D850 or Strobe

[Michelle Pena]

Hi Brian, I've been noticing for a few months now, and not every time... that the back of camera images have been saturated with ugly orange and glowy look. Nothing has changed regarding camera settings that I can tell, and when this happens, editing is a nightmare, even using the grayscale for WB.  I don't know if my camera or strobe is causing the issue or if I'm accidentally hitting something. The bulb on my Flashpoint 400ad Pro is new for about 6 months( I've been using this light for 4 years and never had this issue), so I don't know what it could be. I'll attach unedited photos, but you may see a different color as it doesn't look the same on the back of the camera versus a computer. I have a D850, which is a very contrasty camera, but I have not seen images like this. WB was set at 5260k except for the mauve rug image, which was set at 5000k. Those settings should make the image cool in my experience. These are just awful. Any suggestions? Thank you! 

[Brian]

On 1/7/2025 at 7:22 PM, Michelle Pena said:

that the back of camera images have been saturated with ugly orange and glowy look. Nothing has changed regarding camera settings that I can tell, and when this happens,

Remember, the image you see on the LCD is the JPEG Preview and NOT THE RAW FILE. So believe it or not, there is some "editing" being done. What I want you to do 1st, is set your Picture Control to "Neutral." To do this, follow these steps:

1. Hit the Menu Button
2. Head to the Photo Shooting Menu (Camera Icon)
3. Arrow down to SET PICTURE CONTROL & hit OK.
4. Select NL Neutral & hit OK.

 

The colors and such should be more in-line with the Raw Image. That said, take this with a grain-of-salt; while better, it won't completely match the Raw Image.  

Now, while you are dorking around with your camera's settings, I also want you to adjust the LCD's Brightness.

1. Hit the Menu Button
2. Head to the Setup Menu (Wrench Icon)
3. Arrow down to Monitor Brightness
4. Select Menus/Playback and choose -1. (You might even have to go as low as -2, depending on your LCD. What we are aiming for is to match the brightness of the Raw File.)

On 1/7/2025 at 7:22 PM, Michelle Pena said:

WB was set at 5260k except for the mauve rug image, which was set at 5000k.

 If you are using AWB on your Camera, that's not a good thing. the Godox AD-400 Light you have is 5600K with a +/- of 200K variance in Color Stable Mode. I'm not digging that. If you are setting your camera to 5260K, that's too low. You need to go higher to match the 5600K coming out of your light. Of course, I'm sure you are used to this, but I that +/- 200K variance just bugs me; that's a $500 light as compared to a $2000-ish light. Higher quality lights don't fluctuate. The WB that is stated is the WB Value. Set your camera and be done with it. Alien Bee lights are also notorious for going wonky when you change power, but again a $400-$500 light vs a $2000+ light.

What modifier are you using? I'm assuming this problem started with the new bulb, how is the power at your location? Are you plugged in or using Batteries?

 

On 1/7/2025 at 7:22 PM, Michelle Pena said:

I've been using this light for 4 years and never had this issue

Equipment does wear out, it might be time for a better light. Here is what I would purchase if it were me: Profoto B1X 500 AirTTL 1-Light To-Go Kit. As far as a Modifier, I'd recommend some sort of Large White Octabox. Unfortunately, the ones I've recommended in the past, like a 7' Octa, are no longer made.

 

 

[Michelle Pena]

My current settings are in the pictures below. I don't think I'm on AWB.  Omgosh, neutral looks bland once I upload it to the Mac, but I will give it a shot. I have some free time tomorrow to try the new settings you suggested. Neutral,-2 monitor brightness, and WB of 5600k correct? 

Profoto has been a light I've wanted. The B10, but this must be new. I'm not up to date on those lights.

I've heard that the Wescott FJ 400 and FJ 200 are suitable for what I do: newborns, babies, and maternity. What's your take on those lights  

 

Thanks for your help.

[Michelle Pena]

Oh, and once I change those settings, do I also change my color profile in ACR to Neutral? Right now, I think I have it on " color."

