Shot looks "hazy", why? Before and After PP

Hi all.. it's me again.. still playing with my Dyna-Lite strobes.
I still need to get a light meter, but in the meantime, can anyone tell me why my un-processed shot looks so hazy? I have posted the original shot, and then one that I have adjusted the hue/saturation, and done a "un-sharp mask" on.

These were shot at 125/ F6.3 with my 400 w/s strobes positioned 45 degrees at 1/8 power.

I had one strobe plugged into my 20D, and the other one firing as a slave.

I also had my 580EX pointed at the backdrop as a slave.

Any suggestions???
Thanks
JaLynn

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

It's not hazy. It's normal. Unprocessed shots will appear to lack saturation, contrast and sharpness.

If you're shooting JPEG, adjust the processing parameters in the camera.
If you're shooting RAW, use your RAW conversion software to do the same thing.

Curtis N wrote in post #2962603
It's not hazy. It's normal. Unprocessed shots will appear to lack saturation, contrast and sharpness.

If you're shooting JPEG, adjust the processing parameters in the camera.
If you're shooting RAW, use your RAW conversion software to do the same thing.

Curtis N

Could you elaborate on what you mean by, 'adjusting the processing parameters in the camera', when shooting JPEG? Which parameters are you referring to specifically in order to enhance saturation and contrast?

btw I'm using a 30D.

Thanks

jmanser wrote in post #2962387
Hi all.. it's me again.. still playing with my Dyna-Lite strobes.
I still need to get a light meter, but in the meantime, can anyone tell me why my un-processed shot looks so hazy? ........

I looked at the histogram of the original and I believe that it is way overexposed, even with the high key background. The brights are saturated over a fairly wide range and the remainder of the light intensities are really low. It is always better to overexpose than underexpose, but I believe that you could reduce the exposure somewhere between 1.33 to 2.0 stops.

Embers wrote in post #2963598
Curtis N

Could you elaborate on what you mean by, 'adjusting the processing parameters in the camera', when shooting JPEG? Which parameters are you referring to specifically in order to enhance saturation and contrast?

btw I'm using a 30D.

Thanks

I believe he is speaking of the picture styles (standard, vivid etc.)

I also have a 30D and I use standard picture style most of the time. The sharpness set to 3 on everything else 0 (by default) try using 1 or 2 for contrast and see how that works then adjust accordingly.

Hope this helps

Curtis is right.

I am shooting Raw more and more and I find it easier to do the sharpening in PS rather than the camera.

Nice shot.
Keep shooting.

I have to disagree with Bill about the histogram though.
I think the shot is well exposed.
The spike on the left is just the background. There is so much of it that it kind of skews the picture representing the histogram.
All the other values are within reasonable limits.
If you cropped in really close on the faces you would see a much "nicer" histogram.

If you do not mind me showing editing of the image, I can show you the result after I adjusted the curves in DPP and then tweaked the gammma in PS.

Embers wrote in post #2963598
Could you elaborate on what you mean by, 'adjusting the processing parameters in the camera', when shooting JPEG? Which parameters are you referring to specifically in order to enhance saturation and contrast? btw I'm using a 30D.

Yes, on the 30D you would go to Picture Styles in the menu to adjust those things. You can choose from the various preset styles or create your own styles with parameters of your choosing.

Since the best settings really depend on the subject matter and lighting conditions, I prefer to shoot RAW and adjust those things in post. But that's really a whole different conversation.

The picture is not overexposed. There are no blown areas, even in the brightest whites. Any high key image (a lot of white or bright areas) will have a histogram that favors the right side.

Macbeth wrote in post #2963786
I have to disagree with Bill about the histogram though.
I think the shot is well exposed.
The spike on the left is just the background. There is so much of it that it kind of skews the picture representing the histogram.
All the other values are within reasonable limits.
If you cropped in really close on the faces you would see a much "nicer" histogram.

After thinking about it a bit, I also disagree with Bill. I think that the overall blue tint fooled me.

Curtis N wrote in post #2962603
It's not hazy. It's normal. Unprocessed shots will appear to lack saturation, contrast and sharpness.

If you're shooting JPEG, adjust the processing parameters in the camera.
If you're shooting RAW, use your RAW conversion software to do the same thing.

Ok, good so I'm not crazy.. I thought the "hazy" was coming was from the way my strobes were positioned or something weird like that.

I am shooting RAW, so I will adjust my parameters accordingly! Thanks!!!

Curtis N wrote in post #2962603
It's not hazy. It's normal. Unprocessed shots will appear to lack saturation, contrast and sharpness.

If you're shooting JPEG, adjust the processing parameters in the camera.
If you're shooting RAW, use your RAW conversion software to do the same thing.

bill boehme wrote in post #2963789
If you do not mind me showing editing of the image, I can show you the result after I adjusted the curves in DPP and then tweaked the gammma in PS.

I would love to see your version of the shot after post-processing I will turn my preferences to "editing OK". Thanks

bill boehme wrote in post #2963657
It is always better to overexpose than underexpose, .....

Youre kidding, right?

Converge wrote in post #2965530
Youre kidding, right?

Yeah.. I thought it was the other way around???

Converge wrote in post #2965530
Youre kidding, right?

I've heard this from others too and finally tried it.
This way you can always pull the shadows in with a good RAW converter.

When you underexpose and then try to open it up, sometimes that gets a flat look in the shadows (grayish/grainy).

I agree with others that part of the "problem" with the as-shot image is the error in white balance. The colors just are not right in that shot.

There are two basic ways that I would use to correct the white balance.

One method is to use Custom White Balance, using a standard neutral reference card (either white or gray). The technique is described in the camera's manual.

The other - my preference - is to shoot in RAW mode and make a sample shot with a neutral reference card (and sometimes a color reference card as well) included the scene. The scene and card(s) would be exposed normally for the scene. I then do a white balance correction on the sample shot with an "eyedropper" tool during RAW conversion. Then, I do a batch conversion for all the rest of the shots in the series using the color temperature and hue values I found when working with the sample shot.