400D - help with accurately capturing color

My tricky situation: I need to accurately capture colors of my projects (crafts, mainly), but because I have a daytime job, I resort to photographing my projects late at night, under artificial light in my apartment. My subjects are fabrics and garments and such, of all different colors.

In order to capture true color, I have tweaked the following options of my 400D (or combinations of these options), but I'm still not capturing colors as accurately as I'd like. Please, if you have any tips, share them with me. Thank you in advance!

1. exposure compensation - lightens and darkens, obviously, but I don't find it terribly helpful in accurately capturing true color.

2. white balance presets - tungsten and fluorescent settings come out slightly cool/blue for me.
3. custom white balance by photographing a white card - a little too blue.

4. meter on an 18% gray card, lock exposure, then photograph subject - too warm/red.

5. post processing - I've been doing a whole lot of that. Way more than I used to with my point-n-shoot (puzzling).

6. Oh! of course, photographing from all different angles, therefore changing the way the light hits the object.

TIA.

What color space are your images in? Is your monitor calibrated? The use of an 18% grey card as white balance should be ideal with custom WB.

The major pain in digital display of images is color calibration, especially on other peoples' monitors.

I'm in sRGB. This is one option I haven't toggled yet - should I give it a try?

Getting the color right on everyone's monitor is impossible (and the bane of my existence), but I want something close. I check everything on two monitors, which differ slightly from each other and (I believe) cover a good 80-90% of what other people's monitors are set to.

My situation right now is that the color is significantly different. I can see it when I review the image on the camera's LCD, and/or download it, and I can even tell the issue (too blue, too red, etc.).

Some colors are notoriously difficult to capture accurately (bright red, for example), but I'm having issues even with more tame colors....

Are you shooting RAW? This gives you incredible latitude for color adjustments with most RAW importers. If not, I'd try that next.

Unless you have a calibrated monitor and plan on printing, using sRGB is probably best, as that is the rough color space of most monitors.

I understand. I'll give RAW a try.

I was hoping to minimize post-processing as far as color is concerned, I end up spending so much time trying to get it just right , whereas if the camera captures color close enough I probably wouldn't even bother. But I guess if I want it done right...

1: try using the gray card for your custom white balance (WB). If you want to go all-out, buy something like the WhiBal reference cards.

2: use the Faithful picture style. This picture style is specifically intended to render colors accurately if you have the correct WB.

3: look into WB Shift if you need to tweak the WB setting. Most people don't know it's there, but it's one of the most useful adjustments in the camera for the JPEG shooter. (Pages 88-89 of the XTi/400D manual.)

4: look into the Color Tone adjustment if you need to tweak non-gray colors. It changes the green/red or green/magenta balance depending on the particular color; blues, purples, and grays/whites are not affected. Shifting it right increases the green, left decreases the green. (Page 79 of the XTi/400D manual).

5: consider using the Adobe RGB colorspace. Not that there's anything magical about the colorspace itself, but rather that Canon cose to render colors differently between sRGB and Adobe. The sRGB color rendering is chosen to give more "pop", with noticeably brighter blues, somewhat brighter greens, and slightly deeper reds, while Adobe rendering is more accurate. However, you'll need to convert your pictures to sRGB before you post them on the Web.

6: be sure that you're using a calibrated monitor. If your monitor isn't calibrated, the colors that you see may not be the colors that are actually in the picture.

7: consider going to a Raw workflow. It's more complicated initially, but it will give you more ability to adjust. Finding a Raw converter with good color rendition is a challenge in itself, though. Capture One has a good reputation along with the EtCetera color profiles, but unfortunately EtCetera has not yet produced a profile for the XTi/400D. You might consider shooting Raw+JPEG and working with the JPEG while you experiment with trying to get a good Raw workflow going.

