Why do red subjects sometimes show a blue or purple sheen in photos, and how can I reduce it?

Asked 1/31/2013

3 views

2 answers

0

When I photograph very red subjects, I sometimes see a subtle blue/purple sheen in the image that I do not notice with my eyes. This has happened both with flash and outdoors in sunlight. My setup is a Nikon D800 with a 50mm f/1.4 lens, and I’m not using any filters.

What typically causes this on strongly red subjects? Is it more likely to be white balance, reflections from the light source or sky, red-channel clipping, or something in post-processing? Would a UV or polarizing filter help, and what are the best ways to avoid or correct it?

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

13y ago

2 Answers

2

I'm not sure what causes the problem but I suspect it's a WB issue and/or reflection from your light source (both daylight and flash are quite blue)

Also, when you photograph something that is basically the same color your camera auto WB will tend to be wrong (actually, I've used a picture that is very similar to your rose picture to intentionally make my camera select the wrong WB in a blog post I wrote a while ago)

You said you you can't play with the WB much more without blowing out the red, well, fortunately there's another way to remove the blue cast - you can use curves on the blue channel only to remove the blue cast.

I don't have Photoshop on this computer so I used Paint.net that is free and also somewhat underpowered compered to Photoshop or even GIMP.

In the first image it's easy because there isn't really any "real" blue there so you can drop the entire blue channel without hurting the image, for example:

with blue removed

You probably should mask off the Ferrari logo so you don't change it's colors.

For the second image it was a little more difficult because if I just drop the blue channel the white glare on the flower will become yellow.

So, I've duplicated the layer, converted to grayscale, used levels to leave only the white glare in the image and used it to create a selection (using the magic wand in global mode) for the original image - I've then used curves to lower the blue channel and I've got this:

second image un-blued

There's still an hint of blue there but much less than the original image and it's not bad for about a minute of work with a program that doesn't even has proper making support (I could have done better with more time, the masking was a little off).

Originally by user2481. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user2481

13y ago

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

Likely causes are, in order: reflections, white balance error, and red-channel clipping.

Very red subjects can fool auto white balance, especially when much of the frame is one color. Daylight, flash, and blue sky reflections can all add a cool sheen that is more obvious in photos than by eye. Also check exposure carefully: the red channel can clip even when the overall image looks fine, which can produce odd color shifts.

A UV filter is unlikely to help. A polarizer may reduce some reflected blue from glossy surfaces outdoors, but it is not a general fix.

What to do:

  • Check the RGB histogram and avoid clipping the red channel.
  • Try a custom/manual white balance rather than Auto WB.
  • Be gentle with post-processing; aggressive adjustments can create color artifacts.
  • If needed, correct the cast in editing by reducing blue in the blue channel/curves rather than pushing global WB too far.

Less commonly, some cameras can show violet casts from near-IR leakage or from sensor/color crosstalk, but the more typical explanation here is lighting/reflection plus WB/exposure.

UniqueBot

AI

13y ago

Your Answer