Images get dark when ported to computer

[Confalone]

Shooting 20D with the 580EX flash. Images look great on the camera's LCD but are VERY dark when they are brought into the computer and viewed. Takes a lot of work in Image Editors to correct the problem. This can't be right. What can I be doing wrong? THX in advance. Pat Confalone

[kwang0429]

Shooting 20D with the 580EX flash. Images look great on the camera's LCD but are VERY dark when they are brought into the computer and viewed. Takes a lot of work in Image Editors to correct the problem. This can't be right. What can I be doing wrong? THX in advance. Pat Confalone

I think it's your monitor getting washed out, try another monitor or get the spider tool to get your monitor calibrated.

[bauerman]

I had the same problem initially with my Rebel - the LCD is a liar! A shot that looks great on the lcd is in all actuality a little underexposed. I turned down the brightness on my LCD to help a little - but the best defence against what you are talking about is use of the histogram. I now check the histogram of each shot to make sure that the exposure is where I want it.

[arpi]

you may be using the communications protocol for the printer, giving you the wrong colors.
look in the set up menu and select Communication, choose Normal.

Just a thought

[robertwgross]

you may be using the communications protocol for the printer, giving you the wrong colors.
look in the set up menu and select Communication, choose Normal.

Just a thought

That makes no sense whatsoever.

---Bob Gross---

[lostdoggy]

Take test shot.
Check Histogram.
Adjust FEC (w/flash)
or
Shoot in RAW. (highly recommended w/ 20D or you just wasted your money)
Shoot in Auto White Balance.

Adjust Exposure/Level and White Balance in your choice of post-processing SW, ie DPP, RAWshooter, C1 Phase one (personal favorite), etc.
Apply USM in PS (Element or CS)

[Bob_A]

Shooting 20D with the 580EX flash. Images look great on the camera's LCD but are VERY dark when they are brought into the computer and viewed. Takes a lot of work in Image Editors to correct the problem. This can't be right. What can I be doing wrong? THX in advance. Pat Confalone

I agree that you should check your histogram. Also, I find I have to typically dial in +2/3 to + 1 1/3 stops of FEC (flash exposure compensation) with my 20D to get my photos the way I like them. Canon Support have also sent me an email stating that ETTL-II has been designed to underexpose slightly to help ensure you don't blow out the highlights. This could be 1/3 to 1/2 stop ... who knows, and the additional amount I add could just be a matter of taste.

From browsing the forums, +2/3 FEC seems to be pretty common.

Bob

[Asmodeus]

Don't discount the effect of your monitor. When I use the system with my NEC FE1250 monitor (22" running in 1920x1440x32) and the monitor is configured as I would use it for normal desktop work, images are much darker overall than they appear if printed or if displayed on a different monitor. I recently setup a new system for image and video editing, and using a pair of dual Dell 2005FPW 20.5" flat panels attached to an Nvidia dual DVI 256 MB 6800-based card has given me much more accurate color rendition when editing, though images do look better on the glass tube NEC when it's been reconfigured for image work.

[PhotosGuy]

It's possible that your monitor needs calibration, but I have to go with bauerman, "I now check the histogram of each shot to make sure that the exposure is where I want it." That will give you a correctly exposed shot to start with. The LCD is NO way to judge exposure. ;-)

[star_photographer]

I find this with my 300d as well - pics look great on LCD and on the laptop, but on the PC they look really dark and disappointing! I tend to bear this in mind when doing my concert photography as it's usually really terrible lighting!

[Hellashot]

I find this with my 300d as well - pics look great on LCD and on the laptop, but on the PC they look really dark and disappointing! I tend to bear this in mind when doing my concert photography as it's usually really terrible lighting!

Why dissapointing? It's not like you're shooting film. You have the ability to make the exposure however you want it in post processing.

[Barb42]

test your camera - shoot a series of images of a textured wall at each available 1/3 steps of f stops +/- zero on your camera. You may find that you need to 'over-expose', so to speak. Some cameras actually shoot a f stop or so under or over.

[Confalone]

My monitor IS caibrated with Spyder 2. I', concerned that I have a defective D20. NOte this quote from amother discussion group:

"Flash underexposes by approximately 1 to 1 1/2 stops in auto modes, where exposure compensation and flash exposure lock are not available. That is, it is impossible to take correctly exposed flash pictures in any auto mode. These results are the same for both an external Canon 420EX Speedlite (both direct and bounce flash) and for the built-in flash on the camera. Canon technical support verifies this is not correct behavior for the 20D.
I received the replacement two days ago, and it is an entirely different camera. Flash exposure is dead-on. I'm almost tempted to say I can't fool it, but of course I can if I try, but I really have to try. Flash exposure lock yields precisely the same exposure as normal flash unless the picture is recomposed after locking. Flash pictures in all auto modes are as near perfect as you can expect from any auto mode.

[bauerman]

Glad you got a good camera - BUT - you still need to watch that histogram!