White out

[mn shutterbug]

I have found, when taking a shot of anything white, with the harsh sun hitting it directly, the white completely washes out to almost a bright glare. It's whiter than can be described. It is so white it almost blinds me. However, the rest of the image is exposed properly. Is it my Panasonic P & S that is the problem or can this happen with any camera? I know I can reduce the contrast in camera, but I don't think that will do the trick, Any suggestions besides waiting for the sun to move?

Thanks

[another view]

Any suggestions besides waiting for the sun to move?

Well, that's really the one...

Two thoughts - first, cameras don't record images as our eyes see them. Our eyes can handle a lot more contrast than any camera - negative (print) film being better than digital in this regard, which is closer to slide film in the amount of contrast that it can record.

The other thought is that this is one of the challenges of photography. Great conditions just don't happen that often. When they do happen, shoot a lot and make the most of it. Galen Rowell (RIP, amazing alpine and wilderness photographer) knew his area extremely well. He'd notice something he wanted to photograph and then note that it would be best in mid-summer evening light (example) because the direction it was facing would look best when the sun was at so many degrees to it, etc. When the great light hit, he'd rush to a good spot to capture it.

For most of us, it's pretty tough to have excellent light conditions and something interesting to photograph, as well as having the gear to do it with you and the time to do it. Sure is great when it happens though...

[freygr]

I have found, when taking a shot of anything white, with the harsh sun hitting it directly, the white completely washes out to almost a bright glare. It's whiter than can be described. It is so white it almost blinds me. However, the rest of the image is exposed properly. Is it my Panasonic P & S that is the problem or can this happen with any camera? I know I can reduce the contrast in camera, but I don't think that will do the trick, Any suggestions besides waiting for the sun to move?

Thanks

Some times a graduated natural density filter helps. But the glass filters cost more than some PS cameras.

[SmartWombat]

This will happen with any camera.
It can only record a limited range of light and dark tones, and your harsh sun is too much compared to the rest of the image.

You can use exposure compansation, turn it to -2, so that the white isn't so bright.
But then the rest of the image will be too dark.

Change the light, or change the subject.
If the rest of the image is exposed properly, you've reached the limit of the camera.

A neutral density filter won't help, as you said the rest of the image is properly exposed.
All the ND filter does is makes the whole image darker, so like the -2 exposure adjustment the parts that are now properly exposed will be too dark.

[another view]

Paul, a graduated neutral density filter may help in some cases, because only part of the filter is dark. In the real world these filters can be a compromise. Not a lot of shots will have a perfectly straight line of where you want the dark and light areas to be, so you have to live with something that's too dark or too light just because that's how the filter works.

You can take two shots (one for the light areas, one for the dark areas) and combine them with photoshop, but it's best to have a subject that doesn't move (landscape) and a tripod so the shots line up perfectly.

[livin4lax09]

yes, what you are referring to is a common problem with digital cameras...lack of dynamic range. Dynamic range, as other people have mentioned, is the ability to both capture detail in the dark darks and light lights at the same time. Film still rules supreme on this part of photography. Generally the lower the ISO the more dynamic range you get, but for the most part, it's pretty bad in a digital camera. DSLRs will have an infinitely better level of range than point and shoots though. Another tip is to turn down your in camera contrast all the way. There are many practices to get around this, as AV said, merging two or more images (sometimes referred to as HDR, high dynamic range). Another practice is to just expose for the highlights and boost everything else in post processing where you have a finer control over everything, but you will start to see much more noise in the areas where you boosted the dark colors. another solution is just to live with it I guess, or just do your best to return as much detail to the blown highlight as you can in photoshop. good luck.

[SmartWombat]

True, graduated ND solves the sky/land exposure problem where there is a straight distant horizon.
But a plain ND isn't going to help.

Graduated doesn't do the job too well with a ragged skyline, which is why I'd wither shoot two images, or just wait for the right light.
Shooting RAW doesn't cut it, because of the noise in the shadows when I adjust the exposure on a copy of the image.
Exposing for the highlights, if you're shooting JPEG, may suffer the same problem, depending on how much shadow you want to try to recover.

[another view]

Graduated doesn't do the job too well with a ragged skyline, which is why I'd wither shoot two images, or just wait for the right light.
Shooting RAW doesn't cut it, because of the noise in the shadows when I adjust the exposure on a copy of the image.

That's been my experience too. It's pretty rare in real life that the line separating the highlight area from the shadow is anything close to a straight line. Usually that means an unteresting photograph, compositionally. So like I said, you compromise...

Exposing for the highlights, if you're shooting JPEG, may suffer the same problem, depending on how much shadow you want to try to recover.

Especially a jpeg - better luck with a RAW file because of the higher bit depth (8 bit vs. 12 bit), but still not ideal...