I NEED your HELP – DO I have a Camera Problem?

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

03/17/2005 11:22:00 AM · #1

I have posted several pictures taken on the same day at different light angles below. For some reason it seems that all or most of my pictures [to me and others] seem to have low contrast [FLAT] look. I need to find out if it is in the camera, the settings, or just the way Iâ��m taking the pictures.
I really need your help. I talked with Panasonic Service and was not pleased with the representative. He offered no help at the same time seeming rude. And said just send it to repair. That would be ok but I would have to pay labor and shipping.
Could someone look at these pictures and see if you can determine if you see a contrast problem and if so, is the problem within the camera or something Iâ��m doing wrong. All pictures are straight out of camera and resized to 640 X 480. My camera has a menu called 'picture adjustment' and I have the contrast, saturation, sharpness, and noise resolution set to standard which is the camera's default setting. There are three options (low, std, high). All pictures are taken in HQ JPG format. My camera does not offer RAW and in the TIFF mode I see no difference in image quality. The pictures may not be good shots, but please take the time to look at the contrast or whatever may be wrong, if anything. I donâ��t have the money do blow on sending the camera to repair. PLEASE offer your comments.
Thanks,
Scott W.

Message edited by author 2005-03-17 11:35:58.

nards656

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

Tamron SP AF 24-135mm f/3.5-5.6 AD Aspherical IF for Canon

03/17/2005 11:52:40 AM · #2

I don't personally see a contrast problem that I think is the camera. I pulled a couple of those off and checked histograms; they're pretty well full tonal range, but the tendency is toward the right. That means you are pushing the limits of exposure and sometimes overexposing. That's going to make the shots look bright, but it also kills sky detail and sometimes brings the shadows out too much.

It almost seems like you are exposing for the subjects, which are often in shadow. When you do this, it blows out the highlights and the skies. I think all your skies are either blown out or very close to it. If you are spot metering, make sure you check both the brightest area of the photo AND the darkest area, trying to keep both of them within 2 1/2 stops of the exposure setting. If you are just using the typical center weighted averaging or full averaging, try setting your exposure for -1 and see if it changes your feelings about the contrast. I was able to add contrast to the two shots I checked easily using curves, and thus I think the problem is more in how you are approaching the shots.

It also appears that you're making most of your shots in the bright midday sun, which tends to (in my experience) really flatten the world due to the overhead lighting and the color of the light.

I hope that's not insulting, just trying to be helpful.

Brad

Olympus OM-D E-M1

Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO M.Zuiko

03/17/2005 11:57:37 AM · #3

Great observation Bernard.
I personally have found my E-10 over exposing by just a tad, and setting my manual exposure compensation to -0.3 has made a noticeable difference. I can bring an under exposed shot back out, but once blown out or over exposed, it's history.

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

03/17/2005 11:57:38 AM · #4

Originally posted by nards656:

No - not insulting at all. I thank you for your input. I would hate to send the camera off for repair and it was me, that would be a waist of money. I take most of my pictures from 3:00 to 7:PM, so yes the light is overhead or setting.
Again thanks for your comment.
SDW

03/17/2005 12:01:43 PM · #5

For the given lighting situations these seem perfectly normal to me. Indeed, they have an admirably full tonal range. Assuming you are using your camera's default metering mode, which probably averages the entire screen, what you are seeing is an effect of of the metering, which is faboring the "shadow" areas wherever they dominate the image.

Your meter is designed to assume that whatever it is measuring "averages" out to a zone 5 gray. If you take a picture that is filled 100% with a white wall, and another filled 100% with a black wall, the two images should come out in the same, identical, tonality of gray.

If you set the camera for spot metering, and choose a spot that youw ant to be zone 5 gray, and meter on that, and lock the results, then reframe the picture, you'll see a significant difference.

Note that the "flattest looking" of the images are the ones shot in bright daylight with the light behind you; ANY camera produces a flat image in those circumstances.

If you want more information on using metering and modes creatively, let me know. Incidentally, I use my Nikon at LO contrast, LO saturation, NO sharpening, and STANDARD noise reduction. I prefer to do all my contrast and saturation work in photoshop where I can control it. My native images look no different from yours, given similar setups.

Robt.

