Nikon D300 and shooting in a studio setting

Hello everyone! I'm new to the forum and I really need some help! I'm about to throw my Nikon D300 out the window. I went from a Nikon

D40 to the Nikon D300. I have been using the Nikon D300 now for about a week and I'm not liking any of the results that I'm seeing.

 

I shoot with a three strobe studio lighting set. I take photos of pets. I am having trouble with sharpness, color, contrast, and over exposure.

I use a flash meter before every photo shoot. I have tried several different settings on the Nikon D300 and all the results are terrible. I

shoot in manual mode and I set the shutter to 1/125 and the F-stop to 11. I took 256 photos last night and all of them were of poor color

and over exposed. I have the camera set on 3D point 51 focus tracking. The focus looked pretty good but that was all that turned out ok. I

was using Vivid for my color but changed to neutral last night. I know that I must be doing something wrong because this camera should

give me much better results then the Nikon D40 did.

 

Can anyone offer me some advice!!!!

Connie,

 

If you can show some samples from the photos you mention, Im sure people can have more clear idea of what is wrong with the pictures and be more helpful to you.

What ISO setting are you using? That strikes me as the most likely reason that your exposure isn't agreeing with what your flash meter is telling you to do.

I'm sorry but I deleted all the photos from last nights session. I was so mad! I checked my ISO settings but maybe the

camera had other ideas. I always keep my ISO at 200. Since I deleted the photos I can't even check what settings I was

using. I'll change the camera back to the default settings tonight and try again. This time I'll post a photo to the forum so

every one can see what I'm talking about. Thanks.

you definitely do NOT want vivid for your situation. go w/ Neutral and manually set your white balance.

I wouldn't even bother with manually setting the WB... I'd shoot in RAW so that you buy yourself all of that nice extra post-processing latitude, and can completely alter the white balance after the fact without wrecking the image the way you would when making such changes to a JPG file.

 

As for resetting to defaults... make sure that once you DO set to default, that you're not in auto ISO mode (where the camera adjusts ISO for you).

 

A sample or two, Connie, will definitely help us help you. Out of curiosity, what lens(es) were you using?

I was using the 18mm 200mm lens. This is my favorite portrait lens. Gives me the room that I need and I can get some

nice close ups.<div></div>

One more thing to add. I do photo shoots for my local Humane Society. I might end up with 300 photos in one night. I do

not have time to work with these photos. I need the camera to do the work for me when it comes to color, sharpness, and

contrast. When I used my Nikon D40 I didn't have a problem with color, contrast, or sharpness. It was there for me. I know

that I must be doing something wrong with my settings.

 

This photo was set on vivd color.<div></div>

Well, the over-exposed area is a result of... over exposing. You indicated that you're using a flash meter. I'd examine the metering technique, since you seem a stop hot or so on the (camera) left side of the dog's face. Of course, you want to bring down the power of that camera-left strobe/softbox... you DON'T want to stop the lens down. You're dealing with a higher-resolution sensor (smaller photosites, since there are more of them), and you have to watch out for diffraction. You might very well be seeing some of that at f/11, and you certainly will if you stop down more. That will soften things a bit.

 

Do you have an 18% gray target you can shoot, in order to calibrate your WB, if you don't want to batch-process that after the fact?

 

And... where are these being shot? Are you in a public place with fluorescent lighting that's slipping into the exposure as ambient light? Just trying to get the big picture, here.

 

Oh, and about that 18-200... are you on a tripod? VR on, or off? Your EXIF data didn't survive in the examples you've provided, so some of those details aren't obvious.

Matt, these photos are being taken in my bedroom which I turned into a studio. Yes, there are fluorescent lighting present.

Of course, I can turn those lights off and just use the studio lights. I started using a tripod but that got impossible to use as

time went on. Shooting dogs they tend to move around a lot. I use the VR on the lens. I don't have gray but I do have a

black seamless paper that I could use. Would that work?

 

The photo below is one that I took with my Nikon D40. Shutter 1/125 F-11 ISO 200. This is the results that I want to

achieve with my D300. I did very little post processing with this photo.<div></div>

Don't throw the D300 out! Send it to me and I'll sned you a brand new D40 :)

 

All jokes aside, I'd echo to try to shoot RAW if you are not already doing it (I think the D40 only does compressed, you have the option of uncompressed on the D300) - you may be able to salvage some of the overexposed areas. Do you have Active D-lighting on of off? I once had it on high at an event and everyone I shot turned out to have red ears.... also, when I had a 18-200, it was backfocusing, had it fixed my Nikon, but I am assuming you had OK results with the D40 and that lens?

 

Cute dogs BTW......

Connie, I guess you you have discovered how good the D40 really is!

I was going to use the active D lighting tonight but maybe I better not. The only thing that I have been using is the 3D focus

tracking which by the way, I really like.

 

The 18-200 worked excellent on my Nikon D40. If I had know that the D300 was going to produce such terrible results I

would never had invested the money. This is just crazy in my opinion.

 

I may end up selling the D300 and just sticking with the D40 because the results were excellent. Doesn't make any sense

to me.

Connie, it ain't a shortcoming of the better body. It's just how you're telling it to write those JPGs on the fly. It is

MORE capable of producing quality JPGs than the D40 is, and if you're working with animals, the number of keepers

you'll get (because of the vastly superior focus speed and frame rate) is a big help. The 18-200 will work just as well

on a D40, D60, D80, D90, D200 or D300. That's not what's going on, here.

 

Which color space are you using on the camera (sRGB)? How are you opening the JPGs and working with them,

since you're not using RAW files? Whatever application you're using could be making a mess of things because it

doesn't understand the color space that's marked on the JPGs, or is improperly importing it.

