White are whiter than ever!!!

[newtek007]

Okay. Simply put. I own the Canon 20D. When I take a picture of anyone ot anything out with the sky in it, the sky is almost completely whitewashed. I have experimented with every concevable bell and whislt on this thing and I hve yet to get a good picture with decent white balance.

Can someone out there PLEASE help!!!

Thanks.

:rolleyes:

[tim]

Please post an example, it could be a couple of things. Make sure you're at ISO 100 to start with, and F8, and make sure the shutter isn't hitting it's fastest speed - 1/8000th of a second. You might need to fiddle with the exposure compensation until the histogram looks right, I don't think that's the problem here.

[ddelallata]

POst a pic with all of the EXIF Data.

[cmM]

There's usually a LOT more light in the sky than reflected off someone's face. Sometimes there's so much difference that it exceeds the camera's dynamic range. So unless you want to take double exposures and blend them in photoshop, you have to compromise as far as *what* is properly exposed, or pick a scene where there's not that much light difference.

[Rocket850]

I'm having the same problem. Here are a couple examples.
Thanks Jay
http://img461.imageshack.us/img461/5296/whitesky17gz.jpg
http://img461.imageshack.us/img461/3717/whitesky24pp.jpg

[newtek007]

Here are some examples. Note in all of the pictures all of the whites. They seem to be washd out. I am coming from the Canon Ellan II 35mm camera and the whites are usually more defined.

1. Fire House

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v679/newtek007/IMG_5040.jpg

File Name
IMG_5040.jpg
Camera Model
Canon EOS 20D
Shooting Date/Time
10/1/2005 12:28:42 AM
Shooting Mode
Program AE
Tv( Shutter Speed )
1/500
Av( Aperture Value )
14.0
Metering Mode
Evaluative Metering
Exposure Compensation
0
ISO Speed
800
Lens
18.0 - 55.0 mm
Focal Length
18.0 mm
Image Size
800x533
Image Quality
Fine
Flash
Off
White Balance Mode
Custom
AF Mode
One-Shot AF
Parameters Settings
Contrast Mid. High
Sharpness Mid. High
Color saturation Mid. High
Color tone 0
Color Space
sRGB
Noise Reduction
Off
File Size
73 KB
Custom Function
C.Fn:01-0
C.Fn:02-1
C.Fn:03-0
C.Fn:04-0
C.Fn:05-0
C.Fn:06-0
C.Fn:07-0
C.Fn:08-0
C.Fn:09-0
C.Fn:10-0
C.Fn:11-0
C.Fn:12-0
C.Fn:13-1
C.Fn:14-0
C.Fn:15-0
C.Fn:16-0
C.Fn:17-0
C.Fn:18-0
Drive Mode
Continuous shooting



2. Car

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v679/newtek007/IMG_5051.jpg

File Name
IMG_5051.jpg
Camera Model
Canon EOS 20D
Shooting Date/Time
10/1/2005 12:36:52 AM
Shooting Mode
Program AE
Tv( Shutter Speed )
1/320
Av( Aperture Value )
10.0
Metering Mode
Evaluative Metering
Exposure Compensation
0
ISO Speed
800
Lens
18.0 - 55.0 mm
Focal Length
18.0 mm
Image Size
266x400
Image Quality
Fine
Flash
Off
White Balance Mode
Daylight
AF Mode
One-Shot AF
Parameters Settings
Contrast Mid. High
Sharpness Mid. High
Color saturation Mid. High
Color tone 0
Color Space
sRGB
Noise Reduction
Off
File Size
35 KB
Custom Function
C.Fn:01-0
C.Fn:02-1
C.Fn:03-0
C.Fn:04-0
C.Fn:05-0
C.Fn:06-0
C.Fn:07-0
C.Fn:08-0
C.Fn:09-0
C.Fn:10-0
C.Fn:11-0
C.Fn:12-0
C.Fn:13-1
C.Fn:14-0
C.Fn:15-0
C.Fn:16-0
C.Fn:17-0
C.Fn:18-0
Drive Mode
Single-frame shooting