[Brian]

No. Leave ACR ALONE. Remember, this is to change what you see on the camera's LCD.

Again...

Always remember:

Your camera's LCD is a Lying and Cheating Whore who will sell you down the River if given the chance!!!

The image you see on the LCD is NOT-NOT-NOT-NOT-NOT THE RAW FILE!!!

It is the JPEG Preview embedded within the Raw file. NEVER-EVER-EVER JUDGE COLOR (OR EVEN EXPOSURE) BY LOOKING AT THE IMAGE ON THE LCD. YOU MUST LEARN HOW TO READ YOUR HISTOGRAM.

Which reminds me, there is another setting I want you to change.

1. Hit the Menu Button
2. Head to the Photo Shooting Menu (Camera Icon)
3. Arrow down and look for Color Space
4. Set it to sRGB.

Now, again...this doesn't change the Raw Image, just makes the image you see on the Camera's LCD...it's colors, to the sRGB Color Space.

23 hours ago, Michelle Pena said:

neutral looks bland once I upload it to the Mac

Neutral is closer to the #blah image you get when the JPEG Preview goes away in ACR or LR. Photo Mechanic reads the JPEG Preview...that's why it's so friggin' fast. As soon as you import your image into ACR, it's going to be #blah. Remember, your JPEG Preview is supposed to look #amazeballz...Raw files look #blah. That's what sells cameras!!

Which is why I'm having you set your camera to "Neutral," which isn't that bad. You should try "Flat," now THAT'S a #blah image. Neutral tames down the colors on the LCD but still looks pleasant enough so you can show people if you need to. Flat is just that...complete flat looking colors.

Speaking of Photoshop, I want you to check your settings. Start at the top of these instructions and work your way down:

Setting Up Photoshop

 

23 hours ago, Michelle Pena said:

I've heard that the Wescott FJ 400 and FJ 200 are suitable for what I do: newborns, babies, and maternity. What's your take on those lights

I'm going to give it to you straight: Quit buying the fucking $500 lights!!!!

You have outgrown them. They only get you so far and you are discovering their limitations. Invest in a high quality light(s), and I recommend the Profoto lights, which aren't that expensive...they are less than $2000. Some lights are $4000 each!! Or more. Just think, we haven't even gotten to the "Really High End" Stuff!!  I want you to start saving your money from your shoots. It's time for you to get a better light. I know they are expensive. I get it...but I'm a firm believer in the "Buy it Right-Buy it Once!" Philosophy. If you buy another $500 light, you are just throwing money away. Even if you went a little lower and went with a Profoto A2 Monolight, would be a little better.

Here is a friend of mine who shoots Newborns, Babies, Maternity and such: Christine Hsieh Photography

Now don't go bugging her with questions, I just wanted to show you examples of shooting with a Profoto Light and a really large Octabank Softbox. (She just uses ONE Profoto light.) She also shoots with a Nikon Z6 these days, not sure which version, I think a Z6III? She shot with a D4 for years, but the weight of that camera was bugging her arm, so she went lighter. Notice the quality of light from the Profoto is? How even it looks? Unfortunately, they don't make her 7' Octabank Modifier any more so I can't link to one. (You can see it in her Catchlights.) I haven't been to her studio in years, but her setup is very simple and easy to work with.

[Michelle Pena]

OK, the camera is already set to sRGB. Picture control is in neutral, and WB is at 5600k.  I changed the LCD screen to -2 it was at -1 before..I'm not sure I see the difference. Did you see the Wb setting in the previous photo I sent you? It's on Kelvin, that is correct?  I will attach a picture of a setup I used with those changes settings, not sure if it will do any good for you to judge it. I need to go down to 250iso... I do understand about using the histogram. But I do love some shadows in my newborn images, so the points are never in the middle  What should I do then?  I do see your friend's images are clean-lit but flat. Not that that's bad, but I personally love a little more shadow and depth. I will start saving for the Profoto light! 

