Purple looks too grey on my D200 => why ???

<p>Hi everyone,</p>

<p>Three years ago I bought a (new) Nikon D200. I'm an enthousiastic amateur, previously used a Nikon F60, this D200 is my first digital camera. Since the beginning, my D200 has had difficulty with the colours purple and lilac. At first I thought I just had to get to know the camera's settings, but I haven't been able to solve this problem. Other colours are acceptable (meaning reasonably resemble the original colour of the object photographed). But purple and lilac just get way too grey. The intensity of the colour is lost. I always adjust the white balance to the light situation, but purple never gets the way it looks in real life. (N.B. I never use the K-option to chose Kelvins, I use the preset WB-options.)</p>

<p>I shoot in RAW, use 1600 and 800 ISO (but I've also used the lower ISO values, doesn't seem to help much). Because of the lense I mostly use (1:2.8), I never use flash. I admit I still don't know exactly all the (endless) options, since after I bought the camera, life has been very hectic, with birth of twins, and such...</p>

<p>I've added 3 photos of the same situation, with different lenses (see below). The colours of the toy telephone are correct. The real life colours of the coat are much more intense than you can see on the photo. To give you an idea: the lilac inside of the coat is in reality the same colour as the blueberry ice cream in the picture I've added. (downloaded from internet, my D200 seems unable to take this photo !)</p>

<p>All photos taken with lense at 50 mm, mode P (automatic), white balance 'cloudy', 800 ISO, Shoot A, Custom A and at Ch (= 5 frames/s).<br /> Photo 1:<br /> Nikkor AF 28-200 1:3.5-5.6 G ED with filter B+W 62 KR-1,5 Skylight 1,1x<br /> Photo 2:<br /> Nikkor AF 50 mm 1:1.8 D with filter B+W 52 E KR1,5 1,1x<br /> Photo 3:<br /> Nikkor AF-S 17-55 1:2.8 G ED DX with filter B+W 77 010 UV-Haze 1x MRC</p>

<p>I use Compact Flash San Disk Extreme III 30 MB/s 4 and 60 MB/s 8 GB.</p>

<p>Basically my question is:<br /> Am I doing something wrong ?<br /> Is something wrong with my camera ?<br /> Does anyone recognise this problem ?</p>

<p>Looking forward to your ideas, experiences and advise !<br /> Thanks in advance !!!<br /> Regards,</p>

<p>Pauline S.<br /> (The Netherlands)</p><div></div>

<p>here's photo 2</p><div></div>

<p>and photo 3</p><div></div>

<p>and here's the ice cream. The colour of the inside of the coat is in real life the same as this ice cram !<br>

Regards,</p>

<p>Pauline S.</p><div></div>

<p>Everything looks fine to me, especially the ice cream... which also looks very very yummy! If you really want accurate colors get a colorchecker passport thingie, or at least a whibal card.</p>

<p>DId you also try this with white-balance set to "A" ( Auoto ) ?<br>

White balance set to "cloudy" asumes an environment color temp. of 6000 Kelvin which is quite high undewr most circumstances. , and since youy say you shoot RAW, you should be able to adjust the whitbalance in Post Processing easely...</p>

 

Try shooting at base ISO (100). High ISO is not known to be a color enhancement technique. And as long as you're

shooting RAW, try tweaking WB in post -- this is truly one of the huge advantages of RAW format. Also, what about

monitor calibration? Are you sure you're getting an accurate representation of your work on-screen? In my own

experience, red is the difficult color to get right. It takes some time to get right, but it can be done.

<p>Simple photoshop adjustment (if it lets me upload the image) - increase the blue a bit - and you're there...<br>

Image quality is not the greatest since I did a copy paste and saved it as smallest JPG<br>

Dave</p><div></div>

<p>I always thought purple and lilac were so subtle and accurate representation is tough. However, if you are using a white card to calibrate your color temp for each shot, you should be ok, especially shooting in RAW. High ISO sometimes seems to narrow the tonal range, but you mention that you still have a problem at low ISO. If you haven't properly calibrated your monitor you might find that could solve your problem, as I don't see anything out of whack with the samples photos you posted. The only other thing which occurs to me is that since your info above showed you were shooting in the programmed mode, you might try dialing in some exposure compensation to see if the lightening or darkening solves your problem by changing the intensity of the colors.</p>

<p>Dear all,</p>

<p>Thanks for your comments so far ! I'll look into it.<br>

To David, I'd like to say that I expect more from a D200 than the need to use PhotoShop for each picture...<br>

Kind regards,</p>

<p>Pauline S.</p>

<p>Pauline - all RAW shots (regardless of camera body) need some post processing to draw out the best from them...that's why one shoots in RAW, to have the flexibility to make adjustments without destroying the original capture of as much data as the camera can achieve. In the olden days of film, the photo processor and printer made these decisions, now in the digital times it is up to you to do so. If you want to shoot JPEGs instead, you can program into your camera some of the (in camera) post processing, so it "automatically" will take place and you may not even need PS (things such as sharpening, color balance, saturation, etc). However, each time you open, adjust, and close post processing in a program (such as PS) on a JPEG, you lose/destroy some of the pixels. So, that's the tradeoff.</p>