3. Airplane field Box

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v679/newtek007/IMG_5260.jpg

File Name
IMG_5260.jpg
Camera Model
Canon EOS 20D
Shooting Date/Time
10/25/2005 4:53:20 AM
Shooting Mode
Program AE
Tv( Shutter Speed )
1/125
Av( Aperture Value )
6.3
Metering Mode
Center-Weighted Average Metering
Exposure Compensation
0
ISO Speed
400
Lens
28.0 - 80.0 mm
Focal Length
28.0 mm
Image Size
800x533
Image Quality
Fine
Flash
Off
White Balance Mode
Flash
White balance compensation
M2
AF Mode
One-Shot AF
Parameters Settings
Contrast Mid. High
Sharpness Mid. High
Color saturation Mid. High
Color tone 0
Color Space
sRGB
Noise Reduction
Off
File Size
115 KB
Custom Function
C.Fn:01-0
C.Fn:02-1
C.Fn:03-0
C.Fn:04-0
C.Fn:05-0
C.Fn:06-0
C.Fn:07-0
C.Fn:08-0
C.Fn:09-0
C.Fn:10-0
C.Fn:11-0
C.Fn:12-0
C.Fn:13-1
C.Fn:14-0
C.Fn:15-0
C.Fn:16-0
C.Fn:17-0
C.Fn:18-0
Drive Mode
Single-frame shooting

4. Airplane At Field

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v679/newtek007/IMG_5261.jpg

File Name
IMG_5261.jpg
Camera Model
Canon EOS 20D
Shooting Date/Time
10/25/2005 4:53:27 AM
Shooting Mode
Program AE
Tv( Shutter Speed )
1/160
Av( Aperture Value )
8.0
Metering Mode
Center-Weighted Average Metering
Exposure Compensation
0
ISO Speed
400
Lens
28.0 - 80.0 mm
Focal Length
28.0 mm
Image Size
800x533
Image Quality
Fine
Flash
Off
White Balance Mode
Flash
White balance compensation
M2
AF Mode
One-Shot AF
Parameters Settings
Contrast Mid. High
Sharpness Mid. High
Color saturation Mid. High
Color tone 0
Color Space
sRGB
Noise Reduction
Off
File Size
102 KB
Custom Function
C.Fn:01-0
C.Fn:02-1
C.Fn:03-0
C.Fn:04-0
C.Fn:05-0
C.Fn:06-0
C.Fn:07-0
C.Fn:08-0
C.Fn:09-0
C.Fn:10-0
C.Fn:11-0
C.Fn:12-0
C.Fn:13-1
C.Fn:14-0
C.Fn:15-0
C.Fn:16-0
C.Fn:17-0
C.Fn:18-0
Drive Mode
Single-frame shooting



Thre you go. Any kind of help would be great. Thanks for responding so quickly.

:D

[elTwitcho]

It's because the sky is brighter than your foreground, which is more or less unavoidable without filters or bracketing and merging shots to an HDR image. Point your camera straight up at the sky after setting the exposure to your "ground" subject and you should be able to understand what's happening pretty quickly.

Circular polarizers work good for this kind of thing. All your "whites" are actually just blown highlights. A better understanding of exposure would be beneficial in all the examples I've seen posted. Not at all to be condescending, but a photography book would be of the greatest benefit at this point so you can understand what's happening when you expose a shot

[newtek007]

Yep. I need to pick up some books. I was just hoping to get some decent "Snapshots" without having to do a lot of thinking.

I tried a circular polarizer and only noticed marginal improvements. It made a world of difference with my 35mm camera.

[soupdragon]

Low dynamic range is a problem I too have suffered with.
I have tried dozens of ps tricks to try and get cloud detail, skin tones and whites correct with little success.
My solution (and I know this seems a little retro) where possible is to use a grey grad.
This has allowed me to get some much better whites and still maintain some sky detail.
Admittedly this is probably only of any use in situations when the sky is an integral part of the image.

[robertwgross]

And besides, it is not a white balance problem. It is purely an exposure error.

If the metering gets a good look at the bright sky, it is going to go one way. If the metering gets a good look at the dark shadows, it is going to go the other way. It is the job of the human operator to discern when the dynamic range is going to be too much for what the camera can do, and then modify the situation to capture it.

---Bob Gross---

[tim]

The human eye gives the impression that it can see a huge dynamic range because it adjusts to extreme differences in brightness almost instantly. You can do the same in your pictures but exposing for the highlights, then exposing for the shadows, then merging them in photoshop.

