This post follows a chat with Matt Payne about light color.
The first image is a raw capture at 5050K during smoke-filled skies of a nearby wildfire. The sky was really this color and it was a surreal experience, especially knowing families lost their homes nearby.
Specific Feedback Requested
My questions are, Would you change the color of the light to remove the extreme orange cast or leave as is? Under what circumstances would you do so?
My own answer is, it depends. I recently submitted the second photo, an edited version with the WB and tint adjusted, as well as a few other aspects, to look much less orange but still weirdly brown, for publication.
I have a hard time believing anyone would accept this color of light without an explanation that it was real.
Having seen scenes like this I would believe it but you can still tweak the white balance selectively in shadows and highlights to give some sense of prescense.
The red scene is believable to me, I have also seen scenes like this. The image with the adjusted color balance could be telling a different story other than fire.
I agree with @Eva_McDermott about the adjusted image showing something different than fire. I don’t know if either image could really be understood without some explanation. The first one is much more believable as a environment under fire/smoke. The second one feels more like a foggy morning or day. I wonder what the second one would look like in B&W.
Matt, I think it all depends on what you want to communicate to the viewer. Environmental damage, or environmental serenity. Either way, it’s nice to see both images. Thanks for sharing them.
This is a good topic of discussion. I’ve shot scenes in Auto white balance plenty of times and get wildly different looking images based on what the camera thinks it’s seeing. I guess the question is, is the raw image an accurate representation of what you remembered seeing and if so, then I think it is what it is but the viewer would definitely need a background story to find it believable. I definitely find it believable knowing the conditions you were shooting in. However, the light is very flat so as @Matt_Payne suggests, I would try and breath a little bit of contrast into this with some dodging and burning but I think the white balance looks fine if that’s the story you want to tell. If I learned one thing over the three days that Alister was critiquing images it was that it doesn’t matter what you want others to think, it only matters what you want to think and feel about your image. He suggested to several posters that they write an essay about what the image means to them and edit in a way that brings those feelings and emotions out.
Looking at the thumbnail of this I immediately knew it was a fire image. I think a lot (many?) people have seen fire scenes at this point, and if presented with the “unedited” light temperature they wouldn’t bat an eye. The edited version looks like “fire light” to me, also, not fog. It’s that brown hazy look.
Personally, I wouldn’t change the color temperature ever, but that may reflect my personal experience with wildfire (lost just about everything). Your unedited scene feels apocalyptic, which seems to me to be an appropriate message to convey about wildfire.
On the other hand, you may have a different outlook than I and want to convey a different message. I think we should process our images with a mind to what we want to say - that directs the processing.
I like the composition and symbolism of the vanishing road. Both versions look quite believable, as different amounts of smoke and sunlight mix. We have had several large fires close enough to create heavy smoke and I have some shots with lighting similar to the first one above. When an image is this monochromatic, auto WB is pretty meaningless – it is based on the assumption of averaging a normal range of colors. Daylight may be the closest to “how it was” – maybe. But with anything this emotional, it’s artist’s choice.
I have a picture of a very colorful “total lunar eclipse” – with a 75% moon. The heaviest smoke from that fire was at night, and a wall of smoke was impenetrable dark brown the next morning, thankfully viewed from the outside by then – the remnants of over 5,000 houses and 22 people. (And @Bonnie_Lampley, we seem to be members of the same club…)
One thing that hasn’t been stated is that pictures takes during a smoky fire often come out warmer than they look. That’s because your mind adjusts the colors. Just like shadows that come out blue.
5050 is pretty warm IMO. So you had a warm subject and processed it that way and came out with orange.
I also don’t believe that you need to make things real. Even when representing reality it’s still good to exaggerate just a bit to make your point.
I think you’ve answered your own question here - “It depends…”
Even without a narrative, if you’re submitting to anything related to fires, smoke, etc. etc., then most folks will get it and understand. For anyone who’s experienced skies and conditions like this (anyone in the Western US in the last 3-5 years…) can attest. I know I can.
On the flip side, if you’re sending this for publication - like a calendar company or something, then the expectation is totally different.
Niether is right or wrong, but in this case, the audience does matter as does what you’re trying to say with the image.
Anyway, the original depicts the reality of a fire-driven atmosphere… the adjusted image, the viewer has no idea what’s causing the “haze”. In fact the adjust image still could accurately depict smoke from a fire - but the sun isn’t present to create the orange light (high cloud cover above, for example.
@Eva_McDermott, thank you. One image from the series I created just doesn’t tell the story. They tell it better in series.
@David_Bostock, thank you. Agreed, this story is best told with photos and a narrative, at least by me it is. I want to communicate the fire but haven’t tried this before so I appreciate your feedback.
@David_Haynes, thank you. I’ve also used Auto WB with great differences between photos. I couldn’t tell you what the setting was for this one since I was a bit sloppy about it when I created it and can’t find it in LR. I submitted a different image of the same afternoon to Alister and got great feedback and it boosted my confidence in all the images from that day.
@Bonnie_Lampley, thank you. I appreciate your encouragement to process however I feel is appropriate for the message I wish to send. Sometimes I lose sense of that over what I feel people will accept.
@Diane_Miller, thank you. Agreed about the WB. I appreciate your position that it is in the eye of the beholder. What you describe sounds tragic.
@Igor_Doncov, thank you. I appreciate your advice about the mind’s eye adjusting to conditions. I hadn’t considered that.
@Lon_Overacker, thank you. Agreed, audience matters. I happened to capture the sun in one composition and it proved to be the best image with the greatest impact.
