melissa_van_leeuwen

<p>@Luke, here is image 3 lower right corner.<br>

<img src="http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1024x768q90/30/j6a0.jpg" alt="" /></p>

 

<p>I liked my old D700 but didn't love it like everyone else did there's and this is why I wasn't too sad to see it go. I really struggled in post processing, especially with skin tones. I did a side by side comparison of a friends D700 and my old one, and I had a lot of red in my images and the colours were off. After testing this new D700 the colours were gorgeous.....unfortunately I am left with a defective camera. A trip to Nikon will hopefully help!</p>

<p>@Luke were your issues with the D3S's comparable to what you are seeing my D700 doing? Nikon quoted me $225, which isn't too bad unless they have to replace a part and then they said that they would call with another estimate if need be.<br>

I'm not ready yet to just write off this D700. I am willing to give it a shot with Nikon first to see if they can repair it. I have my fingers crossed.</p>

<p>I will have to speak with the seller and see if he can provide me with a receipt and then send it into Nikon. <br /> <br />The "communication cable" theory sounds like it could be the culprit. Hopefully I don't get the run around with Nikon.<br /> <br />I just sold my used D700 with 147,025 shutter count for $900 yesterday, so $1500 for a camera with only 1444 shutter count to me was a steal. I am in Canada though.</p>

<p>Yes, I've tried all of the memory cards I have, all 7 of them. Something I just tried, and don't recommend as my husband hates it when I do this with the remote or electronics that are just not working, was to bang the camera body against the palm of my hand firmly. To my surprise the camera began functioning fine.....banged it against the palm of my hand again and it was acting up. This is my second D700 as well and my first worked perfectly.</p>

<p>I found an amazing deal on Kjiji with a local buyer selling his D700 for $1800 and only a shutter count of 1444. I ended up purchasing this D700 for $1500 after extensive testing and no issues. <br /><br />I now had even more time to really test out my new D700 today and am now noticing some very troubling horizontal and vertical pixel issues. I don't know how else to explain it. <br /><br />I've searched and searched an can't find anything remotely close to what is going on. Any ideas? I've shot in raw, jpeg, low iso, high iso, wide open closed down and get the same results. Every 4 out 10 images is like this. Looks like a trip to Nikon, but I'm wondering if anyone has any ideas of what is going on or have you seen anything like this before? </p>

<p><img src="http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1024x768q90/35/em29.jpg" alt="" /><br>

<img src="http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1024x768q90/163/p2lp.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p><img src="http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1024x768q90/855/aenj.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Hi Dan, and thanks for the explanation, makes sense. I've checked my JPEG's and they have a high amount of magenta as well. Magenta is the highest, followed by cayan and then yellow. Because I have my camera set to adobe RGB, I guess I should start checking my #'s for colour balancing in RGB as well? I have yet to do my research on what those numbers should look like in relation to each other.</p>

<p>So again, is this a white balance issue or do D700's require more colour correction? </p>

<p>Mag, I guess all the articles I've read on skin colour correcting have all been in CMYK. Maybe I should research colour correcting in RGB and what those number should be? I'm now believing that my problem lies more with white balancing correctly. Can anyone expand on lightrooms inability to accurately display colour? This worries me. As my pp'ing begins in LR.</p>

<p>Dan I just did a shoot in RAW + JPEG, so I'd have the image to compare. What am I looking for though or comparing in lightroom with the 2 images? The accuracy of my #'s. There's still so much I need learn!</p>

<p>For the pictures I posted I didn't white balance them. Should've though because that is what I usually do in LR first. But even after white balancing them and exporting to CS4 my numbers are off and magenta is usually the highest number.</p>

<p>I'm working on a calibrated mac and have validated calibration through my lab prints. I shoot in raw and am working in Adobe RGB colour space. I work with Adobe RGB in camera, Lightroom and CS4, after editing I convert to srgb.</p>

<p>Peter, in regards to WB in camera. I shoot raw and therefore do my WB in Lightroom. I do have an expodisc but do a lot of lifestyle portraits of children, and they don't like to stay still. So it's kind of hard to always use it.</p>