You might or might not find anything interesting in the color chart in Phil's review of the XTi/400D:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/page20.asp

You may also want to consider a GretagMacbeth Color checker. They were a Swiss company, but have just been bought out by a US company (X-rite)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=465287&is=REG&addedTroughType=search

I find a color checker card invaluable when photographing art work. It give me a standard reference point for several colors. No mater what your color space, it is rarely possible to get total acuracy across the entire gamut.

Brian A.

I'd highly recommend that you start shooting in RAW, for starters. Here's what I do for better color reproduction:

Shoot a gray card, then proceed with desired shots. Open up the RAWs in Adobe Bridge, open the gray card shot in Adobe Camera RAW, and use the dropper tool to set the proper white balance. Make any further adjustments as needed (exposure, contrast, etc) and then close the image. Shift-select the remaining shots in from the shoot (in Adobe Bridge) and right click: Previous Conversion. This applies the custom white balance from the gray card shot to the whole series. Takes all of ten seconds to do, and works perfectky (assuming the lighting was unchanged for the entire shoot) ...

I'd highly recommend doing this on a calibrated monitor, BTW - calibrating by hand (eye?) is better than nothing, but it will not be accurate compared to the 'real' thing ...

Ok... few people here are made out of money and so need to pick and chose what they buy carefully... but the truth is.... starting off on the right foot just makes life easier and, in the long run, less expensive.

Go buy some photo lighting, and build yourself some neutral colored backdrops while you are at it (i.e., avoid colored reflected light.) Even just one light and a reflector...

Stop using your household incadescent and fluorescent lights! Fabrics in particular can just look plain cr*ppy under artificial lights.

-gt

You will be amazed how easy it will be to get the correct color balance.

You will spend less time adjusting color temp in raw than messing with jpegs after-the-fact.

digirum said:

My tricky situation: I need to accurately capture colors of my
projects (crafts, mainly), but because I have a daytime job, I
resort to photographing my projects late at night, under artificial
light in my apartment. My subjects are fabrics and garments and
such, of all different colors.

In order to capture true color, I have tweaked the following
options of my 400D (or combinations of these options), but I'm
still not capturing colors as accurately as I'd like. Please, if
you have any tips, share them with me. Thank you in advance!

1. exposure compensation - lightens and darkens, obviously, but I
don't find it terribly helpful in accurately capturing true color.
2. white balance presets - tungsten and fluorescent settings come
out slightly cool/blue for me.
3. custom white balance by photographing a white card - a little
too blue.
4. meter on an 18% gray card, lock exposure, then photograph
subject - too warm/red.
5. post processing - I've been doing a whole lot of that. Way
more than I used to with my point-n-shoot (puzzling).
6. Oh! of course, photographing from all different angles,
therefore changing the way the light hits the object.

TIA.

Click to expand...

--
Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/jon_b

Thanks everyone for your suggestions!

I'm definitely going to give RAW a try. It's new to me, but my camera isn't just an expensive toy to put on a shelf, I want to utilize it to its maximum capabilities.

Some of your other suggestions are just a matter of changing a setting or two, so I will definitely give them a go - faithful picture style and Adobe RGB. Tweaking the WB and Color Tone may be a bit more tricky (for me).

As for getting a decent studio light and neutral backdrops - I'm halfway there. I already use neutral backdrops. Studio lighting will be a priority when I have a bit more space (I live in a tiny apartment). In the meantime, I really, really want to learn proper color capture and correction - sometimes I have to take pictures elsewhere - in a coffee shop if that's where I'm doing my work, at a friend's place if that's where I'm spending my weekend. Light conditions will change, and I want to be able to adapt, capture color accurately no matter what. (I know that's a lot to ask )

The Color Cards are not that expensive and allow you to quickly check colors shifts for any work flow. Put on in one or more frames and include with the fabric sample as you shoot. Make a few notes as you go and soon you will have a good feel for the color affects of locations and lighting changes. Just as makeup tables have selectable color lights for checking how you look, your fabrics will appear to shift colors. The cards come with different numbers of color squares and white/black/grey squares. After you get used to using the color samplers in Adobe with the cards your fingers can fly using the scripts you save as you build your library of corrections for common locations. Automate every common function. Get spoiled.