 

Regardless, you've definitely got to back down on the contrast - the whites are blown out and the blacks are blocked

up - and that's either an exposure issue, or simply too much contrast pushing followed by too much JPG

compression.

 

What platform are you on, and do you have enough juice to download the free Capture NX2 trial and run it? It can

render JPGs, as a batch, right from the RAW files, using the in-camera settings... while still preserving the RAW files

so that you can see how color temperature or other processing changes WOULD effect the JPGs is you made those

changes in the camera itself. Shoot in RAW, see what sort of changes to the possible-in-the-camera settings provide

the results you like, and then just have the camera use those settings thereafter when you want it to make JPGs on

the fly. Or, just go ahead and always batch process from RAW... that way you always preserve the more useful file

in case you have a real winner that needs careful handling.

When I do shooting with my studio flash equipment, the exposures using a flash meter and film are good. But, with digital, they are pretty bad. I have to use the LCD for exposure test to get good results. Then the results are great. The flash meter is what is messing you up!

 

michael.

Ok, here are the settings that I used for this photo:

 

Reset the camera back to default settings

using 18-200mm lens

51 point 3D tracking focus

Shutter 1/125

F-8

Flash meter stated to use f8

WB - Auto

ISO - 200

Saved file as NEF (RAW) + JPEG fine

Image size - Medium

JPEG compression = Optimal Quality

Picture control - Neutral

Sharping - +3

Color space - sRGB

AF point selection - 51 point

Center weighted area - Avg.

 

This is what I get.<div></div>

We're back to how you're using the flash meter, I guess. The lowest ("normal") ISO setting on your D40 is 100. The lowest on your D300 is 200. If you still have your flash meter set to calculate based on ISO 100, this is just about exactly what I'd expect to see. Can you check on that?

I don't get it, both the D40 and D300 pics have color casts. Can't judge sharpness from the low-res samples. There is contrast -- go to neutral, adjust lights, maybe even make a custom low-contrast mode. Like Matt says, check your ISO; with a small studio you should use ISO 200 or L-1.0 (=ISO 100).

 

If a part of the picture is overblown, then change the light ratios. It's a studio -- you can adjust the light. Similarly, if the light is too hard, soften it. I believe your problems are because you're quite used to the D40 and the D300 acts in a different way, so you need to invest a little bit time and effort in learning it. Mind you, I have a D300 and I can produce very sharp pics with it with just the right contrast.

The Nikon D40's lowest ISO setting is 200. That's the same setting as the D300. I decided to bump up the F-stop to 11

instead of 8 and just used the default settings on the camera. WB is auto. The colors look better but I still see issues with

over exposure. I also don't feel that the sharpness is there anymore. See photo below.<div></div>

Connie,

 

I am having similar difficulties.

 

Try this as a test with your current setup (those colors may be confusing the camera)...switch your metering mode from full "3D

color matrix" (not the same as 3D focus) to center weighted and see if that does anything.

 

How are you triggering the studio lights? I found that one time I did not have my SB-800 completely embedded in the hot-shoe

and it gave bad results. Also, try setting a pre-measured white balance instead of auto. Unless your strobes are high quality,

usually you will find a slight temperature difference between shots.

Sorry for my confusion on the lowest ISO. I'm using a D200, which bottoms out at 100.

 

Your most recent example still looks slightly overexposed, but also looks (especially in the reds) over saturated. Reds are also the longer wavelengths, and are thus more likely to cause diffraction as you stop the lens down further. Do you have any way of reducing your strobe power by a stop, insread of stopping down the camera by a stop?

Firstly, as others have said, I'll gladly send you a D40 plus even perhaps some cash for your D300.

 

Second, it's not the camera. That's harsh, but it should be a relief, as you can be sure that you didn't shell out the bucks for nothing. The D300 is a big step up from the D40 in just about every way.

 

Third, what Michael said. You've got a fantastic lcd on the back that will show you blown highlights with a single button press. Use it. If I'm shooting something studio, I am initially running back and forth to my strobes constantly to dial in the perfect exposure balance. If an image isn't coming out to your liking, do something about it. Move your stands, diffuse or feather a light, dial strobes up or down. Once you get your zone of interest lit right, it should more or less stay that way as long as the subject is in relatively the same space.

 

Finally, workflow with raw doesn't have to be that bad. In fact in a strobe setting where the light is the same in every shot, it can't really get any easier. With adobe camera raw, I'd ctrl-a to select all my files from a shoot (in bridge), right click, open in raw, then select all in that window. Use the dropper tool to tweak white balance or set it by eye (it's usually pretty close to begin with when on auto), then nudge other color/sat/contrast settings until your happy. Click apply to all, and you're done. That's pretty much it, unless you want to do further work to an image. Many other software packages, from very expensive to downright free will do the same. A particular image might need further tweaking here and there, but the benefit of shooting in a controlled environment (studio), is well, it's a controlled environment.

 

By the way, adorable dog pics. I'm sure you will be very pleased with your results when you get your setup right.

Well I just looked at the last two images in your post here of the stuffed bears and the last one does look as if you have switched to

center weighted as opposed to 3D Matrix on the previous washed out pic. I thought of checking your meta-data only after I posted

those suggestions.

 

However I see a big difference, do you think its a result of switching F-stops, shutter speed?

Let me do another test run and move the lights around and lower the fstop on the studio lights. BRB.

Ok, I turned down the studio lighting. WB was in flash mode. The sharpness was there until I saved the file into a smaller

file in Windows Picture Viewer. What's up with that??? Why am I losing the sharpness when I down size the file??? Do I

need to save the files in the camera as small instead of medium files??<div></div>