<p>I'll post examples of SOOC shots (fixed the exposure) and then some colour corrected examples. My images look "alright" until I colour correct and them I can't believe the difference. I guess I should mention the images I have posted are raw and just colour corrected I have not done any WB correction on them. Maybe I should have before colour correcting? I've also realized that my cyan values are super high as well.</p>

<p>Colour corrected images are posted 1st and SOOC shots posted after.<br /> <img src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1341/4733901265_52488052b8.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="357" />1<br /> <img src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1121/4734540414_9f2443c2bd.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="357" />2</p>

<p><img src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1120/4734540268_b9120cbfbc.jpg" alt="" width="333" height="500" />3<br /> <img src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1157/4734539952_6848ff5925.jpg" alt="" width="333" height="500" />4</p>

<p>I colour corrected in CS4 using the colour balance tool and levels. Taking my values off of the forehead of the boy in images 1&2 and of the girl on the left of image 3&4.<br /> Here are before and after levels:<br /> Image #1 (colour corrected) <br /> C-7% <br /> M-20%<br /> Y-24%<br /> Image #2 (SOOC)<br /> C-29%<br /> M-42%<br /> Y-41%</p>

<p>Image #3 (colour corrected) <br /> C-13%<br /> M-21%<br /> Y-29%<br /> Images #4 (SOOC)<br /> C-28%<br /> M-30%<br /> Y-28%</p>

<p>I could have spend a bit more time getting my numbers bang on but I wanted to post a quick example. I'm just getting tired of colour correcting each one of my pictures, surely I can do something to get my pictures a bit closerto being "right" without spending 5-10 minutes colour correcting each photo.</p>

<p>Thanks<br /> Mel</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hi everyone. My question is reagrding my images from my D700. When checking skin tones and doing colour correction on my images, I'm finding my D700 shoots with a lot of magenta. Does anyone else find this with their D700? Is there a way in camera to adjust my magenta levels and lower them even though I shoot in raw? All of my images have a reddish hue to them. I'm coming from a D90 which I found was not prone to having too much magenta.</p>

<p>The colour correcting in CS4 to get my skin tones bang on is very time consuming. I'm also doing my white balancing in LR which I feel I'm being quite accurate with....or so I thought. Maybe my white balance in post processing is the issue?</p>

<p>Thanks,<br>

Melissa</p>

<p>Thanks Chris. I'll bookmark that! I just finished an online course with a fellow from Australia. It was on Raw workflow, and I really like it. Thanks!</p>

<p>Awe, thanks Robert! You guys are truly awesome on this forum. Yes Active D-Lighting was by default set to auto. I turned this to off and my exposure was perfect in "centre weighted" metering mode. All of my settings were identical in both pictures but my image was properly exposed in the picture with Active D off. That makes me feel better.<br>

I know I'm just using the histogram on my camera but with Active D on auto, it was obviously underexposed, although camera said it was perfect.</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

<p>I use manual exposure. Under b6 in my menu I can manually fine tune my exposure accordingly. If I'm finding I am getting consistently over/under exposed images (even though the exposure reading is telling me that I'm correctly exposed) I'm going to "tweak" this to my liking.</p>

<p>Shun, I'm checking out that thread and it's very interesting. So I'm think with 51 points it's a bit excessive. I may try single point AF with either 9 or 21 points and see if that works better for me.</p>

<p> Wow Luke very informative! Like I said I am no expert on everything the D700 has to offer but it sounds like you know what you're talking about. Because my camera was underexposing in centre weighted mode I decided to play around and try out the other metering modes. It appears that it is probably not a malfunction issue. It was a bit frustrating though for me as all of my images were underexposed. Luke what would you recommend as a choice for metering? I mainly do shoots with young children, families etc. Then I guess I will have to compensate my exposure accordingly seems, I get such varying results form the metering modes.<br>