03/17/2005 12:16:05 PM · #6

To go a little further, take this example:

I assume that this is closer to what you were "seeing":

A simple curves adjustment accomplishes this, and I prefer to do the work in photoshop than have the camera make those decisions for me. The camera gave you all the information you need to do whatever youw ant witht he image; it's essentially your job to make the image be what you visualize it as.

Robt.

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

03/17/2005 12:27:37 PM · #7

Thanks everyone for your help. I have never been so happy to here it me not the camera.. lol. I just didn't have the money to send this camera off for repair.
Thanks you: Bernard, Brad, and Robert

All of you have been very helpful!

Originally posted by bear_music:

I assume that this is closer to what you were "seeing":

A simple curves adjustment accomplishes this, and I prefer to do the work in photoshop than have the camera make those decisions for me. The camera gave you all the information you need to do whatever youw ant witht he image; it's essentially your job to make the image be what you visualize it as.

Robt.

You are correct Robert. See I need to learn more about PS 7

Message edited by author 2005-03-17 12:28:46.

Brad

Olympus OM-D E-M1

Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO M.Zuiko

03/17/2005 12:43:31 PM · #8

Robert made a great point I forgot to mention that I do as well.
I have my camera set in center-weighed metering mode pretty much all the time, and will pre-load the shot with the shutter button halfway down and scan around and look at the metering in the viewfinder to kinda check highs & lows. I often will find the sweet spot I want metered, hold in the exposure lock, recompose and take the shot.
If your camera can bracket shots, that is also something to try, say one stop up and one stop down. At times can make a world of difference.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

03/17/2005 12:46:24 PM · #9

Here's another example of what I'm talking about, using this original:

This should be a LOT closer to what you "wanted";

In this one I've used the cntrl-alt-tilde-invert layer mask, a little curves, some hue/saturation, and some selective color work.

I'd be happy to walk you through these processes via e-mail; reach me at bear_music@yahoo.com.

Robt,

brianlh

Canon EOS-450D Rebel XSi

03/17/2005 01:24:37 PM · #10

nice jab on the edits robert, especially the last one.
meanwhile, i was working on another one:

did some screen/multiply work with highlights and shadows on new layers (learned this technique from one of the tutorials here on DPC), then an adjustment layer for saturation to produce:

the second may look slightly artificial in colors, but it's mostly to pronounce the difference that can be made with some photoshop work (this took probably 3 or 4 minutes to do).

maybe it's just my inexperience speaking, but i have been under the impression that very few photos 'pop' right out of the camera - most will benefit from levels at the least, and more often than not other tweaks as well

Message edited by author 2005-03-17 13:25:40.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

03/17/2005 01:29:25 PM · #11

Originally posted by brianlh:

Maybe it's just my inexperience speaking, but i have been under the impression that very few photos 'pop' right out of the camera - most will benefit from levels at the least, and more often than not other tweaks as well

It's NOT your inexperience; the software in the camera's designed to forgive a multitude of flaws. Therefore it will almost always produce an acceptable image but rarely a perfect one "out of the box". It's up to you to fine-tune your work.

Robt.

brianlh

Canon EOS-450D Rebel XSi

03/17/2005 01:37:33 PM · #12

somehow i double posted after an edit, but the correct one is below. whoops!

Message edited by author 2005-03-17 13:39:33.

brianlh

Canon EOS-450D Rebel XSi

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

03/17/2005 01:38:40 PM · #13

Originally posted by bear_music:

good to hear, since i almost always need to - if nothing, at least RAW adjustments. :)

Scott, here is a shot that I took a week ago on the LA DPC outing:

quite flat and dull - not exactly appealing to the eye and was a huge dissapointment compared to what i felt i had seen in person. with some basic RAW adjustments (i realize your camera does not offer raw, but you can achieve similar results with other photoshop tools), i quickly turned it into one of my favorites:

perhaps overly saturated again, but what can i say - i like colors :D

don't be afraid to learn photoshop - i found it quite intimidating at first, but have picked up things here and there and have learned to use some of these techniques in order to salvage my photos that just look bleh. (but, as is always said, remember that nothing in photoshop substitutes for getting the exposure/composition/etc right in-camera).

Message edited by author 2005-03-17 13:40:29.

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

03/17/2005 02:11:01 PM · #14

Thanks everyone for your tips. I'm in and out today, I will be checking back. All of you, you don't know how much your help is appreciated.
Thanks,
Scott W.