| Author |
Message |
Max Besana
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Aug 06 10:26 - Edited by: Max Besana
Reply
Hello to everyone in Whoopy community!
First of all, thanks to all the warm comments and welcomes, much appreciated! I joined Whoopy around a week ago and I'm amazed everyday of the level of respect, support and enthusiasm I find around. Inspiring and motivating!
Here goes my question...
I have recently bought a Digital camera, I was quite happy about it until I transfer all my pics to my computer, which is an Mac. Most of the pics I took in my time in Scotland and England look over exposed, to much white, or just to fake. To tell the truth I don't have an Apple monitor, as I couldn't afford one. I'm using a flat screen from Acer. I have tried to calibrate it using an application from Mac, and yet I don't seem to be doing a good job, or... is my monitor really crap? Can anyone give me some insight or tips on how to solve this issue?
I would like to thank in advance to who ever will come to my rescue...
Greetings,
Max Besana
|
36Clicks
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Aug 06 12:10
Reply
Hi Max,
Reading the problem you describe, I don't think it's necessarily a monitor callibration issue. In general, the preview on the back of the camera gives you an indication of the exposure, but that isn't as reliable as a monitor. In other words, if a photo looks good on the small LCD on the back of the camera, it doesn't mean it actually is good.
It can also be the metering inside the camera that's inproperly configurated which causes the overexposed sky. It might be worth checking the histogram of a photo with an overexposed sky, either on your camera, or in a program like Photoshop or Paintshop. If there's a peak on the right hand side of the histogram, there are blown out parts in the photo, most likely the sky.
It would be good to know which camera you use, as well as which camera settings you used with those photos (metering mode, EV adjustments, shutterspeed, aperture, ISO settings, etc. If you could post an example (unedited) would be even more helpful.
As to the monitor callibration, there's a forum thread that briefly touches the subject of monitor callibration: http://www.woophy.com/forum/12_1344_0.html
A good link to see if your monitor is properly calibrated is http://www.easyrgb.com
To calibrate your monitor, it's best to use a neutral ambient (surrounding) light situation, and follow the steps in System Preferences > Display > Color. Then you can calibrate your monitor. You also need to adjust the hardware settings (brightness and contrast) of your monitor, as well as follow the onscreen instructions when you click Calibrate...
A good monitor is important, but not the most critical thing. A well tuned / calibrated monitor will make the difference in getting the right colours (colour matching), but will not prevent a blown out sky in a poorly exposed photo...
Cheers,
36Clicks
|
John Melskens
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Aug 06 12:28 - Edited by: John Melskens
Reply
Thank you Hugo - and Max. That was what I needed too. And the link to easyrgb.com was a big help.
|
|
Max Besana
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Aug 06 14:19
Reply
Thank you 36Clicks!
I have checked you links and they worked fine.
I'm currently working with a Canon 350D and I was using jpeg format and standard white balancing for cloudy days. (Yes, is basic, but I'm still learning to work around the features of the camera). The rest of the specifications, well, as I was testing and trying, I used different ISO, shutter speeds and aperture, trying to figure out what would work better, when.
I will start using RAW, as I read in one of Whoopy forum threads the advantage of this format. I currently use iPhoto and Photoshop, but I try to avoid to much digital manipulation. I will post a pic later on today ( need to resize them) .
Thanks again,
greetings,
Max
|
|
36Clicks
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Aug 06 15:34
Reply
Hi Max,
It's primarily the metering method you used to expose the shots - Average, pattern or spot metering. The rest of the info is usefull to assess the photos individually, as those will be photo specific.
The more info you can provide, the better it is. In Photoshop, go to file > file info. You'll find all information there.
Cheers,
36Clicks.
|
|
Max Besana
Member
|
# Posted: 21 Aug 06 09:16
Reply
Hi 36Clicks,
Here by an example of the "skies"...
in the info window says, metering method: Pattern ( and to tell you the truth, I'm not sure what does this mean...)
Thanks a lot for your helpfull comments and tips, hope to become better this way!
Greets,
Max
|
|
36Clicks
Member
|
# Posted: 21 Aug 06 09:52
Reply
Hi Max,
Very interesting - the sky isn't overexposed at all, there are plenty of details in it, only the contrast is a little low. Even stronger, the photo seems well exposed judging by the histogram in Photoshop, and there are no blown out parts - at all.
If you don't see the details on your monitor, it is most likely that you've set the brightness of the screen too high. This is a hardware setting.
As to the photo, I think if you adjusted the levels a bit (in photoshop: use image > adjust > levels) as well as increased the saturation a notch, you'd be able to boost the image.
With the in-camera menu, I'm sure you'll also be able to increase the contrast during exposure, but I wouldn't recommend that option, as there's no way back, and it makes it only more difficult to expose correctly. Furthermore, you're likely to get more severe differences between blown out parts if you have a harder contrast due to direct sunlight on a brighter day.
pattern metering is an average reading of the light intensity in the camera using various points throughout the viewfinder. It determines the camera settings (on auto, both aperture and shutterspeed) I'd say that would be the right way to go about it. For a more elaborate explanation of these settings, check the instruction manual.
The situation and weather conditions (a heavily overcast sky) is always difficult to shoot in, as the contrasts, which normally accentuate the landscape are virtually non-exsistent. And then, there's the ol' scottish haze too, reducing the details in elements further away, including the sky. That's why you see so little contrast in the original shot.
Hope this helps.
Cheers,
36Clicks
|
Andreas Heijdendael
Member
|
# Posted: 21 Aug 06 11:41
Reply
A very nice site about monitor calibration is the following. It also includes some links to programs that you can use for this purpose. Although the use of a 'spider' would be the best way to go don't go running off to buy one of these things since they're pretty expensive and for most photographers not worth the money.
Monitor Calibration
You can use the monitor calibration file to calibrate your printer too. Very usefull if you want your printer to print exactly what you see on the screen. Just google for this and you'll find enough information to fill a whole cabinet of pages. (-:
|
|
Max Besana
Member
|
# Posted: 22 Aug 06 09:07
Reply
Thanks to both you, 36Clicks and Andreas!
I have follow your advise and I get the feeling that my screen reflects a bit more what my eye had seen.
:)
Greetings!
Max
|
Frank Unbeliever
Member
|
# Posted: 2 Oct 06 17:25
Reply
Not a solution, but you can of course always compare your pics onscreen with other images onscreen. If all others suffer from the same lack of detail or overexposure, it's probably your monitor, if the others all seem better, it is probably something to do with the camera.
Also in checking the camera settings, check for the exposure-compensation (+/- ev). In my experience in some cameras it is very easy to change this setting withour being aware of it, and it does add or detract from your chosen settings. Sometimes you're not even aware you changed it because it is a control that is rarely explained well in the manual and is accesible on the camera through shortcuts.
And on flatscreens the hardware contrast setting (wheel or buttons on the monitor) is more important than in classic monitors. It can easily create onscreen washouts...
Just my two cents, good luck!
|
Online now: Guests - 2 Members - 2