First Camera Rig - Help w. TG5

[ladiver33]

Hi. Recently purchased the TG5 and housing and have had some fun getting some okay results for my first attempt at any sort of photography. Encouraging! However I am a bit confused and frustrated with some of the settings when I get more than a few inches from a subject.

Right now I am just using video lights. For both video and stills. a combo of two Gobe850's and one Sola Photo 800 (trade back and for between my buddy). For the close up stuff, there seems to be little issues with my results/lighting. However when i get more than a just a few inches away, all the coral and wild life appear blue and green.

Made two simple links to show a few unedited images to demonstrate it better. Most of this was at a depth between 20-50 feet.

Close Up Images :
When close up......

Green and Blue Images
When further away ...

Two basic starter questions :
1) Do I need to worry about setting white balance while underwater? Ie. should I be calibrating it using a white card or shooting a neutral color while "in the blue" ? For both photos and video.

2) Is it simply a matter of my lights not being powerful enough? Would a higher lumen lamp help solve this?

I'm typically shooing with Auto ISO/Auto WB/No Flash (using video lights)/Raw+Jpg in a custom setting. Havent done much using the "underwater mode" as I assumed that's for more light/snorkel like environments?

When I looked at various youtube videos online w/ sample TG4 footage (ie the examples from Backscatter and the like) the color looks dramatically different than mine BUT a lot of the sample video appears to be taken at a shallow depth.

Any help or insight would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

 

[Hoag]

First of all, IMHO, your pictures show a very good starting point. If I may offer one piece of unsolicited advice, it would be this, whenever possible try to shoot pointing up. It will tend to separate your subject from the background and will give an image that is more dynamic. Shooting down or into the reef tends to give a flatter appearing image.

Your first question deals with white balance. I think that you are doing one thing right that for some reason, a lot of people seem to be reluctant to do. You are shooting in RAW. This one decision on your part gives you a lot of flexibility in post production (PP). Every camera is different, so please take what I am about to recommend with a grain of salt. On many cameras, the best option is to set your White Balance to "Auto", and let the camera figure out what it thinks is the right setting. This tends to be a pretty good solution above the surface but some cameras handle it better than others underwater. Other options wold be to set the White Balance to "Shade" or to "Cloudy". These settings will warm the picture up significantly, but they are only a starting point. You will almost certainly have to fine adjust in PP. One thing to consider doing is to carry something white like a slate with you and take pics of it every once in a while. That will give you a reference for your White Balance.

Unfortunately, in my experience, you can do a lot in camera when you capture the image, but you will almost always have to make adjustments in PP once you get home. Experience with your photo editing software (I use Adobe Lightroom) can help you streamline your workflow.

Your second question deals with your lights. Again, take my response with a grain of salt. Strobes are a far better option if you are shooting stills, and video lights are the best option for videos. If, however, you shoot both video and stills, then you need a lighting system that will work for both. That will tend to drive you toward using video lights as your option even for stills. Keep in mind that even the brightest light (the sun for instance) starts to lose reds in as little as 10 feet. Your lights will never be that bright, so realistically, since your light has to travel from the source to the subject and then back to your camera, you have to be no more than 3-4 feet away from your subject for them to be effective. (There is a saying that you should go in as close as you can, and then, pause for a second and go a little closer.) In general, the closer you are to your subject, the better, both in terms of composition and the lighting. This takes a lot of practice!

Underwater photography is not easy. It is an exercise in trying to balance a number of different things that are often at odds with each other. Trying to maintain perfect buoyancy while breathing in such a way that you don't have a lens full of bubbles at the moment you trip the shutter. Trying to frame the image to get that "perfect" composition while staying off the reef. Getting in close enough to your subject so that it is properly lit while not scaring it away. And trying to do all of this while setting your Shutter Speed, Aperture and ISO and making sure that your subject is in focus.

It takes a lot of practice, and I can promise you that you will take far more pictures that will frustrate you than you will that you are happy with, but every once in a while, you will get one that everybody who sees it will go "Wow! That is amazing!" and it will all be worth it. Keep up the good work.

I hope I have answered your questions.

 

[elbig]

@Hoag. What about rigs that have one video light and one strobe? Is that a reasonable compromise?

 

[Hoag]

@Hoag. What about rigs that have one video light and one strobe? Is that a reasonable compromise?

I have never used a set-up like that personally, so I honestly don't know. It would seem to me that as long as the video light did not leave a "Hot Spot" of light that it should work fine. The video light in this set-up could have the advantage of also acting as a focus light. I have a Big Blue focus light that cuts out briefly when is senses a strobe going off.

I have read posts on ScubaBoard from people who do have a set-up like you mentioned, and appear to be getting good results.

 

[h2sk1]

With the video light, you should have seen a bit more of your subject lit, but that probably indicates that you weren't close enough (i.e. using zoom instead of getting closer to your subject), or that your video light isn't strong enough. Even though you are shooting raw, it is still nice to have the picture closer to the proper white balance. For subjects that are further away, it does help to shoot raw but use the UW2 white balance setting. That gets rid of the harshest blue tones. It won't pump up your reds enough. That's the limitation of using a weaker video light vs strobe. That said, we've had some pretty good pictures of large pelagics using our TG4 with NO light using the underwater white balance setting. The water was clear though and those shots were generally at 20m (60ft).

