value)' or 'HSB (Hue-Saturation-Brightness)'. Luminance/Value/Brightness are all pretty much the same thing.
answered Apr 15 at 0:49
Michael CMichael C
139k7 gold badges158 silver badges397 bronze badges
add a comment |
What kind of light was illuminating your subject?
It all starts with the light.
Always.
I've found that most of the time uneven skin tones are a result of:
- Too many different types of lighting mixed from different angles, so that one part of skin is influenced more by, say, the tungsten lamp to the right while another part of the skin is more influenced by the fluorescent light high overhead to the left. Color casts from highly reflective objects, such as your subject's pink wig or even a rich green lawn on a sunny day, can shift the color of human skin.
- Poor overall lighting, even if all of it is the same type, with a low CRI (color rendering index). If there is no light present that is the same hue as parts of your subject's skin, there will be no light that color reflected from your subject. The colors that are present in the light will then be exaggerated.
- Flickering lighting, such as most "energy efficient" light sources like cheap fluorescent or LED lighting, combined with fairly fast exposure times so that as the opening between the shutter curtains transits the sensor, the intensity and color of the light is changing as the light cycles from the peak to the trough of the alternating current powering it. Flickering lights not only get brighter and dimmer with the cycle of the current powering them, they also go from bluer and fuller spectrum at peak to browner and lower spectrum at the trough.
What is the best approach to avoid such issues as I am taking a photo so I don't have to try and fix it in Photoshop afterwards? Is it something with my settings?
Control your light sources. Be sure you are using even, full spectrum lighting that does not flicker. Be sure that all of the light coming from different angles is the same, both in terms of color temperature along the amber ←→ blue axis and "tint" along the green ←→ magenta axis.
Control your camera's color. Be sure the camera's white balance setting matches your light. Again, this includes both color temperature adjustment as well as white balance correction along the "tint" axis.
Shoot raw anyway. As counterintuitive as this sounds, saving the raw data will allow you to make a few, simple global adjustments in post processing to dial your color in even more precisely than the coarser settings on your camera will allow. Your raw converter's HSL/HSV/HSB tool¹ can be invaluable here! You won't be forced to do various localized adjustments to a JPEG image near as often by processing the raw data.
For further reading here at Photography SE:
CFL and LED mixed
Why and how capturing RAW image instead of JPEG helps with editing
Why can software correct white balance more accurately for RAW files than it can with JPEGs?
This answer to How to edit photos shot in fluorescent light has some detailed examples of how an HSL tool was used globally (applied to the entire image without having to use individual adjustments to different areas) to adjust for the color casts to a wide variety of skin tones shot under less-than-full-spectrum lighting.
¹ HSL stands for 'Hue-Saturation-Luminance'. Other image processing applications call the same type of tool 'HSV (Hue-Saturation-Value)' or 'HSB (Hue-Saturation-Brightness)'. Luminance/Value/Brightness are all pretty much the same thing.
answered Apr 15 at 0:49
Michael CMichael C
139k7 gold badges158 silver badges397 bronze badges
add a comment |
What kind of light was illuminating your subject?
It all starts with the light.
Always.
I've found that most of the time uneven skin tones are a result of:
- Too many different types of lighting mixed from different angles, so that one part of skin is influenced more by, say, the tungsten lamp to the right while another part of the skin is more influenced by the fluorescent light high overhead to the left. Color casts from highly reflective objects, such as your subject's pink wig or even a rich green lawn on a sunny day, can shift the color of human skin.
- Poor overall lighting, even if all of it is the same type, with a low CRI (color rendering index). If there is no light present that is the same hue as parts of your subject's skin, there will be no light that color reflected from your subject. The colors that are present in the light will then be exaggerated.
- Flickering lighting, such as most "energy efficient" light sources like cheap fluorescent or LED lighting, combined with fairly fast exposure times so that as the opening between the shutter curtains transits the sensor, the intensity and color of the light is changing as the light cycles from the peak to the trough of the alternating current powering it. Flickering lights not only get brighter and dimmer with the cycle of the current powering them, they also go from bluer and fuller spectrum at peak to browner and lower spectrum at the trough.
What is the best approach to avoid such issues as I am taking a photo so I don't have to try and fix it in Photoshop afterwards? Is it something with my settings?
Control your light sources. Be sure you are using even, full spectrum lighting that does not flicker. Be sure that all of the light coming from different angles is the same, both in terms of color temperature along the amber ←→ blue axis and "tint" along the green ←→ magenta axis.
Control your camera's color. Be sure the camera's white balance setting matches your light. Again, this includes both color temperature adjustment as well as white balance correction along the "tint" axis.