Sorry I have completely forgotten about another annoying issue. I was having MAJOR focusing issues with my D700 on my last shoot. I kept closing down my f stop thinking it was to wide and unable to focus on both of my subjects. My camera would just not focus on my subjects properly. Both subjects were lying on a white blanket in moderate sunlight. I had never had this problem with the D90 and an inability to focus. Sometimes with the D90 if I was shooting wide open I would get one eye in focus and one out of focus. But that was easily fixed. Any suggestions or camera settings to help my D700 focus? It seemed as though the sensor was jumping everywhere and not focusing properly.</p>

<p>I was using my 50mm 1.4, @ 1.8. I was shooting a container of vinegar. Obviously a white container but the part of the label I was focusing on was black.<br>

If it's sunny tomorrow I'll be sure to head outside and check my exposure. Stanley I can see what you mean by a punchier image with the D90. That's it, the d90 seemed punchier but like you said if it's preserving information for post processing that would be the reasoning.<br>

I really thought my transition from d90 to d700 would've been a bit smoother.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thanks Eric. I've checked my bracketing again, and it's not on. I shoot in manual mode and shoot Raw as well. I've taken a look at my raw images in LR from a shoot I just did in "centre weighted" mode and they are underexposed.</p>

<p>So do I just stick with "centre weighted" mode and over expose by 1-2 stops? Or is this a problem because of the variance between modes?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I've recently upgraded from D90 to a D700. I've found quite few posts on where people are finding that their D700's are over exposing by 1 or 2 stops. So for me what is happening is this:</p>

<p>1) My pictures are under exposed by 1 stop when shooting in "centre weighted" metering mode<br>

2) Over exposed by 1 to 2 stops in "spot metering" mode<br>

3) Under exposed by 1 to 2 stops in "3D color matrix" mode</p>

<p>So for all my test shots the pictures are taken of the same subject under the exact same lighting circumstances. All pictures were taken with the same settings, the only variable was the metering of each picture, in which I changed the shutter speed. I took 3 pictures for each metering mode; the first picture was set to "proper" exposure, second was 1 stop over exposed and third was 2 stops over exposed.<br>

What I used to gauge proper exposure was my histograms. I hope this isn't too confusing:) I'm definitely not an expert on the D700 and maybe it is just an over site of mine that using a different metering mode will result in different exposures? I would think not.<br>

I'm just not happy with my D700, and was getting more consistent results with my D90. All of my settings are set to factory default except for my dynamic af area which is set to 51 points. Is there something that I'm missing or do I have a faulty camera? My exposure always seems off . Any insights would be greatly appreciated!</p>

<p>So what I've ended up doing is recalibrating my laptop, and then calibrating using my Spyder3pro. This pretty well took care of the green casts on all of my photos! Thanks to Matt:) I did this earlier today just on a whim but really took my time second time around and made sure there was no green case.<br>

I also used the "native" setting on the SP3 and this helped as well. Thanks so much, and I'm glad I didn't give up. Although I spent the ENTIRE day on this calibration issue it is well worth it!</p>

 

<p>So you mean the display settings that are on my computer are fighting with the calibration. Do you have any idea how I would then get my laptop back to it's default or factory setting? Or how I could manipulate these to my benefit. Who would have thought calibrating would be this tricky? I guess even if these settings were set back to their default it could still be in competition with the calibration. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.</p>

<p>On my laptop display after I calibrated.</p>

<p>Hi Everyone,<br>

So first off I'll start by saying that I've decided to calibrate my laptop using the Spyderpro3 as I didn't have the extra cash for the Eye2display1, which I would have preferred....but anyways. Also I totally get that I may not get the results I would've liked with calibrating my laptop as it is a laptop:) I would like a bit more accuracy though with my colour and figure atleast if I get my monitor to display colours as close as possible to print, I'm happy with that, for now. <br>

So the big problem. I have a green tint to my images and the yellows are too yellow. My blues are more purple which I'm told is very much expected with laptop calibration, and there isn't much I can do about that, but is there ANYTHING I can do about the green and yellow?<br>

Mel</p>