[ghocking]

I know its a pain. All I can say is:
1. Keep the sun behind you, and you will get good blue skies.
2. If not possible, use RAW or meter off the sky, or bracket as said earlier.

[Inspired Photography]

2. If not possible, use RAW or meter off the sky, or bracket as said earlier.

But if you meter off the sky, make sure your mids and especially shadows don't end up underexposed.

Rob

[newtek007]

Excellent advice! Thanks.

I guess the problem I am having is an exposure problem and equating my film camera to a digital camera. In the photos that I posted earlier, all of those photos would have come out decent with the Ellan II as far as exposure was concerned, stock out of the box. With the D-20 it either meters all the way to the light or dark side of exposure.

Someone stated earlier something about the histogram. I see it in the camera, but how do you read it?

[SkipD]

What you need to do is fairly simple, but well beyond "point and shoot". By the way, I would suggest that you use the camera in Tv mode to make this simpler until you get the hang of it.

Before getting to the solution - the problem is that the camera cannot record the entire range of brightness that we experience in some scenes. For example, the backlit firehouse scene - all the faces and the front of the building are actually in shadows. Our digital cameras can record up to a range of about 5 stops of difference in brightness without too much problem, but when the brightness range exceeds that we need to start thinking about what's more important to us.

What you need to do first is to put the camera (20D in this explanation) in "partial" metering mode so that you know for sure what area of the viewfinder is actually representing the portion of the image over which the camera is measuring light. With the "partial" metering mode, the circle in the viewfinder is a pretty good "aiming" tool for you.

Assuming you are trying to meter a scene like the firehouse scene above (and you are in Tv mode on the dial on your camera), press the shutter button halfway and meter various portions of the scene - dark, medium, and bright - and take note of the aperture values showing in your viewfinder. If any are aperture values are butting up against the ends of the lens' adjustment range, change your shutter speed so that all readings are "on scale". Once you have "live" aperture values for all areas of different brightness in the scene, you will have to mentally record all the aperture values. The darker areas are going to give you lower aperture (f-stop) numbers and the brighter areas are going to give you higher aperture numbers.

After taking the whole range of readings, you need to determine what the total range of the scene is. If the scene extremes are within 5 f-stops of each other, just calculate the middle of the range. For those of you reading this who don't really know f-stop values well, the standard (whole) f-stop values (covering the majority of lenses) are: 1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22, and 32.

Once you have decided that f/8, for example, is the middle of the range, turn the camera's dial to M (manual mode) and set the shutter speed to what you had in the Tv mode and set the f-stop to your calculated value.

If the brightness range of the subject exceeds 5 stops, then you will have to make an additional decision. That is regarding what the most important part if the image is for you, or in other words what can you afford to lose (either dark shadows with no detail or blown highlights). Then you need to mentally calculate what the middle of the remaining 5-stop range would be and set the camera accordingly.

When you've made all the measurements and decisions, take the shot. Then look at the histogram display and see what it looks like. If you have peaks on the histogram that seem to go past the right side, you will have blown highlights in the image. If you have peaks that seem to go past the left side, you will have shadow areas that have little or no detail. If the histogram shows that you have blown peaks but plenty of "wiggle room" at the left end, you could close the aperture down by a stop and take another shot. Same goes for the other way. If the right side peaks are not near the edge of the histogram display but the left side seems to go past the edge, you could open up a stop or so and re-try the shot.

I have been explaining the use of aperture alone for adjusting the exposure purely for simplicity. With conventional light (as opposed to flash - a horse of a different color, so to speak) you can, of course, adjust either shutter speed or aperture to control the exposure. My explanations using only aperture were primarily for those folks who don't have experience playing with manual exposure control.

A far simpler way to do the metering is with a good handheld meter, as the meter will display both aperture and shutter speed options and let you play with the combinations by just turning a dial.

Once you get the hang of this, you will be able to "scan" a scene with the meter in the camera active and find the "middle" exposure setting in a few seconds. Then you can just keep the shutter button halfway down to lock that exposure and go with it. If you are using the camera in its native mode with both exposure and focus controlled by the shutter button, you may be better off using M mode for the exposure control. I like to, as another option, use the option that puts the focus control on the * button instead of on the shutter button. That is Custom Function 4 = 1, at least on the 20D.

