White-washed pictures
Robert
I am having troubles with my new canon 350d in that outdoor photos seem
to be very 'white-washed' for lack of a better description. Baby-blue
flowers are very nearly white; deep red roses are not deep red --
whitewashed pink really; green foliage is pastey off-green. It almost
seems like there are 3 bright suns present with each picture. Happens
on the 28-80mm and the 55-200mm lenses but more often on the 55-200.
Thinking it was maybe my interpretation of the pictures on the laptop,
I took some in for printing and they came out whitewashed there as
well. Similar pictures I took on film with my Nikon N70 under similar
conditions look great; the canon eos 350d not so much. I am using the
automatic-everything when taking the picture or occasionally the
close-up mode.
Any suggestions on how I might improve my pictures to have better
colors? Could there be something wrong with the camera or maybe, more
likely, the photo taker is making a classic mistake?
Thank you to all for any advice.
Rob
hTr
Robert
You may want to try a lens hood to reduce outside light from lens. You
could try just a rolled piece of paper to shield from direct sun. It
also could be your light sensor on the camera.
hope this helps
hTr
"Robert" <LR...@LYCOS.COM> wrote in message
news:1157680447....@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
m Ransley
exposes right.
mark.t...@gmail.com
Have you played with many settings, and if so can you reset the camera
to defaults?
Is your screen calibrated (ie gamma)?
Robert wrote:
> Hello,
> I am having troubles with my new canon 350d in that outdoor photos seem
> to be very 'white-washed' for lack of a better description.
....
Unspam
Put the camera in manual mode, hold the palm of your hand in front of the
lens (be careful not to cast a shadow on your hand), adjust the shutter
speed and aperture until it reads one stop above average, take a picture.
Look at the picture to check that the exposure is accurate by using the
histogram. Now, in the same light that you took the reading, take some more
pictures and if they are ok keep doing it, if they are not have your camera
examined.
Stan Beck
stops.
You can improve your colors by using a lens hood, maybe a polarizing filter
at times, and set your exposure compensation for a -2/3 to -1 stop. This
will help preserve your highlights, but will darken your shadows. Use your
curves adjustment in your editor to pull detail out of your shadows.
--
Honest technical and artistic critiques welcomed.
Stan Beck > From New Orleans to Brandon MS
To reply, remove 101 from address.
***
"Robert" <LR...@LYCOS.COM> wrote in message
news:1157680447....@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Robert
Thank you to everyone who has posted a response. I appreciate your
time and all your suggestions very much and will try them each out as
soon as the sun manages to find its way back to the midwest. I think
me, my camera and the sun have to work out a deal sometime soon...
I'll post back with what I find, even if the fault lies with the
photographer.
I posted the picture that caused my original question here. It was
such a nice blue when it started.
The EXIF data for this picture is this before I resized it.
[Camera]
Camera Manufacturer : Canon
Camera Model : Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XT
Orientation : top-left (1)
X Resolution : 72
Y Resolution : 72
Resolution unit : Inch
Software : Adobe Photoshop Elements 4.0
Date modified : 2006:09:09 15:21:34
YCbCr Positioning : co-sited (2)
[Image]
Exposure time [s] : 1/320
F-Number : 5.6
Exposure program : Not Defined
ISO speed ratings : 400
EXIF version : 02.21
Date taken : 2006:09:02 14:55:02
Date digitized : 2006:09:02 14:55:02
Components configuration : YCbCr
Shutter speed [s] : 1/320
Aperture : F5.6
Exposure bias value : 0/1
Metering mode : Multi-segment (5)
Flash : No flash
Focal length [mm] : 200.
FlashPix Version : 01.00
Colour space : sRGB
EXIF image width : 3456
EXIF image length : 2304
Interoperability offset : 8982
Focal plane X-Resolution : 1728000/437
Focal plane Y-Resolution : 384000/97
Focal plane res. unit : Inch (2)
Custom rendered : Custom process (1)
Exposure mode : Auto (0)
White balance : Auto (0)
Scene capture type : Standard (0)
[Makernotes]
Macro : Normal
Selftimer : Off
Compression setting : Fine
Flash mode : Auto
Drive mode : Single or timer
Focus Mode : One-Shot
Image size : Large
Easy shooting : Macro / Close-Up
Contrast : High
Saturation : High
Sharpness : High
ISO value : Unknown
Metering mode : Evaluative
Focus type : Unknown
AF point : Unknown
Exposure mode : Easy shooting
Focal length [mm] : 200
Focal length short / mm : 55
Focal units / mm : 1
White balance : Auto
Sequence number : 0
Picture info : Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XT
[Thumbnail]
Compression : 6
X Resolution : 72
Y Resolution : 72
Resolution unit : Inch
Thumbnail offset : 9122
Thumbnail length : 6463
Robert
Always with the attachments... Can't remember the things...
Here is the picture:
http://lr120lr.tripod.com/my_albums/
Thank you again to everyone!
mark.t...@gmail.com
think your main problem is that your exposure mode (and to a lesser
extent, white balance) was inappropriate for the subject. See below
for details.
Hope this helps!
Robert wrote:
>....
> > > Robert wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > > I am having troubles with my new canon 350d in that outdoor photos seem
> > > > to be very 'white-washed' for lack of a better description.
>...
.> > The EXIF data for this picture is this before I resized it.
> > ISO speed ratings : 400
Seems a bit high for sunlit shots - high ISO's mean noisier images.
Given you were up around 1/300 of a second shutter speed, you could
probably have safely used ISO 200 or even 100... Not related to your
problem though!
> > Metering mode : Multi-segment (5)
This means the camera will just do its best and average out a 5 segment
sample of the image. With a dark background and a brightly lit but
small subject, it's likely to get it 'wrong' (technically right..)
