The snow will be gray till I get the monitor calibration tool. I have tried a few other methods and they don't seem to have any effect as your still saying my colors are off...

I was pretty sure that I was clear that I came right out and said there was something wrong with 'grey snow is grey'.



So, to be a bit more clear-your image is not properly exposed. In fact, I often find your images to be underexposed, leading myself, as well as Chris to ask you if perhaps your monitor is out of calibration since it seems to be pretty common. It's not just a matter of colour, it's a matter of exposure as well. In this case underexposure means that the snow is grey rather than white-and I'm also thinking the wb might be a little cool as well, but hard to be quite sure without proper exposure.

The 'put on your big boy drawers' comment-even though not meant *ONLY* for you, but everyone putting their work 'out there' was a bit out of line, and although said playfully without ill intent -i realize it could be taken in such a manner over the internet.

You say you've asked many others to view your images to check after Chris had mentioned this or that-have any of them been pros on calibrated displays? I'm not being sarcastic-because what 'looks fine' to the average bear on their uncalibrated display will not look fine to folks that are picky about exposure and colour and using calibrated displays. It's part of the learning curve, and lots of people that aren't either very serious hobbyists or professionals won't always know/see a problem. From my experience blackberry and other mobile devices almost always have a blue colour cast by default-as well as many laptops/desktops. Hopefully you'll see what we are talking about after you've properly calibrated your display(s). Cheers.

greenspree-getting it right in camera is crucial in most circumstances, especially some of the trickier ones. such as this. if at all possible while shooting set a custom white balance in the field rather than leaving it on auto and getting a lot of inconsistency to deal with after the fact.

in the image you've posted it looks like the white balance is off as well as some underexposure. i have an awesome writeup on colour correction after the fact especially dealing with jpg images that i'll dig up and post for you. |

Monitor calibration only shows you the gray snow, it does not fix the gray snow.

Proper exposure fixes gray snow.

I really don't understand how a calibrator is going to change this. It's dark but the colors seem right.

the white/black point on his monitor could be off. but the colour calibration is a step in the right direction

Great thread.

Socktan...your lesson from the Holland College bootcamp demonstrated here again. Tell your camera what white is supposed to look like. I remember your cruddy slide photo of the snow that looked like it was from outside a lead smelter.

The snow in the pic is more a blue than a gray. Anyway looking out my window and out in the distance but not too far off there are areas where the light indeed has the snow shaded and it has a blue/gray cast. I am sure that if I was using my telescope, telephoto or simply zoom to capture a close up of an animal such as a fox that the snow would be of the color the light has it where the animal is located. And it would be as such no mater what exposure or settings I was using, that is within reason with regards to everything else I might want to capture. I think that is what has happened with the picture, and nothing else. An aberration of perspective if you will.

Of course depending on the time of day and quality of light the snow may have a cool or warm cast. Depending on what your goal is in post you may want to leave the off white balance as it is or correct it.

That is not the case in this image though. The image is underexposed and the snow definitely has a grey tint. If you corrected just the exposure and contrast in post you can see that the image overall is somewhat warm.

Without knowing the range or if the sky has clouds casting shadows, Seems a lot to read into it to me.

An under exposed image is an under exposed image. Whether you are shooting people or wildlife you are going to want a proper white balance regardless of the sky and cloud cover. Not much to read into really.

Snow isn't white in all occasions, but when considering this image, it is underexposed.

The average RGB values are 180,187,189. That's gray snow. The values should be closer to 255,255,255-ish. After correcting exposure for the subject, the snow ends up to be an average of 248,254,255.


This is a relatively old thread and jmweb seems to have a better handle on proper exposure and adjusting missed exposure in post. Perhaps revisiting this image in the archives and adding an adjusted copy to this thread is a good idea.

Perhaps, but it is a shame there isn't also an unzoomed shot from which one can have a better perspective of the lighting. For sake of argument.

I don't understand. A wider shot should change how the tighter shot is exposed? No. It is what it is; underexposed.

A wider shot might display if the area where the fox is is under the shadow of a cloud or shaded by a snow drift and a low late afternoon sun.

The image is still underexposed. In any of those above scenarios proper exposure would yield similar results. Depending on the type of light and position of the sun you would see some SLIGHT differences in the snow (cast and exposure) but nothing major.

Like Chris said John has come a long long way since this and it would be a great one to revisit and reprocess.

Agreed, that would be interesting.

wen i was first starting out I would always go back and reshoot locations as I gained knowledge and my skills improved. I still will go back to images from 5-6 years ago and reprocess the odd one for fun.