Taking the thinking one step further.... There's no way to manipulate the lighting in the firehouse scene in this post. However, if you are shooting something up close such as people or a small scene that has a strong backlight, you could use a reflector to put some light on the camera side of things or possibly use a flash fill to get some light into the shadows. Flash fill is sometimes tricky, but the reflectors would let you meter the results of the reflected light into the subject.

I hope this is helpful. If anyone has any questions, fire away please......

[dhbailey]

And set your ISO as low as possible -- the blown shots are all ISO400 and higher -- set it down to ISO100 and see what happens. Also the shutter settings in TV mode seem mighty slow for outdoor shots -- set the shutter to 250th or faster and see what happens.

Use the histogram when you go out and experiment. And be sure to experiment when the pictures you're taking aren't important keepsake type pictures. Spend an afternoon outdoors shooting in all directions, plan an organized experiment routine, take a tripod if possible.

Setup a planned sequence of shots for each location:
iso100
iso200
iso400
iso800

Shoot with 4 different shutter speeds at each ISO setting: 50, 160, 250, 500

Make certain the exposure compensation is set to zero.

Shoot the same 16 picture-sequence with your camera pointing north, east, south, west (and be sure to note where the sun is while you shoot these pictures, so you can turn the results into knowledge such as "when shooting into the sun at iso100, set the shutter to...")

Take time to learn this complicated camera and it will become much easier in short order.

The histogram is just a graph of what the exposures are. the parts to pay most attention to are the top edge and the right edge -- if the white part slopes off the graph to the right, there will be blown highlights. If parts of the white area reach the top and seem to want to continue beyond that top edge, there is data in that color range which is lost to the exposure, and even shooting RAW wouldn't allow you to get that back. If the white area is bunched up all to the left, the picture will be too dark.

What you really want in a typical snapshot type of exposure is a nice sort of bell curve, with the top just reaching the top of the graph, and the right edge reaching zero just before or just at the right edge of the graph.

If I have misrepresented anything I'm sure others will be quick to correct me, but this is how I shoot and I am quite happy with most of my results. When I'm not happy is when I haven't bothered to look at any of the histograms but rather have trusted the LCD display of the picture -- something I have to remember not to do.

Most important, though, is practice, practice, practice.

[robertwgross]

What you really want in a typical snapshot type of exposure is a nice sort of bell curve, with the top just reaching the top of the graph, and the right edge reaching zero just before or just at the right edge of the graph.


This is not meaningful. First of all, you seldom get a bell curve. The top of the histogram reaching the top of the graph has no importance at all.

---Bob Gross---

[jbradc]

Get a good quality graduated ND filter (at least 2 stops), it makes all the difference in the world.

[jbradc]

Just for kicks i tried to correct one of the images in Photoshop, as you can see it helped a little, but the white clouds are just blown out so there is no data to use. As I said a graduated ND filter would have solved the problem. I keep one on when I am shooting scenes that contain sky.
http://www.sevenhillsphotography.com/shots/IMG_5040_edit.jpg

[AJSJones]

This is not meaningful. First of all, you seldom get a bell curve. The top of the histogram reaching the top of the graph has no importance at all.

---Bob Gross---

True, true. But checking to make sure "the right edge is reaching zero just before or just at the right edge of the graph" is a good way of ensuring that there will be few blown highlights. Combine that with a thumbnail review for blinkies and you'll not have much problem with blown highlights. I often allow a few blinkies (in such skies as posted above, which seem to be very bright) to ensure a good amount of shadow detail. Until I learned better, with my film camera I got some lovely shots of sky with dark foreground, or some lovely foreground shots with a blown out sky...

Andy

[J Rabin]

...an exposure problem and equating my film camera to a digital camera. In the photos that I posted earlier, all of those photos would have come out decent with the Ellan II as far as exposure was concerned, stock out of the box.

No. Film camera - digital camera - exactly the same exposure. The lab you sent your film to was likely adjusting your exposure mistakes at printing time because negative film has latitude to tolerate exposure errors of 1-2+ stops and still make a decent print.
Your film exposures were likely off, the printer was fixing them for you.