Shoot raw anyway. As counterintuitive as this sounds, saving the raw data will allow you to make a few, simple global adjustments in post processing to dial your color in even more precisely than the coarser settings on your camera will allow. Your raw converter's HSL/HSV/HSB tool¹ can be invaluable here! You won't be forced to do various localized adjustments to a JPEG image near as often by processing the raw data.
For further reading here at Photography SE:
CFL and LED mixed
Why and how capturing RAW image instead of JPEG helps with editing
Why can software correct white balance more accurately for RAW files than it can with JPEGs?
This answer to How to edit photos shot in fluorescent light has some detailed examples of how an HSL tool was used globally (applied to the entire image without having to use individual adjustments to different areas) to adjust for the color casts to a wide variety of skin tones shot under less-than-full-spectrum lighting.
¹ HSL stands for 'Hue-Saturation-Luminance'. Other image processing applications call the same type of tool 'HSV (Hue-Saturation-Value)' or 'HSB (Hue-Saturation-Brightness)'. Luminance/Value/Brightness are all pretty much the same thing.
answered Apr 15 at 0:49
Michael CMichael C
139k7 gold badges158 silver badges397 bronze badges
What kind of light was illuminating your subject?
It all starts with the light.
Always.
I've found that most of the time uneven skin tones are a result of:
- Too many different types of lighting mixed from different angles, so that one part of skin is influenced more by, say, the tungsten lamp to the right while another part of the skin is more influenced by the fluorescent light high overhead to the left. Color casts from highly reflective objects, such as your subject's pink wig or even a rich green lawn on a sunny day, can shift the color of human skin.
- Poor overall lighting, even if all of it is the same type, with a low CRI (color rendering index). If there is no light present that is the same hue as parts of your subject's skin, there will be no light that color reflected from your subject. The colors that are present in the light will then be exaggerated.
- Flickering lighting, such as most "energy efficient" light sources like cheap fluorescent or LED lighting, combined with fairly fast exposure times so that as the opening between the shutter curtains transits the sensor, the intensity and color of the light is changing as the light cycles from the peak to the trough of the alternating current powering it. Flickering lights not only get brighter and dimmer with the cycle of the current powering them, they also go from bluer and fuller spectrum at peak to browner and lower spectrum at the trough.
What is the best approach to avoid such issues as I am taking a photo so I don't have to try and fix it in Photoshop afterwards? Is it something with my settings?
Control your light sources. Be sure you are using even, full spectrum lighting that does not flicker. Be sure that all of the light coming from different angles is the same, both in terms of color temperature along the amber ←→ blue axis and "tint" along the green ←→ magenta axis.
Control your camera's color. Be sure the camera's white balance setting matches your light. Again, this includes both color temperature adjustment as well as white balance correction along the "tint" axis.
Shoot raw anyway. As counterintuitive as this sounds, saving the raw data will allow you to make a few, simple global adjustments in post processing to dial your color in even more precisely than the coarser settings on your camera will allow. Your raw converter's HSL/HSV/HSB tool¹ can be invaluable here! You won't be forced to do various localized adjustments to a JPEG image near as often by processing the raw data.
For further reading here at Photography SE:
CFL and LED mixed
Why and how capturing RAW image instead of JPEG helps with editing
Why can software correct white balance more accurately for RAW files than it can with JPEGs?
This answer to How to edit photos shot in fluorescent light has some detailed examples of how an HSL tool was used globally (applied to the entire image without having to use individual adjustments to different areas) to adjust for the color casts to a wide variety of skin tones shot under less-than-full-spectrum lighting.
¹ HSL stands for 'Hue-Saturation-Luminance'. Other image processing applications call the same type of tool 'HSV (Hue-Saturation-Value)' or 'HSB (Hue-Saturation-Brightness)'. Luminance/Value/Brightness are all pretty much the same thing.
answered Apr 15 at 0:49
Michael CMichael C
139k7 gold badges158 silver badges397 bronze badges
edited Apr 16 at 5:06
answered Apr 15 at 0:49
Michael CMichael C
139k7 gold badges158 silver badges397 bronze badges
answered Apr 15 at 0:49
Michael CMichael C
139k7 gold badges158 silver badges397 bronze badges
answered Apr 15 at 0:49
Michael CMichael C
139k7 gold badges158 silver badges397 bronze badges
139k7 gold badges158 silver badges397 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
It's certainly a very warm colour balance. Is this more accurate? It's a simple 'Auto Color' process, available in most photo editors.
But, although it's refreshing to see a young girl not plastered in makeup, it IS rather cruelly accurate.
What shall we do about the shadow under the cheekbone? Maybe do some subtle work with the airbrush. Or just re-shoot, but reflect some light into that area?
answered Apr 14 at 21:53
Laurence PayneLaurence Payne
1,3574 silver badges6 bronze badges
I doubt "auto color" produced anything close to "accurate"... Such automatic adjustments usually need white and black points to adjust the color channels. Since the image is a crop that doesn't contain anything that is supposed to be truly white or black, the result is likely to still have a color shift. In this case, likely too much blue.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 22:10
Well, you can see what it DID produce. I'd certainly class it as 'possible', unlike the original. No?
