Will Cheung Shoots Marco Photography With The Help Of MPB
Back Modifications (9)
Views 104 Unique 60 Award Shortlist   


By xwang
The problem of this photo is the "magentas colour" in the sky. I tried Hue/saturation layer and colour layer to get rid of it, but failed.
What I found interesting is that the colour might not be magentas, since I desaturated all the colors on the Hue/saturation layer, apart from blue, the "magentas" was still there, only disappeared when "master" applied.
Colour layer doesn't work either, the brush moved the "magentas" to elsewhere in the sky, as it was smudged.
So my question is:"Any other way to get rid of the messy colour, to have a beautiful and clean sky please?
The photo was a snap, I couldn't do anything about it on camera setting at the moment when I took the photo, but Light room gave me a good auto suggestion, so I took it, but the "magentas" colour.
All comments and suggestions are welcome. Thanks for viewing.

Tags: North yorkshire Sunlight Man Wall Scarborough Seaside Steps Angler Bouy Landscape and travel



Robert51 14 12 142 United Kingdom
13 Nov 2018 5:36PM
Just an idea, in PS try a color balance layer and move the red down to about -24. Then a layer mask for the sky and sea.

Good luck...
dudler Plus
19 2.1k 2018 England
13 Nov 2018 6:20PM
I'm sure that you know that spot metering and manual exposure require some care. And that a superzoom is likely to compromise quality a bit.

I've done two mods with 30-second edits in ACR, one using the Adobe AWB function, and one moving hte magenta-green slider towards the green.

A view that you had to shoot - I hope you tried a few different positons in the frame.

xwang 14 56 8
13 Nov 2018 8:24PM
Thanks Robert.
Colour balance layer worked better with Hue/saturation and color layer. For me, It needs more fine tune to get the color right and get rid of the band in the centre.
The band perhaps is another technical issue as well,.. less data was recorded? I had tried to add on some noise, but it didn't work well.

Thanks John for your mod and comments.
I have never used Adobe AWB, no idea what it is,...
I do use ACR a lot, I tried LR +PS these days, LR looks tidy, but I don't quite know how to use it, so I still edit the photo on PS, because I don't like the ".xmp" in the folder,.. Grin
dudler Plus
19 2.1k 2018 England
14 Nov 2018 6:47AM
In ACR, there's a white balance section - two sliders (blue/yellow and magenta/green) and a dropdown menu of choices. The AWB is in the dropdown, and having had it reccommended by Willie, I've found that it works differently from camera AWB, and often far better... The default in the dropdown is 'as shot' but there are several options.
paulbroad 15 131 1294 United Kingdom
14 Nov 2018 8:28AM
Really don't mind it as it is. The colour is due to slight under exposure of the sky but can also be due to atmospheric dust. Auto Colour in PS changes it to a lighter shade without really damaging anything else. I suspect the colour is probably near correct.

xwang 14 56 8
14 Nov 2018 11:04AM
Thanks Paul.
Glad to know the "why"s are under exposure and, .. atmospheric dust.
What should I do in situation like this?
Some people say: "Walking with P mode"; some say:" Walking with A mode,F8",...but not really practical for me when I was taking something else and suddenly saw something interesting,..

Thanks John again.
Sorry that I forgot the "jargon(s)", believe it or not, I had to google "ACR" yesterday, but misunderstood "AWB" as something else, but "Auto white balance".
I remembered when I took this photo with my first DSLR, I talked about "white balance" with Paul(braod). Paul suggested to use "auto", I can't remember the correct rate that Paul mentioned then, but I took the digital advantage since,...
For the British sky I found that manually adjust white balance was a bit "annoying", it's very changeable, better leave it alone, rarely I do it manually for whatever ....
Thanks a lot.

paulbroad 15 131 1294 United Kingdom
14 Nov 2018 11:26AM
Hello Jasmine, long time....

I carry all my cameras set to P mode, auto ISO to 1600 and single spot autofocus. Auto white balance and best JPG. This allows me to shoot a grab shot and be reasonable certain of a useable image. If I have time, I would then re-think settings as the subject and lighting determine, but then ALWAYS set back to the pre-sets for moving on. I rarely use spot metering at all, but now mainly use Fuji CSC and can judge exposure directly from the viewfinder, being electronic.

I also always use Auto WB. I know this is not the advice from some, but colour balance is easily changed on a JPG - does not have to be RAW, and in the days of film we only had two main choices - daylight or tungsten! So why need all the different settings, especially when the majority of users do not understand colour temperature?

I used to use a colour temperature meter at work and correction filters in my days as a Metallurgist because we often needed colours 'correct' whatever that means. All that matters is does the end product look good?

In your shot here, all I would have done is a tighter crop. What is the correct sky colour? Can you remember? Does it matter?

banehawi Plus
19 2.9k 4354 Canada
14 Nov 2018 1:04PM
Its a combination of significant underexposure, and white balance. Underexposure seems to cause the majority of the issue, with WB fine tuning a bit.

I have up[loaded 3 screenshots; your original showing exposure is well under; screen 2 shows the huge colour change with corrected exposure; screen 3 shows a combination of increased exposure and WB. The lens also have very significant vignetting.
The answer is in this series of shots.


cbrundage 10 4 United States
14 Nov 2018 9:11PM
I'm looking at it differently from the others. I love the composition - the angle of the fishing rod vs. the angle of the stairs making it so interesting and the red square on the left making a contrast - love it!
xwang 14 56 8
14 Nov 2018 9:53PM
Thanks Paul.
Yeah,... it is long time. I do learn a lot from you, and other photographers on EPZ.
"P mode, auto ISO to 1600", maybe I should give a try as well,...
The reason that I haven't dropped "Spot meter" is perhaps I like contrast, also a lot of time the light contrast is strong. You know, my starting point of learning "Light" is from your comment on this
photo. From this very point, I realised that how important it is to get high light under control, and also not losing the shadow's detail.
I understand that "spot meter" is not always necessary, I admit that I'm simply lazy sometimes, also I couldn't tell a lot difference on settings. I remembered I tried once outside "shakespeare theatre", when Willie mentioned it some years ago, maybe it depends on the situations.
On this occasion, I was actually taking a photo of a boat. I'll upload it on MOD to show you if I could get the high light under control(with spot meter), after "long time" since your first comment.

Thanks Willie for your screen shots.
I'll upload the default( I wondered why you didn't ask for default this time,..Smile.), LR Auto screen shots and my LR adjustment's screen shot which was uploaded on EPZ's critique gallery.

The first one is default screen shot on PS. It wasn't underexposed as much as I uploaded for critique. But why did I upload an underexposed one?
We go to the second screen shot which is LR's auto adjustment. I noticed that it increased exposure 0.06, and high light was reduced. It gave me an idea to adjust the setting to the third screen shot, my adjustment. The wall and the buoy look a lot better on this one, but I can't handle the sky, it came with the "magentas" issue. I thought if I could get rid of it, it would be the photo I wanted...
Thanks again!
paulbroad 15 131 1294 United Kingdom
15 Nov 2018 4:19PM
Using a spot meter has nothing to do with contrast as such, Jas. It is just a meter like any other, can be the most accurate when correctly used, but also the most inaccurate when not correctly used.

I rarely use spot metering, being quite able to adjust the auto system myself to get what I want, and a CSC helps here a lot, giving an on screen correction. I would only use spot when it was very necessary, never as a general means of metering. Never!

xwang 14 56 8
16 Nov 2018 1:01PM
Thanks Paul.
It's perhaps some understanding,.. There were(are) some articles I read before on web , or this , there are a lot about spot meter,. .. I remember that they always say "light contrast", this is the problem I always have,..so I thought to preserve the very bright light spot, keep the details, and not lose the shadow too much,..
dudler Plus
19 2.1k 2018 England
17 Nov 2018 11:30AM
A spot meter will allow you to balance light and dark points, but won't in itself expand the dynamic range of yoru sensor.

To make really good use of it, you'd need to take readings from the light and dark points (which you would have to find), and then calculate the exposure to get them as close as possible to the extremes of what your sensor can deal with. Michael Freeman's book on exposure is good reading on the topic: when you understand what he's got to say, a spot meter is a great tool.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.