Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Digital Cameras 
Thread started 05 Feb 2008 (Tuesday) 00:23
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

40D exposure problem

 
Donte
Member
Avatar
162 posts
Joined Oct 2007
Location: San Diego
     
Feb 05, 2008 00:23 |  #1

I was messing with my 40D tonight trying to under exposing some test pictures. I just wanted to see what a couple steps under would do to the picture. When I started to under expose the picture things started going bad. Take look at these pictures.

They start to get this yellow hazing on them. This has never happened before. What could be causing this strange effect?



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DVS_WiNdz
Cream of the Crop
9,835 posts
Joined Jan 2007
Location: New York, NY
     
Feb 05, 2008 00:31 |  #2

My guess is white balance? did you set it on auto?


Stephen L.
Gear list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Donte
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
162 posts
Joined Oct 2007
Location: San Diego
     
Feb 05, 2008 00:33 |  #3

Yes it set to auto. If I change the WB it gets even worse.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sam_M
Senior Member
Avatar
535 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2007
Location: New England
     
Feb 05, 2008 00:41 |  #4

I could venture a guess and say that you have fluorescent lighting? I can't find the post right now about it, but there was a good thread on shooting under fluorescent lighting, and combating the banding with shutter speed.


Canon 50D | Nikon D850 D200
+ other assorted glass, plastic, and metal.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Feb 05, 2008 02:52 |  #5

I would guess it's probably fluorescent lighting.

Fluorescent lights aren't continuous. They pulse (how quickly depends on the ballast). Because you were trying to underexpose, you were probably increasing your shutter speed (making it faster), and eventually increased it to the point where it would be able to capture only part of a single pulse from the lighting.

In your case, you'll want to decrease your shutter speed and narrow your aperture.


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Donte
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
162 posts
Joined Oct 2007
Location: San Diego
     
Feb 05, 2008 13:27 |  #6

Wow thanks guys. I never even knew about the fluorescent light issue. Add another fact that I leanred from the great people of the this site. Thanks again.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
statsman
Senior Member
527 posts
Joined Dec 2007
Location: California, USA
     
Feb 05, 2008 13:32 |  #7

Donte wrote in post #4857208 (external link)
Wow thanks guys. I never even knew about the fluorescent light issue. Add another fact that I leanred from the great people of the this site.

I didn't either until I started shooting indoor high school basketball a couple of months ago. Talk about WB all over the place.


  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
number ­ six
fully entitled to be jealous
Avatar
8,964 posts
Likes: 109
Joined May 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
     
Feb 05, 2008 13:35 |  #8

That's what it looks like to me, too. At 1/320 second you'll get about 1/3 of a light pulse, with variation between top and bottom.

Yep, that's what your shots look like...

-js


"Be seeing you."
50D - 17-55 f/2.8 IS - 18-55 IS - 28-105 II USM - 60 f/2.8 macro - 70-200 f/4 L - Sigma flash

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
canonloader
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
52,911 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 135
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Behind A Camera
     
Feb 05, 2008 13:49 |  #9

Damn, I was going to ask how did you do that background. :lol:


Mitch- ____...^.^...____
Gear List, My You Tube (external link)
War is not about who's right, it's about who's left.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
liquefied
Goldmember
Avatar
1,160 posts
Joined Oct 2006
     
Feb 05, 2008 13:50 |  #10

Yep, fluorescent lighting. It happens to all cameras.



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
canonloader
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
52,911 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 135
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Behind A Camera
     
Feb 05, 2008 13:52 |  #11

I have those little screw in florescent lights you replace the other kind with and I don't get anything like this. Yes, the color is not exactly right, but it's even throughout, not like a ND filter.


Mitch- ____...^.^...____
Gear List, My You Tube (external link)
War is not about who's right, it's about who's left.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
number ­ six
fully entitled to be jealous
Avatar
8,964 posts
Likes: 109
Joined May 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
     
Feb 05, 2008 14:07 |  #12

canonloader wrote in post #4857372 (external link)
I have those little screw in florescent lights you replace the other kind with and I don't get anything like this. Yes, the color is not exactly right, but it's even throughout, not like a ND filter.

I've heard that from others, too. Guess it's time to do some tests on a compact fluorescent.

If the phosphor in the lamp has a slow decay time it'll even out the cyclic variation - I suppose there's a difference between tube-type fluorescents too.

The worst are arc-discharge lamps, like the mercury or sodium vapor street lights.

-js


"Be seeing you."
50D - 17-55 f/2.8 IS - 18-55 IS - 28-105 II USM - 60 f/2.8 macro - 70-200 f/4 L - Sigma flash

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
canonloader
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
52,911 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 135
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Behind A Camera
     
Feb 05, 2008 15:28 |  #13

If the phosphor in the lamp has a slow decay time it'll even out the cyclic variation

You mean, like it still glowing after you turn it out? Yep, it sure does that. In a dark room, it fades out over a second or so, cool looking.


Mitch- ____...^.^...____
Gear List, My You Tube (external link)
War is not about who's right, it's about who's left.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
number ­ six
fully entitled to be jealous
Avatar
8,964 posts
Likes: 109
Joined May 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
     
Feb 05, 2008 17:38 |  #14

That would solve the problem. I suppose there are tube-type fluorescents that have slow decay too, but you never see that specified on the package...

-js


"Be seeing you."
50D - 17-55 f/2.8 IS - 18-55 IS - 28-105 II USM - 60 f/2.8 macro - 70-200 f/4 L - Sigma flash

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
canonloader
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
52,911 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 135
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Behind A Camera
     
Feb 05, 2008 18:08 |  #15

I have seen some, but you only see them glowing if there is no other light in the room, like in a basement at midnight. :)


Mitch- ____...^.^...____
Gear List, My You Tube (external link)
War is not about who's right, it's about who's left.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

2,421 views & 0 likes for this thread, 10 members have posted to it and it is followed by 2 members.
40D exposure problem
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is ANebinger
1182 guests, 178 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.