– Laurence Payne
Apr 14 at 22:12
Depends on what you consider "possible". "Auto color" made some extreme adjustments to the image, including changing contrast. Detail in her cheeks are blown out. If you do a 50% color blend, to retain original detail and tone down the extreme color shift, the results look more reasonable, though still too blue/pink for my liking. Unless she's standing under blue lighting or Appalachian, I would not consider such coloring normal/accurate/possible.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 22:34
@xiota Based on the color of the white of her eye, I'd guess that this is actually more accurate that either the example in the OP or your modification of it. It might not be the most desireable look, but it probably is the most accurate one. That's far from saying that AWB always gets it better than manually controlling the color, though.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:53
@MichaelC - The "whites" of people's eyes are not perfectly white.
– xiota
Apr 15 at 1:45
|
show 5 more comments
It's certainly a very warm colour balance. Is this more accurate? It's a simple 'Auto Color' process, available in most photo editors.
But, although it's refreshing to see a young girl not plastered in makeup, it IS rather cruelly accurate.
What shall we do about the shadow under the cheekbone? Maybe do some subtle work with the airbrush. Or just re-shoot, but reflect some light into that area?
answered Apr 14 at 21:53
Laurence PayneLaurence Payne
1,3574 silver badges6 bronze badges
I doubt "auto color" produced anything close to "accurate"... Such automatic adjustments usually need white and black points to adjust the color channels. Since the image is a crop that doesn't contain anything that is supposed to be truly white or black, the result is likely to still have a color shift. In this case, likely too much blue.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 22:10
Well, you can see what it DID produce. I'd certainly class it as 'possible', unlike the original. No?
– Laurence Payne
Apr 14 at 22:12
Depends on what you consider "possible". "Auto color" made some extreme adjustments to the image, including changing contrast. Detail in her cheeks are blown out. If you do a 50% color blend, to retain original detail and tone down the extreme color shift, the results look more reasonable, though still too blue/pink for my liking. Unless she's standing under blue lighting or Appalachian, I would not consider such coloring normal/accurate/possible.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 22:34
@xiota Based on the color of the white of her eye, I'd guess that this is actually more accurate that either the example in the OP or your modification of it. It might not be the most desireable look, but it probably is the most accurate one. That's far from saying that AWB always gets it better than manually controlling the color, though.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:53
@MichaelC - The "whites" of people's eyes are not perfectly white.
– xiota
Apr 15 at 1:45
|
show 5 more comments
It's certainly a very warm colour balance. Is this more accurate? It's a simple 'Auto Color' process, available in most photo editors.
But, although it's refreshing to see a young girl not plastered in makeup, it IS rather cruelly accurate.
What shall we do about the shadow under the cheekbone? Maybe do some subtle work with the airbrush. Or just re-shoot, but reflect some light into that area?
answered Apr 14 at 21:53
Laurence PayneLaurence Payne
1,3574 silver badges6 bronze badges
It's certainly a very warm colour balance. Is this more accurate? It's a simple 'Auto Color' process, available in most photo editors.
But, although it's refreshing to see a young girl not plastered in makeup, it IS rather cruelly accurate.
What shall we do about the shadow under the cheekbone? Maybe do some subtle work with the airbrush. Or just re-shoot, but reflect some light into that area?
answered Apr 14 at 21:53
Laurence PayneLaurence Payne
1,3574 silver badges6 bronze badges
answered Apr 14 at 21:53
Laurence PayneLaurence Payne
1,3574 silver badges6 bronze badges
answered Apr 14 at 21:53
Laurence PayneLaurence Payne
1,3574 silver badges6 bronze badges
answered Apr 14 at 21:53
Laurence PayneLaurence Payne
1,3574 silver badges6 bronze badges
1,3574 silver badges6 bronze badges
I doubt "auto color" produced anything close to "accurate"... Such automatic adjustments usually need white and black points to adjust the color channels. Since the image is a crop that doesn't contain anything that is supposed to be truly white or black, the result is likely to still have a color shift. In this case, likely too much blue.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 22:10
Well, you can see what it DID produce. I'd certainly class it as 'possible', unlike the original. No?
– Laurence Payne
Apr 14 at 22:12
Depends on what you consider "possible". "Auto color" made some extreme adjustments to the image, including changing contrast. Detail in her cheeks are blown out. If you do a 50% color blend, to retain original detail and tone down the extreme color shift, the results look more reasonable, though still too blue/pink for my liking. Unless she's standing under blue lighting or Appalachian, I would not consider such coloring normal/accurate/possible.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 22:34
@xiota Based on the color of the white of her eye, I'd guess that this is actually more accurate that either the example in the OP or your modification of it. It might not be the most desireable look, but it probably is the most accurate one. That's far from saying that AWB always gets it better than manually controlling the color, though.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:53
@MichaelC - The "whites" of people's eyes are not perfectly white.