<p>"I'd like to say that I expect more from a D200"<br />Wow!<br />Many camera's have trouble with colors like purple. The biggest advantage of shooting RAW, as you're doing, is to be able to post process images to your liking.<br>

While you're at it, ditch the filters.</p>

<p>As Stephen said. In my LaCied 24" calibrated monitor, I don't see any problem with the color. Having seen lots of complaints, about cameras of balance, color, white balance, exposures with sample images on PN, all of the turn out, or many of them, monitor problem, having a cheep, or uncelebrated monitor.</p>

<p>Dear all,</p>

<p>I've followed the advise of several of you to try a white balance card and/or lower ISO values ! :-)<br>

I've tried the following:<br>

ISO 800 with use of grey card<br>

ISO 100 with use of grey card<br>

ISO 100 with WB 'cloudy' (for reference)<br>

I admit that the last one is the most grey-ish (so the comment on the WB 'cloudy' was correct, though cloudy weather, it was not the best for the current light !). Of the other two photos, the second one is the best (grey card + ISO 100). So the comment about the ISO values and colour, is very true as well. I'm grateful to know this now. Thanks !<br>

On the best photo, the lilac turns a little to pink too much now, but the colours itself are much more 'alive' than they were, less grey. It's definitely a lot better !<br>

Of course there's still the question of 'accurate representation'. I'm not sure whether you mean the view on the D200 screen or on my laptop (Apple MacBook) ?? Looking at the best photo, the D200 shows more grey than my laptop, but the laptop gives the lilac too much pink now (which the D200 doesn't). What to do ? I'm now getting a little lost here...<br>

Changing the amount of light used (+/- on my D200), didn't really influence the tone of colour (on my D200 screen).</p>

<p>Thanks so far ! and if you can help me to improve this even more, I'd again be very grateful.<br>

Kind regards,</p>

<p>Pauline S</p>

<div></div>

<p>After posting my last comment, I read the new ones (the last 3). I'm sorry for my previous remark to David now. It's my inexperience that expected the D200 to do better. I didn't know this, but have learned now from several reactions that this is quite common. Using photo shop might in fact be a good idea after all...<br /> I'm sorry, David.</p>

<p>Pauline S</p>

<p>Pauline<br>

You are not doing anything wrong and your camera is fine. Getting the best colours is an art that takes time to learn and does need work outside the camera on Photoshop.<br>

What you are exerienecing is the issue of colour calibration and matching.<br>

You will find some helpful guides on this site.<br>

<a href="http://www.datacolor.eu/en/learning/short-guides/index.html">http://www.datacolor.eu/en/learning/short-guides/index.html</a><br>

Basically a camera sensor and your eyes see the world differently and some colours that you can see a sensor cannot.<br>

Your setup menus in the D200 will have a significant effect on the look you get out of the camera<br>

In order to display colours correctly a monitor needs to be set up using a colour calibrator, your Apple Mac will not display colours as well as it could if you have not calibrated it. You cameras rear screen cannot be colour calibrated so you cannot use it for colour checking it is only good enough for a guide not critical analysis.(no rear screen monitor on any camera is colour calibrated)<br>

Along the process there are many different things reacting to the colour all of which will respond in a different way. So your eye, the sensor, the monitor and printing dyes will all react slightly diffrently. In the days of film we used to rely on someone at the processor to asses the colour and adjust if necessary. Even then it was not possible to match all the colours, consistency between prints made at different times was very hard to achieve.<br>

You D200 was a good camera when released in 2005 but you need to learn its limitations and work within them. In case you think this sounds like I am suggesting you by a new camera I am not, at least not just for this reason as colours and accurrate reproduction are still and will always be an issue whatever camera and however much you spend.<br>

As others have already said low ISO's give better colours than using 800 or 1600</p>

<p>Simon</p>

 

<p>I've never had any problems with the purple / violet / magenta / red area when I was shooting with my old d200 that couldn't be explained by funky lighting, the wrong white balance settings or similar issues. If you are interested, I could post numerous images taken with my old camera that show this. Also, I wouldn't worry about your camera failing in some way which impacts the color balance. When they fail, they don't fail this way.</p>

<p>It is almost certain (as was pointed out above) that the problem occurred because you used the "Cloudy" white balance setting. This setting tends to try to warm the image too much. Below is a two-click fix to your image: First, I simply used the white balance eyedropper tool in ACR. The brighter parts of the toy phone all gave approximately the same correction, which looks pretty good to my eye. Next, I adjusted the curves in ACR to brighten up your image and give it a bit more contrast. I have posted the result below.</p>

<p>FWIW, since the filters that you used do cut slightly into the deep violet end of the spectrum, so it's possible that they were also contributing to the problem, but I would expect their effect to be quite small. I'd be much more concerned about the quality of the incident light (ie, almost like the CRI (color rendering index) on fluorescent bulbs) and then getting the best match to that in your in-camera color balance. As suggested above, using a white card to set a custom white balance is probably your best bet if you don't want to adjust it later in Photoshop.</p>