Digital requires the person holding camera to behave like you are shooting slide film. That is, read the scene with your eyes and know what your camera meter is pointing at. Keep your exposure errors under +/- 0.33 stop max tolerance, expose for the most important middle tones in a photo scene, and try and avoid over exposing.

Digital has far more dynamic f/stop range than slide film, so once you master digital exposure, the results are stunning. There are no good or bad histograms. They just reflect the tones in an exposed image.
Many good sites have "reading histogram" tutorials, like this: http://www.sphoto.com/techinfo/histograms/histograms.htm
or at Luminous-Landscape. Exposing to the right is decent advice, but not a religion, unless the scene is a complex landscape.

In a portrait, with neutral clothing and nice neutral background, the last thing you want to see is a histogram evenly spaced to the right. Read the scene with your eyes. Every scene has a histogram.
Enjoy the learning curve....
Jack

[Bob_A]

Digital has far more dynamic f/stop range than slide film, so once you master digital exposure, the results are stunning.

But I don't believe digital has anywhere near the dynamic range of print film, particularly B&W. I agree with newtek007 that a film SLR gives better results for these kinds of situations ... maybe not for slides (which I never shoot), but certainly for film.

[jbradc]

But I don't believe digital has anywhere near the dynamic range of print film, particularly B&W. I agree with newtek007 that a film SLR gives better results for these kinds of situations ... maybe not for slides (which I never shoot), but certainly for film.
You are correct, I shot slide film (mostly Velvia) for over 10 years before going digital and the dynamic range is about the same, roughly 5 stops.

[newtek007]

I've been messing around with different exposures and settings the past couple of days. It's blowing my mind as to the fact that I cannot turn a $1500 camera on and have it take a picture without blowing the whites out.

With my Ellan II I always use FujiChrome Velvia film and never have to worry about this kind of blowout.

I guess I'm learning. Thanks for all of the advice and tutorials. You guys really know how to help!!

This is a great resource. Now, off to the book store!

:D

[i2iSTUDIOS]

What I just leanred is meter the sky or the brighest area in the scene, press the shutter 1/2 way, hit the * button to lock the exposure, then find your subject and fireaway. You will then caputre all the detail without blowing anything out, then go to photoshop and adjust levels till you bring the shadows out.

[Tom W]

Here are some examples. Note in all of the pictures all of the whites. They seem to be washd out. I am coming from the Canon Ellan II 35mm camera and the whites are usually more defined.

1. Fire House

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v679/newtek007/IMG_5040.jpg



This shot is suffering from lens flare, as evidenced by the spots near the center of the scene. But flare spots are not the only result of flare - it will also reduce contrast and cause a "washed-out" look. Try to keep the sun behind you as much as you can to reduce flare. Also, the sky is significantly brighter than the front of the building. You have exposed the building properly, but the sky is now too bright.

2. Car

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v679/newtek007/IMG_5051.jpg



Lens flare isn't evident, but you're still shooting at a dark object with a very bright sky in the background. Again, try to get the light behind you. Use a reflector to aim the light at your subject, thus reducing the difference in brightness somewhat.

3. Airplane field Box

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v679/newtek007/IMG_5260.jpg

Here, you're just dealing with very high contrast. YOu could reduce the contrast to "normal" or better yet, shoot RAW. JPG images don't have much latitude to brighten or darken the highlights and shadows, but RAW images give you some room.

4. Airplane At Field

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v679/newtek007/IMG_5261.jpg



Flare is evident in this shot as well, which can reduce contrast. Get the sun behind you. Any time a strong light source shines directly on the front of your lens, even if it isn't in the image frame, it can cause flare. Cheap filters make the situation much worse as they can increase internal light reflections in the lens.

Thre you go. Any kind of help would be great. Thanks for responding so quickly.

:D

Quick summary (and others have said some of it already):

Shoot with the sun at least to your side, but preferably somewhat behind you. Use the light to not only light your subject, but also to give detailed shadows. Use one of those car-windshield reflectors if you want to put the light where you want it.
Shoot RAW to maximize the image's recoverability. You will have greater ability to reduce "blown-out" highlights and brighten dark shadows with RAW.
Don't use cheap, poorly-coated filters
Use a lens hood to prevent the sun from directly hitting the front of the lens.