– xiota
Apr 15 at 1:45
|
show 5 more comments
I doubt "auto color" produced anything close to "accurate"... Such automatic adjustments usually need white and black points to adjust the color channels. Since the image is a crop that doesn't contain anything that is supposed to be truly white or black, the result is likely to still have a color shift. In this case, likely too much blue.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 22:10
Well, you can see what it DID produce. I'd certainly class it as 'possible', unlike the original. No?
– Laurence Payne
Apr 14 at 22:12
Depends on what you consider "possible". "Auto color" made some extreme adjustments to the image, including changing contrast. Detail in her cheeks are blown out. If you do a 50% color blend, to retain original detail and tone down the extreme color shift, the results look more reasonable, though still too blue/pink for my liking. Unless she's standing under blue lighting or Appalachian, I would not consider such coloring normal/accurate/possible.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 22:34
@xiota Based on the color of the white of her eye, I'd guess that this is actually more accurate that either the example in the OP or your modification of it. It might not be the most desireable look, but it probably is the most accurate one. That's far from saying that AWB always gets it better than manually controlling the color, though.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:53
@MichaelC - The "whites" of people's eyes are not perfectly white.
– xiota
Apr 15 at 1:45
I doubt "auto color" produced anything close to "accurate"... Such automatic adjustments usually need white and black points to adjust the color channels. Since the image is a crop that doesn't contain anything that is supposed to be truly white or black, the result is likely to still have a color shift. In this case, likely too much blue.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 22:10
I doubt "auto color" produced anything close to "accurate"... Such automatic adjustments usually need white and black points to adjust the color channels. Since the image is a crop that doesn't contain anything that is supposed to be truly white or black, the result is likely to still have a color shift. In this case, likely too much blue.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 22:10
Well, you can see what it DID produce. I'd certainly class it as 'possible', unlike the original. No?
– Laurence Payne
Apr 14 at 22:12
Well, you can see what it DID produce. I'd certainly class it as 'possible', unlike the original. No?
– Laurence Payne
Apr 14 at 22:12
Depends on what you consider "possible". "Auto color" made some extreme adjustments to the image, including changing contrast. Detail in her cheeks are blown out. If you do a 50% color blend, to retain original detail and tone down the extreme color shift, the results look more reasonable, though still too blue/pink for my liking. Unless she's standing under blue lighting or Appalachian, I would not consider such coloring normal/accurate/possible.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 22:34
Depends on what you consider "possible". "Auto color" made some extreme adjustments to the image, including changing contrast. Detail in her cheeks are blown out. If you do a 50% color blend, to retain original detail and tone down the extreme color shift, the results look more reasonable, though still too blue/pink for my liking. Unless she's standing under blue lighting or Appalachian, I would not consider such coloring normal/accurate/possible.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 22:34
@xiota Based on the color of the white of her eye, I'd guess that this is actually more accurate that either the example in the OP or your modification of it. It might not be the most desireable look, but it probably is the most accurate one. That's far from saying that AWB always gets it better than manually controlling the color, though.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:53
@xiota Based on the color of the white of her eye, I'd guess that this is actually more accurate that either the example in the OP or your modification of it. It might not be the most desireable look, but it probably is the most accurate one. That's far from saying that AWB always gets it better than manually controlling the color, though.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:53
@MichaelC - The "whites" of people's eyes are not perfectly white.
– xiota
Apr 15 at 1:45
@MichaelC - The "whites" of people's eyes are not perfectly white.
– xiota
Apr 15 at 1:45
|
show 5 more comments
Thanks for contributing an answer to Photography Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f106599%2fhow-to-stop-my-camera-from-exaggerating-differences-in-skin-colour%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
More info is needed. What camera settings are you using ? Are you shooting in raw so that you get all the data possible unchanged by the cameras software or are you set to capture JPG's ? Are you using a "mode" ( such as portrait ) on the camera that makes editing decisions about how the data the camera is capturing is changed ? PLEASE add as much detail to your question as possible.
– Alaska Man
Apr 14 at 17:57
1
It may not be your camera. It may be your perception. You rarely look at people's skin that close, and that long. Your dermatologist could agree with the camera.
– xenoid
Apr 14 at 20:01
In addition to settings, what camera and lens models are you using? Different cameras and lenses render images differently.
– xiota
Apr 14 at 20:44
2
Why does my subject's skin have such a red cast — did my auto white balance fail me?
– xiota
Apr 14 at 20:49
What kind of light was illuminating your subject? It all starts with the light.
– Michael C
Apr 15 at 0:35