<p>Cheers,</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

<p>PS (in edit) - I stopped to eat lunch and didn't refresh my browser before I posted my reply, so I didn't see any of the latest posts in this thread. Sorry if I just duplicated what was done in that time.</p><div></div>

<p>A "gray" (mid tone exposure) card is not necessarily neutral unless it is specifically marked as "neutral white balance". You are probably better off setting the white balance from the white of the calculator. As mentioned, you will also need a color corrected monitor to see the correct colors.</p>

<p>Your last image does look significantly better, primarily due to better exposure. Remember that even white will look gray or black if underexposed.</p>

<p>The D200 is a highly configurable camera designed for a pro or experienced amateur herself to to make choices on how the light is measured and how colors are rendered. That, and a good sensor, are what the expense is for. The expense is not so that the camera itself will choose to do all things for the photographer.</p>

<p>Perhaps take a look at Amazon for a D200 guide since the owner's manual usually is not all that good as an instructional guide.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hi everyone !</p>

<p>Thanks for all your valuable comments.<br>

I'm glad to know there's nothing wrong with my camera and WOW... I'm learning a lot !!!<br>

Of course, after reading your valued comments, I have a few new questions:</p>

<p>To Tom Mann: Can you tell me what ACR is ? your photo looks great !</p>

<p>Furthermore: I only added a filter on each lense to (basically) protect the lens against scratches. Is there a better choice of filter out there ? one that doesn't affect colours maybe ? (I understood the influance is small, but hey, it's easily improved)</p>

<p>To Stephen Lewis who wrote: "However, each time you open, adjust, and close post processing in a program (such as PS) on a JPEG, you lose/destroy some of the pixels. So, that's the tradeoff." Is it different if you shoot in RAW compared to shooting in JPEG ?</p>

<p>To Indraneel Majumdar who wrote "A "gray" (mid tone exposure) card is not necessarily neutral unless it is specifically marked as "neutral white balance"." Is a white card better than my grey card ? I have a grey card for digital photography (I mean... not just any card that happens to be grey). How come it's still not 'neutral' ?</p>

<p>Please everyone, feel free to comment :-)<br>

Thanks again !</p>

<p>Pauline S.<br>

PS It's almost 9 pm here, I'll be on the web again tomorrow.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Is there a better choice of filter out there ? one that doesn't affect colours maybe ?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Hoya HMC is usually a good choice. No filters are best, especially with a lens hood... unless you're near sand or water or worse.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Is it different if you shoot in RAW compared to shooting in JPEG?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I do not know of any editors that modify and resave the raw data. Almost all editors do it in jpeg. So raw data does not degrade, while a jpeg image does (on repeated saves, even if you change nothing).</p>

<blockquote>

<p>How come it's still not 'neutral' ?</p>

</blockquote>

<p><a href="http://www.mtdhelp.com/kb/whibal/is-the-whibal-the-same-as-an-18-gray-card">here's a link</a> to explain it far better than I can. I've heard that the kodak gray card is also spectrally neutral, but have never used one.</p>

<p>A few comments:</p>

<p>- Don't use any filters on the lenses until after you've compared color with the filter on and off.</p>

<p>- I didn't see any reference to which RAW converter was used. If it's a Nikon one and you don't make any adjustments in the converter, the converted RAW will look the same as the JPG out of the camera because they were converted with the same settings.</p>

<p>- I shot two different purple flowers with my D200, D7000 (both RAW) and a S95 (JPG) in bright sunlight, ISO 100. Viewed in Nikon View 2NX the purples look very similar from all 3 cameras. Since they were shot in AWB the WB varies a bit so the purple varies a bit on the blue/red scale, but the color saturation is strong in all of them.</p>

<p>- Try shooting some other objects that are purple and see if you have the same problem. A D200 shouldn't have any problem (with typical settings) reproducing purple.</p>

<p>Some casual background reading -<br>

<a href="http://zone-10.com/cmsm/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=496&Itemid=1">http://zone-10.com/cmsm/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=496&Itemid=1</a><br>

<a href="http://www.ehow.com/info_8430937_photography-tips-blue-flowers.html">http://www.ehow.com/info_8430937_photography-tips-blue-flowers.html</a><br>

I used to have a Kodak sheet on dealing with this same issue with film, but have misplaced it when I moved :o(</p>

<p>Try taking pics of violets, lilacs, chicory and such if you want to drive yourself further nuts.</p>

<p>I came very close to the ice cream by increasing magenta, red, and blue saturation and slightly darkening in Curves. Here's a screen shot comparison.</p><div></div>

<p>Pauline, what color space are you shooting at? Adobe RGB can look off color if not converted to sRGB for the web. It's best to shoot in sRGB for web and monitor display uses. Also be sure the conversion from the NEF RAW files are into sRGB. For DIY printing, Adobe RGB is better because of a wider color gamut, so set your RAW output accordingly. Read the camera manual for how to set the color space settings. Hope this helps. </p>