Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > Newbie Help

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 7, 2003, 4:34 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 292
Default

I spend a lot of time playing with p-shop on my photos, I have entered enough photo competitions (in some of which my stuff was actually picked ). But in all of them since i moved to a 3mp camera, noone could tell from a couple of feet away if it was film or digital at 8X10 prints.
Your question about "realistic tourist shots" may be that you are expecting one medium to match another. They never will, just like film will never match slide. And a print from a slide will never match negatives. And so on.
geof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2003, 5:56 PM   #12
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 71
Default

I have a Nikon 5700 and the shots taken are better quality than my old Canon AE-1 SLR camera. I do sharpen and lighten (indoor shots) most of my photos though.
gverde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2003, 5:56 PM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 71
Default

I have a Nikon 5700 and the shots taken are better quality than my old Canon AE-1 SLR camera. I do sharpen and lighten (indoor shots) most of my photos though.
gverde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2003, 5:59 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 292
Default

i found the same: i like the shots with my oly 5050 better than most with my canon F1n and T90, except sports ( long teles and all...). with a little touch-up in p-shop.
geof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2003, 11:58 PM   #15
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 51
Default

From my very limited use and experence, I always use my programs "instant fix" function on my digital pics and the color comes alive. I use photdelux 4, old but simple program.
serpa4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 9, 2003, 8:10 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
BillDrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Hay River Township, WI
Posts: 2,512
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WayneH
Guys, the problem is simpler than you're making it. My digital cameral image of the sky and forest background appeared to have a 30% gray filter on the lens (not an exaggeration). While the film picture has a bright blue sky and lush greens in the trees. My memory of the day was much nearer the film version. ...
That sounds like an exposure and/or white balance issue. Very easy to happen with lots of sky in the image if you have everything set to automatic. The camera will try set the exposure and white balance so the average is 18% gray.

I'd suggest trying to reproduce the problem - one of the nice things about digital is that you can shoot several few hundred test shots without having to talk to your bank manager. Take that kind of shot with your film camera noting the settings used. Then shoot with as many different settings (exposure bias, white balance, contrast, saturation, ...) as you can with your digicam and look at the EXIF data as you compare the two.

Oops - forgot your camera is in someone else's pocket. So take a look at the EXIF data for the bad pictures and see if they fit the "sunny f/16" rule - the shutter speed should be 1/ISO at f/16 on a bright sunny day. Was the picture taken at something like f/8 @ 1/400 (assuming ISO=100)? And is that camera's normal ISO really 100? Was the white balance set to auto? Was the saturation set differently on the bad photos?
_______________
More megapixels alone won't improve the color, but different cameras do have different charactoristics.
BillDrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 9, 2003, 10:07 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

You could also import your grey sky pics into an editor and look at the histogram of scene brightness. It gives some idea what the auto expose is doing - weighting the rest of the scene to large area sky or not. But this is an exposure issue, whereas you're suggesting colorimetry probs. as well.

I took some late afternoon dull sky pics with my Fuji, and I was surprised how appealing the sky looked, being more blue, so in my case it worked the right way!

This is a bit of a fine point, but colorimetry based on a fixed 'daylight' setting is usually a neutral to bluish northlight sky. Cams use 6500 deg K by default if you preset colour temperature to daylight. However, late evening sky gets 'warmer' and you'd expect this value to drop e.g 5000 to 6000. If you get the chance of similar shots, try experimenting with spot exposure mode, and auto white balance first to a white highlight, or daylight reflected back from a card.

As suggested, the EXIF data will tell you if the cam thought it was a dull day or not. My feeling with digicams, is their auto white balance struggles with flat, duller, evenly lit scenes, without a wide range of high and lowlights. Popping off several pics in auto usually shows this up as variable white balance across the shots- which you can check by comparing RGB values of greys and whites afterwards. Film can have more lattitude.

These things are difficult to assess on a cams lcd. Faithful colour is virtually impossible, but the cams histogram (if it has one) can help a lot with exposure.

I also find the 'auto fix' tools in editors can bring a pic to life. However, all they do with exposure, is assume there has to be some low light black and highlight white in a pic, and white must have been peak white not grey and modify the brightness values to give a standard distribution of values. If the scene was very neutral when shot, you won't always get grey, after applying the tool.
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 10, 2003, 11:18 AM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5
Default

BillDrew and Voxmagna, thanks for "hearing" me. Yes, I leave (errr left) the autosetting on both the digital camera and the film camera almost all the time. The only real variables are that the two photos are being exposed differently on different media. The suggestion to look at the EXIF data on the images, that I'm unhappy with is a good idea and I will try it. I don't know the new EXIF standard yet, so I'll use your guide to tell me. I will also look at one of the "good" shots and see the difference in EXIF.

I'm not down on digital cameras. I am trying to buy one that less often has a white balance problem. I was groping with the idea that higher resolution (5 Megapixels) would do this now I understand that's going down the wrong path. Perhaps the Olympus 3040 could be adjusted to compensate for white balance issues. That's just a matter of my education, certainly the camera has the features. Perhaps most digital cameras of comperable price/features have comperable white balance issues.

This has been educational and I do reallly appreciate your help.
WayneH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 10, 2003, 12:36 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

I forgot to add, that if the cam is inherently more sensitive (rather than more Mpix - but both is great!) i'e low f stop, good lens, best ccd sensor - then the circuits doing the balance, will be more accurate, particularly in lower light.

Think of slr's that open up the lens iris for viewfinder, focus and exposure measurement before the shot, it's similar with digicams.
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2003, 5:31 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 149
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WayneH
I'm not down on digital cameras. I am trying to buy one that less often has a white balance problem. I was groping with the idea that higher resolution (5 Megapixels) would do this now I understand that's going down the wrong path. Perhaps the Olympus 3040 could be adjusted to compensate for white balance issues. That's just a matter of my education, certainly the camera has the features. Perhaps most digital cameras of comperable price/features have comperable white balance issues.

This has been educational and I do reallly appreciate your help.
Don't think that somehow digital cameras are no good becasue of some sort of "white balance issue". Understand what white balance is, and how this compares to film. Setting white balance is telling the camera what type of light you are shooting under. That is, the color temperature of the light. IS it cool? Warm? What? Different light (bright sun, overcast clouds, inside with normal light bulbs, etc). all have different temperatures. the camera needs to know to get the color right. Auto white balance doesn't always guess right?

Now, you may ask your self, "how does this copmare to film? I don't mess with this in film". Well, actually you do. You do it by selecting the type of fime you shoot. Most film, including all of your consumer films, are daylight balanced. That is, they are balanced for natural sunlight or elctronic flash (flash is designed to be like sunlight). In your film camera, take a picture under standard lightbuld lighting with no flash. See what happens with the color.

Being able to adust the camera to adapt to different lighting conditions is a great benefit of digital, not a weakness, IMHO

My canon A40, a $250 USD 2.0 MP camera, has several white balance setting.. Auto, sunlight, overcast, tungsten, and two sepreate flourescent settings. Some cameras even include custom settings, which really give you an accurace white balance adjustment.
jsmeeker is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:37 PM.