need help from some of those camera experts on the forum

[pagani123]

so my phantom 3 photos and videos look a little washed out and bright. so i am looking at filters on dji website they have uv nd4 nd8 nd16 filters. first off what the difference between uv and nd. second whats the difference in the numbers on the nd filters. third what would you guys suggest getting.

Edited December 16, 2015 by Godlygamer23

[pagani123]

just to give you an example this is a photo i took over the summer the grass does not look as vibrant as it does irl and the baseball diamond was darker irl

[nickl]

I would consult @ALwin, but my knowledge of this is that a ND filter's purpose is to reduce the intensity of light that goes through it. This may fix your problem, but you may simply want to increase the saturation of your images in post...

I doubt the camera on the drone is having problems with metering, or the exposure of your images...

 

Just playing around with it for 5 min in Photoshop, I managed to get this:

 

I ended up increasing the contrast, and saturation, and maybe fiddling with the lightness and brightness.

[pagani123]

I would consult @ALwin, but my knowledge of this is that a ND filter's purpose is to reduce the intensity of light that goes through it. This may fix your problem, but you may simply want to increase the saturation of your images in post...

I doubt the camera on the drone is having problems with metering, or the exposure of your images...

 

Just playing around with it for 5 min in Photoshop, I managed to get this:

problem is i dont have photoshop (i dont want to pirate it) also this maybe a stupid question but what about video can i edit to make it look a little less washed out 

[boarder2k7]

There are free programs such as gimp that offer nearly all the features of photoshop and are free.

UV and ND filters wouldn't help that current photo issue. The biggest issue there is that the dynamic range of cameras is much lower than the human eye so everything can't be properly exposed all at once. Cheaper cameras and smaller cheaper optics make these problems worse.

Edit: You can edit videos to fix a lot of exposure issues as well. I'm not sure of any free or low cost programs that will let you work with color grading though.

[nickl]

There are free programs such as gimp that offer nearly all the features of photoshop and are free.

UV and ND filters wouldn't help that current photo issue. The biggest issue there is that the dynamic range of cameras is much lower than the human eye so everything can't be properly exposed all at once. Cheaper cameras and smaller cheaper optics make these problems worse.

Edit: You can edit videos to fix a lot of exposure issues as well. I'm not sure of any free or low cost programs that will let you work with color grading though.

There are lots of free image editors. I often use Pixlr, an online editor for quick stuff... Either way, for video, I am currently using DaVinci Resolve 12 Beta, which is totally free, and is a very popular and powerful program for video editing and color correction. 

[bob345]

From the looks of the example you gave, a filter will not change it. It simply looks like the files produce are made to be processed. the lower contrast helps allot when it come to dynamic range, but the un edited pictures will always look a bit washed out. This is what it looks like when processed in lightroom. I also highly recommend adobe lightroom as a photo editor. At $9 a month its well worth the price. The photography package also includes photoshop.

 

[ALwin]

I'll reply when I get to my office.

[.spider.]

It is totally fine. The image is just flat, which makes it easier to edit the image.

After a bit tweaking in Camera Raw it looks like this

 

 

If you dont want to spend money for software you could use gimp for photos and Resolve for videos. Just increase the contrast a bit and add some saturation. 

 

UV and ND filters won't help. The only filter which could help under certain conditions is a polarizing filter, but you can not use it on a drone because you have to rotate it. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarizing_filter_(photography)

[ALwin]

so my phantom 3 photos and videos look a little washed out and bright. so i am looking at filters on dji website they have uv nd4 nd8 nd16 filters. first off what the difference between uv and nd. second whats the difference in the numbers on the nd filters. third what would you guys suggest getting.

 

UV filters: their purpose is to reduce the amount of UV light reaching the camera sensor.  But modern cameras tend to already have a filter just above the sensor that blocks UV light and the lenses tend to have nano coatings that also have the same effect.  UV filters on modern cameras these days serve only as a protection filter, and even then many do not use it for that purpose.