Spot metering would have been more appropriate here, or even just using
the Sunny 16 rule!!
> > Exposure mode : Auto (0)
See above. Spot meter, or mentally recognise that your dark background
will throw the metering off and use exposure compensation to drop it
down a stop or even two.
> > White balance : Auto (0)
While the color balance seems ok, it is much safer to set the balance
to daylight. Otherwise large expanses of a particular color will throw
the balance out.
> > Contrast : High
Maybe drop this down a bit? Post processing is a better way to get
good contrast. If your contrast is too high, you will quickly blow
highlights and lose shadow detail.
> > Sharpness : High
Again, maybe you might wat to drop this down - it's just a personal
preference and doesn't affect your problem, but I much prefer to
control the sharpness later.
Let us know how you go.
Cheers!
dj_nme
This is a version of your picture where I created a new "object" (I use
Corel Photopaint) after selecting (roughly with a rectangle marquee,
just for example) the flowers and adjusting the gamma to 0.10 so that
the colour is as rich as you describe:
<http://members.iinet.com.au/~therealm/dj_nme/IMG_0539_edited-1_gamma-flowers.jpg>
The black rectangle is how dark the rest of the image would have to be
(if you were trying to do it with a single, no alternations image) to
have a nice, rich blue colour in the flowers.
It is because our eyes have such big dynamic range for brightness,
unfortunately all digital cameras have a much smaller dynamic range
(roughly similaer to colour slide film) and so you have to chose which
parts of the scene are exposed "properly" (to look as bright/dark as you
want it to).
There are several alternatives to trying to get the image right "in
camera" in one exposure, such as:
Shooting two or more images at different exposure values and then
combining them in your image editor to create a "HDR" image.
Shooting in RAW and then adjusting levels when converting to jpeg to try
and bring in both the nicely exposed background and the slightly
over-exposed subject (or vice-versa) together in one image.
Editing you original image by selecting the darker/lighter than desired
image element and creating a new object (or "layer" if you are a
Photoshop user) and adjusting it's brightness or gamma to suite.
BTW, attachments are stripped out of all postings to this newsgroup.
Robert
information and I appreciate your time.
As soon as that fireball in the sky shows up again, I'll be outside
trying and learning from your suggestions.
Thank you again.
Robert
Robert
dj_nme, thank you for doing this and explaining where I went wrong. I
followed your steps (with Paint Shop Pro) and arrived at a similar
picture. Not exact, but close enough to learn what I could improve
upon earlier in the process, like your suggestions, and what I can do
afterwards if it didn't work out perfectly, again with your
suggestions. I also kept in mind what Mark Thomas taught me in a
different thread on this topic and together these observations will
most certainly help me to take better pictures.
Thank you very much for your time and your efforts. I learned a lot
and I appreciate your comments.
Robert
dj_nme
I thought of a way of "saving" the flower picture.
Select the folowers (with a rectangle tool) and create a new "layer"
(assuming Photoshop, or "object" for Photopaint).
Adjust the gamma of the "layer" to give a nice blue to the flowers.
Use the "magic wand" selection tool and click on the black background.
Press delete or right-click and select "delete selection".
This removes everything except the overexposed flowers from the "layer".
Presto! The flowers are now blue.
Rob Novak
>Exposure time [s] : 1/320
>F-Number : 5.6
>ISO speed ratings : 400
For sunny weather, this is seriously overexposed (by about 4 stops).
Just as a general rule, here's an easy way to check if what your meter
is giving you is sane:
* At mid-day with full sun illuminating your subject, proper exposure
at f:16 is approximately the reciprocal of the ISO speed. *
This is called the "Sunny-16 Rule", and it's a lifesaver for awkward
metering situations.
If you were out in mid-day sunshine shooting at ISO 400, proper
exposure should have been close to 1/400th second at f:16 (1/500th is
close enough). Given that your meter gave you an exposure where the
lens was opened three stops larger (from 16, three stops are f:11,
f:8, and then f:5.6), _and_ a shutter speed that was slower than the
reciprocal, it's quite obvious now why everything looks washed out -
it's way overexposed, which digital sensors and slide film do not
tolerate well at all.
If you're shooting in bright light, know what your "sunny-16" speed
should be. If the values that your meter splashes on the viewfinder
display depart from that significantly, you're going to want to take a
second to seriously think about why, and how you want to handle it.
--
Central Maryland Photographer's Guild - http://www.cmpg.org
Strange, Geometrical Hinges - http://sgh.rnovak.net
Robert
> Select the folowers (with a rectangle tool) and create a new "layer"
> (assuming Photoshop, or "object" for Photopaint).
> Adjust the gamma of the "layer" to give a nice blue to the flowers.
> Use the "magic wand" selection tool and click on the black background.
> Press delete or right-click and select "delete selection".
> This removes everything except the overexposed flowers from the "layer".
> Presto! The flowers are now blue.
I've been messing around in the fashion you describe here with this
picture and others that turned out the same way. I'm seeing how to
take better initial pictures by trying to fix what went wrong in the
graphics editor afterwards. All in all a good learning experience --
obviously I'd rather spend time outside taking pictures rather than all
kinds of time inside fixing the darn things.
Thanks for the ideas!
Rob
Robert
Thanks for the feedback Rob, I appreciate your time. Others in this
thread have mentioned similar facts. Next time out I'm going to turn
off the 'full auto mode' on this thing and try adopting your rule. I
like your rule; I find it very easy to memorize and adopt -- thank you!
In review of the pictures I've taken on my new camera so far,
overexposure seems to be a problem I have when outdoors. I think I'm
asking too much from my camera and too little from my brain.
Thanks again Rob,
Rob