[Brian]

From the above photo, your White Balance is set wrong. See the K*? It should be just K.

1. Hit Menu Button
2. Head to Photo Shooting Menu (Camera Icon)
3. Select White Balance in the list
4. Select Choose color temp > and hit the right arrow on the directional pad
5. Change the Value to 5 6 0 0 in the four blocks.
6. Hit OK. You should see 'White Balance        K'     (No asterisks next to the K.)

[Brian]

Kelvin Screen on my D850:
 

 

[Brian]

What your White Balance Setting should look like. Notice that there is no Asterisk next to the K.

[Brian]

57 minutes ago, Michelle Pena said:

I do see your friend's images are clean-lit but flat. Not that that's bad, but I personally love a little more shadow and depth. I will start saving for the Profoto light! 

Yeah, that's her style. I like a bit more shadows and drama myself. I was just trying to show you the quality of light coming out of a Profoto. There is a difference between a $500 Light and one that is almost $2000. There isn't a +/- 200K like on your current light. That just bugs me.   The WB is the WB...it doesn't move. It stays the same temperature regardless of what power setting with the Profoto Lights and other high-end lights.

Now, you still haven't answered my question about your modifiers. What are you using and how large are they? 

[Brian]

I'm wondering if the K* is just a preset / saved WB? Not sure. (Can't remember and I don't ever set my WB to K for what I shoot these days, I'm mostly on AWB2 with my D850.) Try my way. If that doesn't work, you can always change it back.

There isn't a whole lot of difference between -1 and -2 on the LCD Display. It just changes the brightness on the LCD so you don't get into a false-sense of security thinking your exposure is correct; that's what trips people up when they do that. The LCD LIES.

Unfortunately, I can't go into specifics about Histograms, since that topic is covered in the Raw Class.

[Michelle Pena]

54 minutes ago, Brian said:

From the above photo, your White Balance is set wrong. See the K*? It should be just K.

1. Hit Menu Button
2. Head to Photo Shooting Menu (Camera Icon)
3. Select White Balance in the list
4. Select Choose color temp > and hit the right arrow on the directional pad
5. Change the Value to 5 6 0 0 in the four blocks.
6. Hit OK. You should see 'White Balance        K'     (No asterisks next to the K.)

I followed the directions and it still does not change the astrik out? Once I hit ok after setting it to 5600 it’s still k and astrick. Picture below . 
For newborns, I use a 64 inch Paul c buff umbrella, white inside , white diffuser and black outside cover. I use this size for newborns and maternity . For sitting babies I use a 86 inch plm same set up and the 64inch . 
 

I may have to take the raw class again. 

[Michelle Pena]

Ok I messed with the arrows again and I don’t know how or why but now it’s changed! 

[Brian]

Found it!!

If the White Balance has been Fine-Tuned, an Asterisk will appear next to the K.

The G-M Setting on the right, SET IT TO 0.0!!!

(You moved it to M0.5. which is more Magenta.) Nikon Cameras have enough issues with the Reds, don't make things worse. By changing this setting, it AFFECTS ALL OF THE WHITE BALANCE ACROSS THE BOARD, REGARDLESS IF IT'S AWB OR SHADE OR CLOUDY, OR EVEN A KELVIN VALUE THAT YOU MANUALLY SET. That M0.5 setting is screwing with EVERYTHING. You want 0.0.

While you think you are making things better, unless your computer display is 100% dead on with your prints and you calibrate religiously, don't try to fine-tune your colors with the White Balance. How you see color is different than another person's eyeballs / brain. Don't ever judge color via your camera's LCD.

[Brian]

8 hours ago, Michelle Pena said:

For sitting babies I use a 86 inch plm same set up and the 64inch . 

Just you wait until you get a Profoto Light. You will have "Portable Sunshine." That 86" PLM needs "Umph" to get the most out of it. Remember, all modifiers eat a little bit of light. 

Also, the "Inverse Square Law" comes into play. Each time you double the distance between your subject and light, you lose about a stop of light. If you change the flash power from one value to another, say 1/8th power to 1/4 power, you need to adjust your Aperture by one stop. Same thing if you go from full power to half power. I think it's a percentage of 77% of light loss or somewhere around there. So going from 1 foot away to 2 feet, you lose 77%-ish of light power. 2 Feet to 4 Feet, another 77%-ish. That's why Photographers usually keep their lights 4 Feet - 8 Feet away, it gives them the most wiggle-room and still have decent light. Think of being on a Giant Dart Board, with your subject is in the Bullseye. The Rings around the Bullseye define the section of where you put your light, or you can visualize placing you light on the ring itself. Regardless of WHERE you place the light, the Light Power and Aperture Value remains the same as long as the light remains the same distance from the subject as you don't move it further away or closer.

Why does this matter? Because the further away your light is, the more contrast you will have. It's possible that you moved your light to a spot that isn't giving the results that you desire, so I would fiddle a bit, even go as far as to use a tape measure to figure things out. Use a Coffee Can or a Doll. Figure out where you want your light, what camera settings that you use, and mark things with Masking Tape and a Marker.

Golden Rule of Flash Photography:

Aperture Determines Light Power Used -- Shutter Speed Determines Ambient Light.

Zack Arias gave us an excellent video on this subject. Please watch this enough times until it sticks:

Zack Arias: Aperture/Flash Relationship

[Michelle Pena]

3 hours ago, Brian said:

Found it!!

If the White Balance has been Fine-Tuned, an Asterisk will appear next to the K.

The G-M Setting on the right, SET IT TO 0.0!!!

(You moved it to M0.5. which is more Magenta.) Nikon Cameras have enough issues with the Reds, don't make things worse. By changing this setting, it AFFECTS ALL OF THE WHITE BALANCE ACROSS THE BOARD, REGARDLESS IF IT'S AWB OR SHADE OR CLOUDY, OR EVEN A KELVIN VALUE THAT YOU MANUALLY SET. That M0.5 setting is screwing with EVERYTHING. You want 0.0.

While you think you are making things better, unless your computer display is 100% dead on with your prints and you calibrate religiously, don't try to fine-tune your colors with the White Balance. How you see color is different than another person's eyeballs / brain. Don't ever judge color via your camera's LCD.

What does that mean? Fine-tuned?  

 

I've changed it to 0.0. I did talk to the lab once, and they mentioned they added a plus one or two of red, which is why I moved it  . I have a newborn baby today and will shoot with the new settings.I hope all goes well. Mini Mac is calibrated almost to match prints, the only issue I have is brightness. I think it's been a few months since I calibrated. I may do that this evening

[Michelle Pena]

3 hours ago, Brian said:

Just you wait until you get a Profoto Light. You will have "Portable Sunshine." That 86" PLM needs "Umph" to get the most out of it. Remember, all modifiers eat a little bit of light. 

Also, the "Inverse Square Law" comes into play. Each time you double the distance between your subject and light, you lose about a stop of light. If you change the flash power from one value to another, say 1/8th power to 1/4 power, you need to adjust your Aperture by one stop. Same thing if you go from full power to half power. I think it's a percentage of 77% of light loss or somewhere around there. So going from 1 foot away to 2 feet, you lose 77%-ish of light power. 2 Feet to 4 Feet, another 77%-ish. That's why Photographers usually keep their lights 4 Feet - 8 Feet away, it gives them the most wiggle-room and still have decent light. Think of being on a Giant Dart Board, with your subject is in the Bullseye. The Rings around the Bullseye define the section of where you put your light, or you can visualize placing you light on the ring itself. Regardless of WHERE you place the light, the Light Power and Aperture Value remains the same as long as the light remains the same distance from the subject as you don't move it further away or closer.

Why does this matter? Because the further away your light is, the more contrast you will have. It's possible that you moved your light to a spot that isn't giving the results that you desire, so I would fiddle a bit, even go as far as to use a tape measure to figure things out. Use a Coffee Can or a Doll. Figure out where you want your light, what camera settings that you use, and mark things with Masking Tape and a Marker.

Golden Rule of Flash Photography:

Aperture Determines Light Power Used -- Shutter Speed Determines Ambient Light.

Zack Arias gave us an excellent video on this subject. Please watch this enough times until it sticks:

Zack Arias: Aperture/Flash Relationship

I will take a look at the link.

I feel I get a lot of hot spots, so I think the newborns are too bright. I don't feel I get soft lighting with newborns or sitting babies. With the 64-inch plm, I will move it around a lot with newborn sessions! Mostly away to prevent hot spots. I double-diffused and even triple-diffused this light, so it is not bright. I also shot in a room without windows; it's pretty much dark except for the modeling lamp.

[Brian]

Fine Tuned means you tweaked a semi-permanent setting in your camera. By moving it to the Red / Magenta, you told the camera to add red to everything. 

Adjust your WB in ACR. Don’t make the camera do it for you , it will drive you nuts. When is the last time you calibrated and verified your screen against a set of physical prints?

5 hours ago, Michelle Pena said:

Mostly away to prevent hot spots.

Stupid $500 lights!! Bah!!

I’ve heard this lots and lots of times with people who shoot with Alien Bees or similarly priced lights. You get Hotspots. Period. It’s the nature of the beast. It happens randomly and there is no controlling it. 

How do you fix it? By buying a better light.  
 

You aren’t the first person to hit this wall and the answer is Profoto or another Brand of light that is its equivalent. (Meaning a $2000-ish light.) Budget Friendly Lights, do help you get started, but sooner or later you will run into the issues you are having. Like I said, you’ve outgrown them and it’s time for an upgrade.  It just sucks that it costs so much. Good news is, you can keep your Modifiers. 

[Michelle Pena]

OK, I must have misunderstood you. I thought you meant keeping it on Kelvin at 5600 camera. But you meant to keep it at AWB, Correct?

Yes, I have been told the Flashpoint ad400 pro or Godox are bright lights.

 

[Brian]

2 hours ago, Michelle Pena said:

I thought you meant keeping it on Kelvin at 5600 camera. But you meant to keep it at AWB, Correct?

No. When using your lights, I want you to set your White Balance to 5600 K and leave that G-M Setting set to 0.0. If you want to choose the AWB1 or AWB2 when outdoors, that's fine since you are shooting in Raw and can change that value in ACR.

Here is a little secret when it comes to Adobe's Products, like Camera Raw and Lightroom...

It's an interpretation of the White Balance Value that the camera records. Yep! You read that correctly; 5600K on your camera does NOT equate to 5600K in ACR/LR. Got it? Those two things are completely different. Surprise!! This is what throws people off. Nikon's version of White Balance and how it comes up with that WB # in Kelvin, is different with Canon, Sony, Panasonic, etc. etc. comes up with. Then Adobe Camera Raw or LR takes its best "Educated Guess" on what the camera meant. Side-note: Even something like 18% Gray is perceived differently!! Nikon is more like 14% Gray, I think Canon is around 16%? Something like that.

I have found that when I import my images into ACR or LR, that the Kelvin Value is 50K lower than it needs to be when shooting Nikon. So if your AWB is something like 5400K on your image when first imported into ACR, tweak it (add "50") to whatever the value is, e.g., 5450K, and it will give you a better starting point. All this 5600K does is gives you a baseline to start from; there is no magic or "carved in stone" setting. White Balance is an interpretation done by Adobe's software because the Camera Manufacturers are stubborn and won't give the recipe for the "Secret Sauce," and there lies the rub...

So when you set your camera's WB to 5600K, instead of using AWB, it stays there and the camera doesn't argue or try to change anything. This way things SHOULD look the same when importing, but if your lights decide to increase/decrease power, that will change the color temp of the light coming out, or give you hot-spots. This is why we manually set 5600K in your camera; this way if your lights go stupid and lower power or produce hot-spots, your camera will ignore things as opposed to what would happen with the "Auto" White Balance and keep the WB value the same. This in turn, makes things easier for you to change in Post. See how frustrating low-quality lights are?

So to answer your original question, it's your Strobes, followed by your camera being stupid. But mostly your Strobes causing you grief.

Edit: You might find a "Happy Place" with a Kelvin WB Value with your lights within ACR. It could be something like 5750K or 5675K or whatever. It's time you fiddle around and learn your gear, regardless what I say or the manual says. Keep in mind, your $500 lights will keep doing what they are doing, so always shoot Raw and make note of where your WB Values are usually at their best, and adjust them in post. You might even find that setting your camera to 5600K, then adjusting the value in ACR's WB 5800K works better! Or 5900K, or 5250K...this is up to you to decide.

While you are saving for your new lights, I want you to fiddle before your next gig. Photograph something stupid like a Vacuum Cleaner or a stuffed animal. Play around, it's Digital...you can afford to experiment. Yes, I know this is what you are doing, but keep at it. I know it's tedious and mind-numbingly unpredictable. That's what you get with $500 (and cheaper) lights.

[Michelle Pena]

Yes , you are right ! In ACR , they are lower. Today I had a newborn used the new settings , and already I saw no hotspots nor too much brightness in baby’s face! This was after uploading into ACR by the way not LCD. There was no muddy look either. Now I haven’t started editing them yet,but I already noticed a softer better image. I feel it’s the neutral setting because I didn’t change the power of the light.  

[Brian]

13 hours ago, Michelle Pena said:

I feel it’s the neutral setting because I didn’t change the power of the light.  

Sorry to break this to you...

NOPE.

The Neutral Setting affects the JPEG Preview / what you see on the LCD. It makes things more in-line with the Raw file seen in ACR / LR. This way you aren't tempted to say/think, "The image looks so much better on my camera!" 

What is happening, is that you have an intermittent problem with your light, and for the moment...it's behaving and working as it should. That being said, the problem will come back eventually and you will be back to square one, dealing with Hotspots & your other issues.

Keep saving.

[Michelle Pena]

Ok, I grabbed that newborn session from yesterday and halfway edited a photo. It looks excellent already compared to the back of the camera. I want to show you a before and after. I won't show you the back of the camera image because, of course, the cell phone doesn't show the colors correctly or as is. So the back of camera looked very dull, with no contrast, yellowish green in color, almost hazy..you get the jist, Just scary looking LOL! The unedited uploaded image ( shown ) was in 5500wb in ACR and it added 50 !  The second photo is the halfway edited version. I was surprised that it could add contrast and light without looking wonky. Is this the correct direction I'm headed in?  I know you explained a lot, but I am that person who will not understand until I see it for myself, more hands-on. This is how my brain comprehends information lol

 

The second edited photo is still a little too yellow-orange for my liking, and I hope I can fix it. I didn't use the grayscale to edit this photo for time's sake.

 

 

[Brian]

Do not judge colors based on the camera’s LCD!! Just stop. It is only for composition. Each LCD can have its own “personality,” meaning my D850 Screen will look different than yours. 

What’s really happened is you set the G-M back to 0.0. That has done more for you than you realize. That setting really messes with the WB across the board. 

As far as editing, this is a Damien Question; I also know he will ask when is the last time you have calibrated your screen and verified things against a set of physical prints. Have you taken his Raw Class? 

[Michelle Pena]

Yes, I took his class years ago! I never could understand. It was like relearning everything again. And I did give up because I was overwhelmed. I could retake it; I don't want to waste his time.

Sorry, you keep repeating yourself; that is how I learned. Unfortunately, I was never taught not to judge the LCD screen  

The Profoto monolight ($800) seems too low; it's only 100w. I'm not sure if that would be enough light for anything I do.

 

Edited January 12 by Michelle Pena