[newtek007]

I've been running some tests like some of you have suggested. I'll post some pictures later, but I have taken all of the advice to heart and have definantely seen better results shooting in Tv mode. Keeping the ISO down around 100 or 200 is also helping. I have also been watching the histogram like a hawk and have seen that good exposures are around the middle.
So basically, the meter inside this camera isn't the greatest, I'm assuming?

[robertwgross]

So basically, the meter inside this camera isn't the greatest, I'm assuming?

It depends on what you want it to do.

If you need a one-degree spot meter, then that is what you need. If you need to meter over wider areas, like the center circle on your viewfinder, then the internal meter is good enough. If you need to meter a much wider area, like that of the whole viewfinder, then the internal meter will see it better than a one-degree spot meter.

---Bob Gross---

[aMacFan]

There is no doubt (as mentioned by many in the thread), the problem is an exposure problem.

A process I use to restore the beautiful blue to the skies which appear white in my photos is to select only the sky and then adjust the levels. This works only when the sky hasn't been "blown out". I tried this technique on a couple of your shots and was unable to get anything back. Looking at the histogram of the selected sky, everything is bunched up way to the right; indicating the sky is severely over-exposed.

The only thing you can do to get back the blue sky is to replace the sky in post processing with a sky shot which you like. It may not be true to what that day was, but at least you will have a nice looking shot.

Bottom line is to pay attention to the histogram of your picture. Don't worry if parts of your picture looks dark or under-exposed. As long as you capture the maximum information by maximizing the dynamic range of what you are trying to capture, you can adjust the exposure levels of various parts of your photo in post processing. You can't restore what you didn't capture.

[clipper_from_oz]

The human eye gives the impression that it can see a huge dynamic range because it adjusts to extreme differences in brightness almost instantly. You can do the same in your pictures but exposing for the highlights, then exposing for the shadows, then merging them in photoshop.


Im with Tim.....I get white skys all the time and am not concerned...when in doubt ....PS it!....No different from the old days of compensating for this with filters.

[clipper_from_oz]

The slack way out...when in doubt use a graduated screen

[PhotosGuy]

So basically, the meter inside this camera isn't the greatest, I'm assuming? As has been said, "proper" exposure is something that's relative to what you want the cam to do.
My "quick & dirty" solution is to shoot RAW & do this:
Curtis's thread:
How NOT to expose to the right (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=93712)

Other threads that might help you make the transition to digital:
Gray card: Why your meter may be lying to you! (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=54281) I started out to check one thing & learned about another.

Gray Card…White Paper. What’s best? (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=58677)

[2new]

Good sound advice from all!

[muscleflex]

i think your ISO is too high also for a sunny day??!!!!!

[Neilyb]

Generally if I haven't got my ND grad filter I export two tif's from my RAW file (using RAW shooter essentials) one exposed as per camera and one under exposed, which often brings out sky details. Then I mask one out over the top of the other in PS....seem a reasonable quick fix. Only other way is to shoot with a tripod at two differing exposures, and do the same in PS!

Heres and example, post processed:
http://www.neilyb.de/buckden.jpg

Pre processing:
http://www.neilyb.de/buckden2.jpg

[adas]

Here's a shot taken with a $175 Sony poin&shot camera. The quality of the sky is much better then on your shots, i guess. And remember, this camera at ISO 100 has the noise of the 20D at ISO 800!
I think you should watch the histogram for overexposure and recover the shadows later on computer. The 20D shadows are sooo cleeaan...

[mackb]

I know there has already been a bunch of replies to this, but I think I can really help here (and I'm no where close to being a pro). One person pointed out that you shot at ISO 400, but I noticed two other shots at ISO 800. When I first got my 10D I always changed the ISO and noticed that my pictures were messed up. I would try ISO 200 or 100. In the picture of the car why did you need ISO 800 and a high shutter speed?. Maybe I'm missing something, but I think This was an easy question to answer and it received allot of mixed responses.

[felix21685]

newtek nice rc plane :) i got the same charger..

