boomboom Loc: Stow, Ohio

Hi all you Hedgehogs. I took this picture in full sunlight and was happy except the white on the duck was too intense. Is there something I could have done taking this picture that would have kept the color but toned down the whites for more feather detail? I would prefer to do this before postprocessing if possible because my PP is weak. Thanks for any suggestions.

(Download)

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The image from PSE has the EXIF deleted. But, it looks like you have a 'good' set-up, shutter priority and Evaluative Metering, (I think based on my EXIF reader and the data Adobe passed on). A few methods to consider:

1. Shoot in RAW so you can 'recover' the highlights. If you did shoot in RAW, go back to ACR and move the highlight slider to the left and see if any details come back on the white on the head.

2. Check your Exposure Compensation (EC) setting on this image. If it was above 0 (or at 0), in this situation, you'd want to dial it down so the meter falls a bit to the left of zero.

2a. Assure the camera is in AUTO ISO so the camera can control both the aperture and ISO as you set the shutter speed and the EC.

3. If this duck / similar ducks passed your position repeatedly, make sure you review your highlight warnings on the first pass in direct sun and make the adjustments to dial down the exposure so the small bit of bright white goes just below blinking in the highlight warnings.

4. The focal length shows 400mm, the max zoom of this lens. If all your subjects were tending to be at the max zoom and in the center of the frame, consider the spot meter and hope that small center-circle (spot) used for metering falls on the bright white as the bird passes. I prefer evaluative metering and using the highlight warnings and watching the meter position when the warnings stop.

5. If possible, get closer, so these white highlights better fill the frame and register to the Evaluative meter and the exposure selected will account for these highlights.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

You will get more knowledgable advice than mine, but my opinion is that the highlights (whites) are irretrievably blown (overexposed) I just have a copy of LR on my IPad where I viewed it, and I can’t recover any detail in the whites, in the future, you might try pulling down the ISO or EC a stop or two (look at the histogram after you shoot and adjust so that you are not beyond the right end) and/or spot metering on the whites. You have plenty of light in a shot like this, so you can afford to give yourself a stop of “headroom” by underexposing just a little if you’re in doubt and pulling up in post.

boomboom Loc: Stow, Ohio

Thanks for all the good info. I will try a couple of these to see if they will work better. Your advice is always appreciated. You have more knowledge than I ever will. I just keep plugging and learning off of people like you. Thanks again.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

I fixed some typos, hopefully the final version is most useful. It takes practice, lots of practice, both shooting and editing and repeating until some of the ideas become second nature in the field.

boomboom Loc: Stow, Ohio

Your right the whites are too far to retrieve. Maybe my ISO was too high from my last outing. I didn't notice that. Thanks very much for your suggestions. They are appreciated.

Properframe Loc: US Virginia

When shooting birds/mammals with white you need to manually adjust the exposure compensation to underexpose the frame. You may then have to bring up the shadows/colors in post but they are still there. Your whites may not be recoverable if they are blown out.
Remember it is opposite. White you want to darken. Dark you want to lighten.
White bird/mammal UNDEREXPOSE
Dark bird/mammal OVEREXPOSE

Beautiful Bufflehead Duck.

2 minor points. Avoid the high sun. Do not shoot down on your subject unless background forces the matter..

boomboom Loc: Stow, Ohio

I know what you mean. I was excited to see him and didn't really think about too much adjusting because I figured he would fly, which he did. Oh well, that's what keeps me going back in the field.

boomboom Loc: Stow, Ohio

Good points, I will definitely try the underexpose idea. I know better than to take pictures in full sun, but in NE Ohio we never have sun, this day caught me off guard. Thanks again.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

It's a trade-off, underexposing, as EOS images don't respond as well. You want to bring the exposure "down" just to the point the highlights are not blown. But, if you had the ISO fixed at ISO-640, the solution may be nothing more than changing to AUTO-ISO, checking your highlight warnings and moving the EC as needed, possibly even to the right if nothing was blinking at the 0-mark on the meter.

boomboom Loc: Stow, Ohio

Good point. Auto ISO may be one help, never thought of that. I'm getting so many good ideas and probably will never see that Bufflehead again. LOL

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

If the is "information" on a RAW file and the exposure is correct, more detail can be extracted in post-processing. Detail lost from slight overexposure can be restored.

There is something to conser besides over-exposure when texture or detail is missing. Even if the exposure is correct, detail can be lost because of an angle of incidents issue in the lighting. Sometimes when the light strikes the subject at a certain angle of incidents it can cause a lack of fine detail in such subjects as feathers on a bird. With the same volume of light striking the subject from a different angle or skimming the subject, oftentimes detail can be enhanced.

I fully realize that you can't pose a duck or other wildlife subject and move it into the desired light pattern but in some cases, you can change your camera position or try to shoot when the light is more directional and at a more advantageous angle of incidence.

The magic formula is the angle of incidence is equal to the angle of reflection. To make it simple, as an experiment, use any artificial ligt source, say one of this high-intensity desk lamp and shoot a white textured object. Place the light at around 30 degrees to the came/subject axis. Then make another shot with light at 135 degrees to the camera/subject axis. You will probably find, even if the same distance and same volume of light and the same exposure are set, the one at 135 degrees will seem brighter. You may need to move it further away or dim it to retain more detail. Feathering of allowing the edge of the light to skim the surface of the subject will also help retain texture and detail.

OK, I also know you can't move the sun but if you keep the angle in mind you will have fewer issues with washed-out highlights. Of course, you should carefully calculate your exposure, meter or use your camera's metering system effectively.

Bright sunny days with the sun directly overhead can be challenging in terms of range. Calculate yo exposure precisely and consider your post-processing strategy as you shoot.

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

My answer is not as detailed: Cut the contrast setting on your camera if you sense an extreme need for both blacks and whites and bring up just what you need in reconstituting the final from raw. Also it would work with JPEGs since at lower contrast--more detail would also show in the white. In your duck the dark feathers seem natural while, as you say the whites are blown. If you dial down the overall exposure,leaving the contrast--the dark feathers with become more totally black or a bad effect, also---so just dial back the contrast on the camera body.----ew

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Since you want to do this before postprocessing here is my suggestion.
First, take a meter reading off grass or green leaves, they will reflect about the same as a gray card (18%) make sure the sun striking the grass is the same as is striking the bird, then, reduce your exposure by 2 stops to 3 stops, feather detail should be retained.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Sunny 16 rule works very nicely for this image but as has been suggested, due to the bright subject, underexposure of at least one stop is needed. So instead of sunny 16 use sunny 22 or equivalent. Sunny 16 does not necessarily means to shoot at f16 so review sunny 16 if you are not familiar with it.