Bluebells wrong colour!

[Bocat]

Hi, I'm new to this forum. I have been out taking loads of bluebell photos today, but however much I tried to use different white balance settings to make them the real purply colour they were, they kept coming out more forget-me-not blue, which they weren't! I don't want to alter colours on my pc, just to take the image with the right colour to start with - can anyone help - do I need a filter or what am I doing wrong?

[frank1]

If I remember rightly they're almost inpossible to get right. That was using film I'm not sure how they are with digital. I may be barking up the wrong tree but that's as much as I know, not alot is it

[beejaybee]

If I remember rightly they're almost inpossible to get right. That was using film I'm not sure how they are with digital.

Yes ... the problem with bluebells (and quite a lot of, but by no means all, other blue flowers) is that they reflect quite strongly in the infra-red, which the red layer of colour films is sensitive to but the eye is not. Therefore bluebells tend to come out pink. With digital the problem is the opposite - most (but not all) cameras have heavy blocking of the infra-red, and some of the visible red, in the anti-alias filter which is stuck to the front of the sensor. Something is required because otherwise the IR sensitivity of the sensor would be overwhelming, and the colour correction of (most) lenses is such that the IR would blur images, but most cameras seriously overdo the job when correct depiction of bluebell tones is required.

Suggestions:

1. Try to photograph these flowers in sunlight - that was a prescription for "pinkbells" with film but may help "ordinary" digital cameras to get a better colour.

2. Use a camera without heavy IR blocking - the Sigma SD14 allows you to remove the blocking filter. Or a camera which has been modified for astronomical use by replacing the standard anti-alis filter with one which passes infra-red. You can still use these cameras "normally" by adding a dichroic UV/IR blocking filter to the lens. (Astronomers want extended red/IR sensitivity to pick up important emissions especially of hydrogen alpha, 656.3 nm, which is well in the visible red but nevertheless heavily suppressed by the anti-alias filters in many cameras).

3. Fudge the colour by using colur replacement in Photoshop!

[Fen]

1. Try to photograph these flowers in sunlight - that was a prescription for "pinkbells" with film but may help "ordinary" digital cameras to get a better colour.

I thought it was don't shoot bluebells in sunlight? I thought it was shoot with overcast skies or not in bright sunlight.

[Manofolympus]

The advantage to the plant is that pollinating insects vision extends into the near infra red, presumably making the flowers stand out in shady conditions. As far as your photographs are concerned, if your particular camera isn't doing a good job there isn't much you can do, realistically, short of buying a specific "bluebell camera". Fiddling in photoshop is probably the easiest option-removing any built in filter will almost certainly void the cameras warranty unless it is designed to be user removable.

[Manofolympus]

1. Try to photograph these flowers in sunlight - that was a prescription for "pinkbells" with film but may help "ordinary" digital cameras to get a better colour.

I thought it was don't shoot bluebells in sunlight? I thought it was shoot with overcast skies or not in bright sunlight.

Yes I thought it was that way round since IR scattering in the atmosphere is slight-hence sky lit shade will be IR deficient

[Manofolympus]

1. Try to photograph these flowers in sunlight - that was a prescription for "pinkbells" with film but may help "ordinary" digital cameras to get a better colour.

I thought it was don't shoot bluebells in sunlight? I thought it was shoot with overcast skies or not in bright sunlight.

Yes I thought it was that way round since IR scattering in the atmosphere is slight-hence sky lit shade will be IR deficient

Though with a digital camera where the problem is insufficient red recording bright sunlight may give the better colour balance!

[Malcolm_Stewart]

I shot bluebells last Sunday, both en-masse, and in close-up. I was using my Eos 5D and a Fuji Z10fd compact. Shooting under tree cover and in the open, on the 5D I tried both AWB and Custom White Balance using an Expodisc.

With both cameras, reducing the exposure somewhat more than normal to retain highlights, gave me good colour.

And I think it's close to what I remembered... ...as if any memory of colour can be remembered that accurately!

Some of the more distant shots under tree cover were however disappointing - they'd lost saturation, and the "blue" was less than I remember it.

[Mojo_66]

2. Use a camera without heavy IR blocking - the Sigma SD14 allows you to remove the blocking filter.

It does, but if you do that then the pics just come out in various shades of red. Looks great converted to mono though, but perhaps not the effect the OP was after.

[parisian]

I thought it was don't shoot bluebells in sunlight? I thought it was shoot with overcast skies or not in bright sunlight.

Spot on, but isn't it funny that something so quintessentially British and so apparently simple as a bluebell proves to be an almost impossible photographic challenge?
Wonderful

[beejaybee]

something so quintessentially British and so apparently simple as a bluebell

Hmmm. Not simple at all. The "British" bluebell is almost hybridised out of existence, the culprit here being the Spanish variety imported through garden centres, which is a different shape & colour ....

[Manofolympus]

something so quintessentially British and so apparently simple as a bluebell

Hmmm. Not simple at all. The "British" bluebell is almost hybridised out of existence, the culprit here being the Spanish variety imported through garden centres, which is a different shape & colour ....

It is possible to buy British bluebell bulbs for the garden-got some in a Daily Telegraph offer a few years back. Can't remember the nursery of origin but should be findable!