 

ND (Neutral Density) filters: are to reduce light coming into the camera.  The numbers next to the filter indicate how many stops of light they reduce.  ND filters are used when the camera doesn't have a fast enough shutter speed, to help in taking long exposure photos and there is another type of ND filter called Graduated ND which is mostly used by landscape photographers.  Film makers also use ND filters because when recording video you might not be using fast shutter speeds like 1/500th of a second.  So a ND filter helps.  The general rule of thumb is, the higher a number a ND filter has the more stops of light it reduces.  However different manufacturers use a different numbering system.  Some use like the ones you found, N4 ND8 ND16, others use decimals 0.3 0.6 0.9 while others use fractions 1/4 1/16 1/64.  I have just listed the numbers in order of increased reduction in light.

 

Polarising filters: In your case it's not needed.  And you can't use it anyway.  Polarising filters can be used for two primary purposes.  The first is to assist in making the blue sky appear more saturated, if used correctly.  The second is to reduce reflections that may appear when taking photos of (for example) buildings with a lot of glass panel windows.

 

To me it looks like your photo was taken on a overcast day. Judging by the photo you posted, it appears that it is slightly under exposed.  

 

I can't say with 100% certainty why the camera might be underexposing.  It can be for a variety of reasons, such as the metering system in the camera is slightly off, or it is the scene that is causing the camera to miscalculate whatever shutter speed ISO and aperture (if aperture can be adjusted) combination it thinks is correct.

 

To get a better photo, you should either set your camera to compensate the exposure by a third or two thirds of a stop, up to a maximum of 1 stop above.  Or in post processing just slide the exposure slider a bit to the right.  And then you adjust other sliders from there to get the photo you want.

 

The camera, any digital camera's exposure metering system is accurate to within a very tiny margin of error for roughly 95% of the time.  However there are some instances when you have to manually dial in an exposure compensation into the camera. One such example is when taking photos of a landscape full of snow.  Snow is white and it can reflect back a lot of light which can throw the camera's exposure meter off.  My general rule for taking photos of snow is to over expose by maximum 1 stop.

[ALwin]

By the way, if this is the drone and camera you are using, the sample photos they show on the website are not very flattering.  They'd have a hard time convincing me to buy one.

http://www.dji.com/product/phantom-3-pro

 

This photo looks over processed.

 

 

But the video looks nice, though I want to see the metadata.

 

 

There's been some cases where a camera manufacturer hires an advertising/marketing agency to create sample videos and images for their products, and the agency instead of using the product to capture the photos and videos, uses the cameras that their staff have.

[.spider.]

 

Polarising filters: In your case it's not needed.  And you can't use it anyway.  Polarising filters can be used for two primary purposes.  The first is to assist in making the blue sky appear more saturated, if used correctly.  The second is to reduce reflections that may appear when taking photos of (for example) buildings with a lot of glass panel windows.

 

Plants will also appear greener and the streets will be darker if the angle between camera and sun is right

 

Snow is white and it can reflect back a lot of light which can throw the camera's exposure meter off.  My general rule for taking photos of snow is to over expose by maximum 1 stop.

 

 

Wut? It is not the amount! Exposure meters are aiming for an average exposure of 18% neutral grey. 

A shot of a white sheet of paper looks pretty much like 18% gray without exposure correction.

 

It is a bit darker than 18% because there are brightener in the paper and exposure meters are not always accurate. 

[boarder2k7]

Either way, for video, I am currently using DaVinci Resolve 12 Beta, which is totally free, and is a very popular and powerful program for video editing and color correction.

Hahahaha yes, Resolve is awesome! I deliberately didn't mention it because I have the pro version at the media group I work with and I know it's $1000 and OP said he didn't want to spend money. I totally forgot the base software (which does everything you could want) is free!

Get it here: https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/davinciresolve/compare

[Williamchan87]

you just need to use some editor and play with the colour and what not