Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: camera-monitor-photoprinter=calibration ?

  1. #21

    Default

    Hi Zombiez, Flare, and all Gurus,

    I afraid those images you saw from my gallery site are degraded due to software compression or resizing. I just created a new album which store a few original/untouch pictures for you guys to judge. I also list out the picture exposure details there.

    url: http://sunnycp5700.instantlogic.com/...7B3F%7d&Page=1

    Please have a look again and looking forward your valuable advises.

    Cheers!
    ST.

    Quote Originally Posted by zombiez
    Your pictures are underexposed. Use the exposure compensation if the under exposure is consistant. Not sure if CP5700 always under expose. Dim light should not cause under exposure unless you are doing manual.
    Canon 40D|17-55 f/2.8 IS|100 f/2.8 Macro|135 f/2L|300 f/4L IS|430ex|BG-E2

  2. #22

    Default

    Oh ya.. they are full size at 2560x1920, fine compression, about 1.6MB each.

    Thanks again.
    ST.
    Canon 40D|17-55 f/2.8 IS|100 f/2.8 Macro|135 f/2L|300 f/4L IS|430ex|BG-E2

  3. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ST_sg
    Hi Zombiez, Flare, and all Gurus,

    I afraid those images you saw from my gallery site are degraded due to software compression or resizing. I just created a new album which store a few original/untouch pictures for you guys to judge. I also list out the picture exposure details there.

    url: http://sunnycp5700.instantlogic.com/...7B3F%7d&Page=1

    Please have a look again and looking forward your valuable advises.

    Cheers!
    ST.
    Hi ST,

    They are under exposed.

  4. #24

    Default

    Thanks Zombiez, guess I need an external flash
    Canon 40D|17-55 f/2.8 IS|100 f/2.8 Macro|135 f/2L|300 f/4L IS|430ex|BG-E2

  5. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ST_sg
    Thanks Zombiez, guess I need an external flash
    I don't think it is due to lack of external flash. Try to take the same picture with different exposure compensation and see the effect.

  6. #26

    Default

    BTW... Not guru.

  7. #27

    Default

    Ok. Will try out with the Bracketing exposure

    Cheers!
    ST.

    Quote Originally Posted by zombiez
    I don't think it is due to lack of external flash. Try to take the same picture with different exposure compensation and see the effect.
    Canon 40D|17-55 f/2.8 IS|100 f/2.8 Macro|135 f/2L|300 f/4L IS|430ex|BG-E2

  8. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ST_sg
    Hi Zombiez, Flare, and all Gurus,

    I afraid those images you saw from my gallery site are degraded due to software compression or resizing. I just created a new album which store a few original/untouch pictures for you guys to judge. I also list out the picture exposure details there.

    url: http://sunnycp5700.instantlogic.com/...7B3F%7d&Page=1

    Please have a look again and looking forward your valuable advises.

    Cheers!
    ST.
    Hi, i do feel that your "subject" if slightly under expose. (Do pardon me as i am viewing from an uncalibrated laptop as present and exact brightness might be a bit off on my screen in the first place.)

    I believe that the underexposure problems can be look at from several view points.
    1. From picture 0023, 70, 59, we can see a high contrast scene being shot.
    in 0023, check out the reflective cupboard and the subj white shirt, it have already been blown out of details. adding more flash power would, true brighten up your subject skintones(black which is in big contrast to the white shirt) but would render the shirt out of detail. This is not a case of insufficeint flash power but the camera choice of not firing more to avoid overexposure.
    in 0070, i would assume your subj would be the center flower which is not lited up by the window light, hoever take a look at the open window and the petal in the foreground that is under the window light. It presents a high contrast scene to the camera: if the center flower is to be correctly expose, the petal in the foreground(& maybe the petals to the right) would be overexpose. The camera did the best to provide for a "balance" exposure for the scene you present.
    in 0059, same thing, some areas are undershade some are lited by the cloudy sun. what is your subject of interest here?
    IMHO, in a picture you need a subject of interest. and it is usually the norm to have the subject of interest to be of the correct "exposure". In a scene of high contrast, the camera would not know what is your subject, and could onli do it best to provide for a balance exposure in all areas, which might result in an "underexposure" for your subj if it is in the darkerzones. A way to avoid this can would be to spot meter and do a focus lock on your subj (correction have to be made for inaccuracy on reflective meters used in cameras).
    2.Due to limit latitude range of digital cameras, off camera pictures of certain models(i am not sure of 5700) are made to be slightly underexpose. As details is lost once it overblown wheras if slightly underexposed it still can be salvage. A little curves or auto level helps in this case.
    3.If all else fails and the photo is still underexpose. it might be due to certain inaccuracy of the in-built meter. This can be compensated by using the exposure compensatsation. With regards to indoor and flash, the 5700 also have the ability to adjust for flash power adjustments.