We do fix our photos using an equivalent to LightRoom. We've dropped LightRoom in favor of the FREE RawTherapee. That program is great, with constant bug fixes and enhancements, good tutorials, and an avid set of photographers who contribute both to the software and the online forums. If our old version of Lightroom would have worked on a Mac, I might have stuck with it due to familiarity, but we're now editing on both Mac and PC and you can't beat a free program that is as functional as the expensive Adobe LR.

As for elbig's suggestion of using a video light + strobe? Of course that's better. That's ultimately what we use with our TG4, but our strobe had a circuit board failure and while it was at the factory for a warranty fix we shot without it. Most of those shots were macro or super macro, but there's a good turtle shot in the mix.

 

[ladiver33]

First of all, IMHO, your pictures show a very good starting point. If I may offer one piece of unsolicited advice, it would be this, whenever possible try to shoot pointing up. It will tend to separate your subject from the background and will give an image that is more dynamic. Shooting down or into the reef tends to give a flatter appearing image.

Your first question deals with white balance. I think that you are doing one thing right that for some reason, a lot of people seem to be reluctant to do. You are shooting in RAW. This one decision on your part gives you a lot of flexibility in post production (PP). Every camera is different, so please take what I am about to recommend with a grain of salt. On many cameras, the best option is to set your White Balance to "Auto", and let the camera figure out what it thinks is the right setting. This tends to be a pretty good solution above the surface but some cameras handle it better than others underwater. Other options wold be to set the White Balance to "Shade" or to "Cloudy". These settings will warm the picture up significantly, but they are only a starting point. You will almost certainly have to fine adjust in PP. One thing to consider doing is to carry something white like a slate with you and take pics of it every once in a while. That will give you a reference for your White Balance.

Unfortunately, in my experience, you can do a lot in camera when you capture the image, but you will almost always have to make adjustments in PP once you get home. Experience with your photo editing software (I use Adobe Lightroom) can help you streamline your workflow.

Your second question deals with your lights. Again, take my response with a grain of salt. Strobes are a far better option if you are shooting stills, and video lights are the best option for videos. If, however, you shoot both video and stills, then you need a lighting system that will work for both. That will tend to drive you toward using video lights as your option even for stills. Keep in mind that even the brightest light (the sun for instance) starts to lose reds in as little as 10 feet. Your lights will never be that bright, so realistically, since your light has to travel from the source to the subject and then back to your camera, you have to be no more than 3-4 feet away from your subject for them to be effective. (There is a saying that you should go in as close as you can, and then, pause for a second and go a little closer.) In general, the closer you are to your subject, the better, both in terms of composition and the lighting. This takes a lot of practice!

Underwater photography is not easy. It is an exercise in trying to balance a number of different things that are often at odds with each other. Trying to maintain perfect buoyancy while breathing in such a way that you don't have a lens full of bubbles at the moment you trip the shutter. Trying to frame the image to get that "perfect" composition while staying off the reef. Getting in close enough to your subject so that it is properly lit while not scaring it away. And trying to do all of this while setting your Shutter Speed, Aperture and ISO and making sure that your subject is in focus.

It takes a lot of practice, and I can promise you that you will take far more pictures that will frustrate you than you will that you are happy with, but every once in a while, you will get one that everybody who sees it will go "Wow! That is amazing!" and it will all be worth it. Keep up the good work.

I hope I have answered your questions.

This was EXACTLY what I was looking. really appreciate the time you spent answering my question. Stronger light it is! (as my existing video light is only 800 lumens)
Luckily live close to a local underwater photo shop which rents various lighting for day use, so can play around with a few different choices before deciding what works best.
Again thank you!

 

[Hoag]

This was EXACTLY what I was looking. really appreciate the time you spent answering my question. Stronger light it is! (as my existing video light is only 800 lumens)
Luckily live close to a local underwater photo shop which rents various lighting for day use, so can play around with a few different choices before deciding what works best.
Again thank you!

Before you get brighter lights, try to get closer to your subject. When I wrote that you have to get within 3-4 feet of your subject for the lights to be effective, that was not to imply that your lights are not strong enough, but to remind you that the light has to travel from your video light to the subject and then back to the camera, in effect, the light from your video lights (or strobe) has to travel twice the far as the the distance between you and your subject. Virtually no consumer video light or strobe will be of much use beyond 3-4 feet.

Having said that, it is normally better to have more light than you need than not enough.

 

[ladiver33]

Before you get brighter lights, try to get closer to your subject. When I wrote that you have to get within 3-4 feet of your subject for the lights to be effective, that was not to imply that your lights are not strong enough, but to remind you that the light has to travel from your video light to the subject and then back to the camera, in effect, the light from your video lights (or strobe) has to travel twice the far as the the distance between you and your subject. Virtually no consumer video light or strobe will be of much use beyond 3-4 feet.

Having said that, it is normally better to have more light than you need than not enough.

Yep. Will do for sure.... Spoke to a camera shop and they recommended at least 2500 lumens as a starter for any video light being used to shoot photos (unless shooting macro subjects). I am thinking two lights (left and right) at a lower lumen is likely better than one powerful light? ie. Two 2500s vs one center 5000?

 

[Hoag]

@ladiver33 just out of curiosity, are you looking for a set-up for still photos, or for video, or one that is able to do both to some degree?

 

[h2sk1]

Hoag's question is a good one. If you're looking at mostly photos it would be cheaper to get a strobe than to upgrade to a 2500 lumen video light.

If you want to do both, 2 lights will give you the best lighting options vs a single brighter light. That will be more $$ though.