[clipper_from_oz]

Here's a shot taken with a $175 Sony poin&shot camera. The quality of the sky is much better then on your shots, i guess. And remember, this camera at ISO 100 has the noise of the 20D at ISO 800!
I think you should watch the histogram for overexposure and recover the shadows later on computer. The 20D shadows are sooo cleeaan...


Whilst the composition is great I think the quality of the pic is slightly out of focus and colors not right..colors on water look ...I dont know ....different..... especially water highlights ......I think your your PAS says....when in doubt....give it some blue

[blue_max]

My quick workflow is to take a quick snap in a typical lighting and check on the preview. That only works if I am intending to take a few pics in the near future.

You do get a feel for when the camera sees a very bright scene and will try to compensate by darkening the image. Conversely, it will try to lighten one that is too dark. Once you understand that, you can just dial-in some exposure compensation and shoot away. It won't be right for every shot, but you will find a setting that suits most shots with a certain amount of sky.

It's just a case of judging the image in the viewfinder and assessing whether it is standard, bright or dark and adjusting the exposure compensation accordingly. On my 10d the exposure compensation is on the rear dial, so is easy to adjust quickly.

Remembering to allow more exposure for a bright scene seems very counter-intuitive, but once you get your head round it, is simple to understand.

Graham

[adas]

Whilst the composition is great I think the quality of the pic is slightly out of focus and colors not right..colors on water look ...I dont know ....different..... especially water highlights ......I think your your PAS says....when in doubt....give it some blue

What you expect from a $175 worth of camera? Same as what I would expect from your monitor, perhaps.

[tumb]

Either use AEB (best for landscapes) and put together in photoshop, use a circular polarizing filter, or set exposure for just under the brightest highlite (what I usually do) and use shadow/highlight in ps to correct. You can also open the raw twice at different brightness and put them together as you would with AEB. The trick seems to be expose more toward the highlites because it's easier to drag details from shadows, and it's nearly impossible to get data from blown out highlites.

[imrtun]

Hi All, first post.

In the attachment I photoshopped the fire station, the graduated paint bucket can make a great sky, make sure you do it on a new layer and use a layer mask so you can paint it on. Also, set the blend mode to multiply, this makes your mask much more accurate. Your image also seemed very over saturated and had way too much red so I increased the cyan in the reds using the selective colour tool on an adjustment layer. In adition to this I sharpened it up a little.


Obviously this takes a little time and effort but if you're shooting to make prints it's worth it imho.

[adas]

imrtun, I liked better the original. Where is the sun in this?

[pfogle]

My two cents worth...

1) Most of the problems in the original shots are exposure. You have to learn to use the meter, and the exposure compensation +/- settings.

2) The ISO is irrelevant to the quality or dynamic range up to ISO 800. Yes, there are differences, but they're much smaller than what's happening in the scene anyway.

3) The dynamic range is a big problem... most amateur shots are done with color neg film which has the widest dynamic range of all - more even than black and white because of the internal orange mask. So they're the hardest to match.

4) The solution that most people don't want to confront - shoot raw, use two conversions and blend in photoshop. If the shot's important to you, it's worth the effort.

Just my view.

[charly]

Hi newtec007.
I don't have the expierence to be of much exposure help, but nice plane! I'm a fellow rc'er also. I haven't flown too much the last couple of yrs but did mainly fly heli's. Do you have any heli's at your field? If so can you take some pics?

charly
my 2 cents on exposure is ...keep practicing and SEARCHING this forum...Mucho good help here!!

[clipper_from_oz]

What you expect from a $175 worth of camera? Same as what I would expect from your monitor, perhaps.


:))))))

[Neilyb]

Comparing the landscape image of a lake and fields with the above pictures is like comparing Shiraz to grape juice....cant be done. The landscape image is much more balanced and likely to produce an even exposure as the greens are light. The car though is blue and the fire station red casting a shadow as the sun is right infront of the photographer. Don't think we should compare the two.

[tim]

Comparing the landscape image of a lake and fields with the above pictures is like comparing Shiraz to grape juice....cant be done.

Grape juice is sweeter.

[Neilyb]

Shiraz's exposure to oak is markedly different to the exposure grape juice gets...... :)

[Neilyb]

Nice pic. Hmmmmm....we Pomms dream of the aussie summer....and the Aussie winter come to think of it! When the sky is that clear an blue it is a good spot to take your reading from.