    Ok, i think i have typed too much. Due to typing in a rush, i hope I have not put across my points too confuing. btw, having the picture correctly expose does not mean that the printer would print it out in the same colour and brightness, but that is another story altgether.


    hope it helps, cheers.

  9. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jus_a_Nick
    Hi, i do feel that your "subject" if slightly under expose. (Do pardon me as i am viewing from an uncalibrated laptop as present and exact brightness might be a bit off on my screen in the first place.)

    I believe that the underexposure problems can be look at from several view points.
    1. From picture 0023, 70, 59, we can see a high contrast scene being shot.
    in 0023, check out the reflective cupboard and the subj white shirt, it have already been blown out of details. adding more flash power would, true brighten up your subject skintones(black which is in big contrast to the white shirt) but would render the shirt out of detail. This is not a case of insufficeint flash power but the camera choice of not firing more to avoid overexposure.
    in 0070, i would assume your subj would be the center flower which is not lited up by the window light, hoever take a look at the open window and the petal in the foreground that is under the window light. It presents a high contrast scene to the camera: if the center flower is to be correctly expose, the petal in the foreground(& maybe the petals to the right) would be overexpose. The camera did the best to provide for a "balance" exposure for the scene you present.
    in 0059, same thing, some areas are undershade some are lited by the cloudy sun. what is your subject of interest here?
    IMHO, in a picture you need a subject of interest. and it is usually the norm to have the subject of interest to be of the correct "exposure". In a scene of high contrast, the camera would not know what is your subject, and could onli do it best to provide for a balance exposure in all areas, which might result in an "underexposure" for your subj if it is in the darkerzones. A way to avoid this can would be to spot meter and do a focus lock on your subj (correction have to be made for inaccuracy on reflective meters used in cameras).
    2.Due to limit latitude range of digital cameras, off camera pictures of certain models(i am not sure of 5700) are made to be slightly underexpose. As details is lost once it overblown wheras if slightly underexposed it still can be salvage. A little curves or auto level helps in this case.
    3.If all else fails and the photo is still underexpose. it might be due to certain inaccuracy of the in-built meter. This can be compensated by using the exposure compensatsation. With regards to indoor and flash, the 5700 also have the ability to adjust for flash power adjustments.


    Ok, i think i have typed too much. Due to typing in a rush, i hope I have not put across my points too confuing. btw, having the picture correctly expose does not mean that the printer would print it out in the same colour and brightness, but that is another story altgether.


    hope it helps, cheers.
    All that may be true but you should learn to control your camera and not let the camera control you. Make it known that you are the boss. Learn how it behaves and then control it. Sometimes it is ok to blow out the background (which is too bright) to get some detail from your main object.

  10. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zombiez
    All that may be true but you should learn to control your camera and not let the camera control you. Make it known that you are the boss. Learn how it behaves and then control it. Sometimes it is ok to blow out the background (which is too bright) to get some detail from your main object.
    That is why you need to know what type of metering to use and where to do the exposure lock or when to use the exposure compensation when necessary as mention in my previous post. =)

    cheers.
    Last edited by Jus_a_Nick; 31st March 2004 at 11:16 PM.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •