Best way to get rid of blown out sky

[madisonofriel]

I am trying to find the best way to get a blue sky instead of white, I've heard several ways but I'm not sure how they would work for PORTRAITS. I have a hard enough time getting enough light for the portraits as it is, but now I need to fix the sky and I really can't afford to loose that light going to the person if that makes any sense. Any ideas? Thanks

Below is an example of the very common problem

 

[goooner]

The best option would be to use a off camera flash I suppose. Or expose for the sky and bring up the shadows in post (this will of course depend on your camera's dynamic range).

 

[bribrius]

filter?

 

[madisonofriel]

filter?

I wanted to use a filter but wouldn't it shade the person's face as well?

 

[ruifo]

1. First, you need a camera with high dynamic range (like: D3200, D3300, D5200, D5300, D5500, D7100, D7200, D600, D610, D750, D800, D800E, D810, D810A, DF, D4s).
2. Second you need to expose the shot to the highlights, not the shadows. The D750 and the D810/A have the new Highlight-Weighted Metering mode, that does that very well.
3. Third, make sure you're uing RAW file to shoot, not JPG.
4. Fourth, in RAW file post-processing, recover the shadows of the shot, whiling keeping the highlights without blowing up, and adjust any other parameters.
5. Last, after you're satisfied, convert it to JPG and be happy.

Or, expose to the highlights and just use a flash to bring up the shadows while shooting.

Good luck!

 

[fjrabon]

1) flash is your best option

2) shoot with the sun in their face and/or a reflector

3) filters. Polarizing filters tend to deepen the sky's blue without overly impacting the subject. You can also use a blue-yellow filter, which will darken blue tones, but brighten skin tones. Another option is a graduated neutral density filter, this will make the top of the image (where the sky typically is) darker than the bottom of the image (where the subject with insufficient light usually is).

4) extreme shadow saving with an ultra high dynamic range camera. expose so that the sky is exactly how you'd want it and then bring the foreground up in post.

5) HDR with a very quick exposure bracketing system and a very still subject.

Let me repeat, flash is your best option.

 

[The_Traveler]

Madison,

You need to read about dynamic range in order to understand the exposure issue but in short, the sky is so bright that, in order to introduce any color into it, the exposure must be so short that the less bright parts (face, etc) are rendered as too dark.

There are several ways to get around this (none of which may work for you here)

• Shoot from a slightly higher viewpoint so that the sky doesn't fill the field.
• Shoot when the sky has some clouds and is less uniformly bright.
• Use a fill-flash or reflector to provide more light to the foreground.
• Substitute in a sky in editing.
• the use of filters (circular polarizing) will make some difference but, in the situation shown, not enough. Better technique in choice of your position or time will do the trick here.

I noticed that both of your files, although small in dimension, are very large in bytes.
This is due to saving them in 'high' quality.
That is appropriate for files that are meant to be printed and/or have lots of fine detail but is unnecessary with files that are going to be viewed at screen size on the web. You could save this at much lower quality and reduce the file size by 50% or more without seeing any difference on the screen.

 

[KmH]

Spending $2000+ for a different camera is not a very good recommendation for a first step.

Adding to photographer knowledge and skill will pay more long range dividends than buying a new camera.

As mentioned the best solution to use at shutter release is to use supplemental light to balance the dynamic range of the scene.

Failing that, if you have Photoshop you can use Photoshop's Color Range feature or other selection tools to select the sky so it can be replaced with properly exposed sky from a different photo. Many of us have a library of sky photos for just that purpose.

 

[Dave442]

If your going outside shooting portraits outside then a flash can help. The time of day can help.

My camera does not have that much dynamic range so in post I would probably be lighten the faces a bit and drop the highlights and then just in the sky add bit of blue saturation and drop blue luminence (just saw the second video above shows this step, but I usually do not go as far).

Just as with the flash, if overdone it does not look real. I think with the shots you have right now the best is to do what Keith said and replace the sky.

 

[Ysarex]

1) flash is your best option

....snip....

Let me repeat, flash is your best option.

^^^^^^
OCF (Off Camera Flash) -- just want to emphasize from what Frank says here: "best option."

Joe

 

[Braineack]

leave it as is. it looks good. everything else will look fake.

 

[fjrabon]

leave it as is. it looks good. everything else will look fake.

when you're outside and you look up at the sky, it looks white to you?

 

[Braineack]

leave it as is. it looks good. everything else will look fake.

when you're outside and you look up at the sky, it looks white to you?

Right now? Why yes.

using tapatalk.

 

[weepete]

Use some fill flash when shooting.

 

[Maxim Photo Studio]

The Best option would depend on what you have on hand. I start by exposing for the background...always. Underexpose by one stop. Bring in the lights. If you can do HS sync then you would probably shoot wide open which would be great for background blur. If you have to shoot below the sync speeds then adjust the F stop to keep the sky dark. Here is my recent example with two flashes on each side of the camera.