Dull Images ?

[curtis_lancaster1]

<p>I am shooting with a Canon 50d, Canon 28-80 2.8 L lens. Seems that everything I shoot just does'nt seem very vivid. Almost over exposed ? I have used the bracketing setting, (3 shots, -1 up tp +2) I can see the differance in the shots, but all are still just dull. I really want bright, colorful vivid images. Any ideas what I may be doing wrong ?</p>

[geoffs1]

<p>Please post a couple of example photos, along with the details on how you made the photo: JPEG, Raw, etc. (EXIF in the file is perfect for exposure & lens data).</p>

[Jeff Lear]

<p>Yep, let us see an unedited image that you <em>thought</em> would be more vibrant and we'll probably be able to tell you why it doesn't appear that way. It could be an issue of monitor calibration or it could be that you've inadvertently bumped the exposure compensation up or down. I photo with exif data intact will help us diagnose.</p>

[jaydesi]

<p>If you're shooting raw, you'll likely need to increase saturation in post processing. If you're shooting JPEGs, then you may simply need to adjust how it applies saturation to your images.</p>

[ted_raper1]

<p>Try as Jay says - if you're shooting JPEGs, go to the camera menu and increase the saturation. Also, if you are bracketing and I understand your post correctly, try bracketing 2 stops under and one over, instead of two over/one under. Overexposure will tend to desaturate colors, while a little underexposure will tend to make them more saturated.</p>

[john_deerfield]

 

 

<blockquote>

<p>I have used the bracketing setting, (3 shots, -1 up tp +2) I can see the differance in the shots, but all are still just dull. I really want bright, colorful vivid images. Any ideas what I may be doing wrong ?</p>

</blockquote>

 

 

As it has been mentioned, you should post some examples of your images to obtain better advice. That said, vibrance will be a by-prodcut of your <em>lighting.</em> Just as a tape recorder records audio, a camera is simply a light recorder. If the sound isn't good, the recording of the sound isn't going to be good. If the light isn't good, the recording of the light isn't going to be good. If you are outside on a overcast, gloomy day... that is the picture you are going to get. If you are outside on a bright, cloudless day, the same scene will be recorded much differently. What changed? The light. In either scenario you can bracket the image to ensure you obtain the exposure you want; you can play with the post-processing controls (in-camera or on the computer) to increase saturation or contrast or vibrancy or whatever. But no matter what you do, you can't change a gloomy day into a "bright" day because that wasn't the light that was recorded!

 

[tom_mann1]

<p>CL: "... <em>I really want bright, colorful vivid images. Any ideas what I may be doing wrong ?</em> ..."</p>

<p>Not using HDR? (Calm down - just a little in joke here on photo.net). </p>

<p>In all seriousness, we regularly get this question. For example, here's a thread (with examples) from March on the same topic: http://www.photo.net/beginner-photography-questions-forum/00a5ul . That particular thread may veer too much in the direction of post processing for your interests, but you may find it interesting.</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

[aaron_mccormick]

<p>Here's my tip:<br /> Shoot exactly same shot three times, one slightly underexposed, one normally, one slightly overexposed. Use whatever kind of software to increase the contrast of each one by roughly the same amount. More often than not, slightly increasing the contrast (as opposed to increasing saturation) will make the colors richer without ruining the exposure. Then again, I only use one kind of camera.</p>

[jcuknz]

<p>Then there is the approach of wanting out of the camera what one can finish in editing and using the curves tool there. </p>

[curtis_lancaster1]

<p>Thanks for all you responses. I am going to shoot a bunch of pictures this weekend, trying differant settings. I will post some of them afterwards. Thanks again for taking the time to help me with this. All advice is greatly appriciated.</p>

[jim_manganella]

<p>Start with "bright, colorful and vivid" subjects and settings...</p>

[jcuknz]

<p>>>> I am going to shoot a bunch of pictures this weekend, trying differant settings<<<<br>

In the meantime look at some of what you already have taken and play with the curves tool.<br>

Moving the bottom corner mark a bit to the right can help ... this increases the steepness of the line which adds contrast if that is the problem. My curves tool shows me a sort of histogram and sometimes there is a gap at one or both ends of the graph, close the line to the start/end of the histogram can help brighten up a shot.</p>

[mark_drutz]

<p>DSLR's can be set to different levels of saturation and vividness (if there is such a word). Check your manual to see how to do it. My Nikons have a set up menu. I don't know about Canon.</p>

[Jeff Lear]

<p>They are called "Picture Styles" in Canonspeak. You'll find them in the menu. There are several presets with the option to modify or create your own. They can also be downloaded and sent to your 50D via the Canon Utility. Just remember, these presets are permanently applied if you're shooting in jpeg. When shooting in RAW they are applied as an overlay and can be changed, adjusted, or removed using Digital Photo Professional. Also, when shooting in RAW with a <em>Picture Style</em> applied, most editors (like Photoshop and Lightroom) will not recognize the applied adjustments and simply show the base RAW data. This may cause some confusion because the Picture Style is applied to the jpeg image your camera uses to display the preview image on your LCD (even when shooting in RAW) so there may be a significant discrepancy between what you see on your LCD and the image your editor generates, unless you are using Canon Digital Photo Professional.</p>