Paul Stricklin
--
Club, Event Photographer to pay for the equipment
Nature, Landscape for the joy of life

LPS

A follow on to my previous msg.

3 readily availble color cards:

JOBO Gray and Color Test Chart - 3 primary color/3 secondary &white to black in 6 steps

GregtagMacbeth Color Checker- 18 colors + white to black in 6 steps ( there is also a much larger chart made)

Kodak Color Separation Guide and Gray Scale (small) 1 19 step Gray Scale +1 Color scale 3 pri/3 sec colors in 2 shades +White/black + 3 color step
This one does well on a scanner.

Paul Stricklin

--
Club, Event Photographer to pay for the equipment
Nature, Landscape for the joy of life

LPS

Thanks for the latest batch of suggestions.

Believe it or not, I'm finally getting very close to true color in craptastic light conditions, before processing!

This is what I've done:

• tungsten preset
• center-weighed average metering
• +1/3 exposure
• +G3 in WB shift

• and a little PP thrown in (much less than before)

I still need to master adjusting RAW images, as well as using some of the color cards you suggested as standards. I don't yet know how to work with the included software/Photoshop/etc. to do that, something to learn. But at least while I learn, I can keep producing photos and trying different things without feeling like it's totally** off.

Just in case that last paragraph didn't totally give away my newbie status, I should mention something about the silver vs. black camera bodies and upgrading lenses, right? Hehe...

digirum said:

Just in case that last paragraph didn't totally give away my newbie
status, I should mention something about the silver vs. black
camera bodies and upgrading lenses, right? Hehe...

Click to expand...

Just be thankful that you are not shooting film. You can experiment with hundreds of shots with no developing and printing costs; and exif data built in to the image data, so you don't have to constantly keep notes of shot parameters.

Brian A.

Eric Chan, a former 300D user and long time visitor of this forum (in the meantime he upgraded his cameras), wrote a very good instruction about calibrating the RAW workflow. I followed his advice and it was a huge improvement in color accuracy. Of course you also have to calibrate the monitor. Here's the link to Eric's website with the excellent instruction:
http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/acr/

If you calibrate your system you have some work to do in the beginning. But once it's done your entire workflow will be very easy and accurate. From importing the RAW to the print: everything looks the same then.
Many thanks to Eric for his good work! It saved me time and money.

Greetings
Reto
--
My Webgallery: http://1to1-success.com/
Check out my own music: http://music.1to1-success.com/
All my songs for free.

Indeed, this was an extremely helpful tutorial!

However, the only software I have at my disposal is Adobe Photoshop and the stuff that came with the camera. Do you think I can get anywhere with those, using one of these GretagMacbeth ColorChecker Charts? If so, is there a tutorial anywhere, or a quick explanation of how to go about it?

I apologize for being so new at this... we all start somewhere, right? At least I'm not complaining about underexposure, hehe .

digirum said:

Indeed, this was an extremely helpful tutorial!

However, the only software I have at my disposal is Adobe Photoshop
and the stuff that came with the camera. Do you think I can get
anywhere with those, using one of these GretagMacbeth ColorChecker
Charts? If so, is there a tutorial anywhere, or a quick
explanation of how to go about it?

I apologize for being so new at this... we all start somewhere,
right? At least I'm not complaining about underexposure, hehe .

Click to expand...

No need to apologize at all. Asking good questions is always the right thing to do!

It depends on which version of Photoshop you have. If you have an older version check out which RAW converter you can install. The plugin can be downloaded for free at the Adobe website. Here's the article that Eric also mentioned:
http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/21351-1.html

It deals with the RAW converter plugin version 2. Erics article refers to version 3 and higher. On thing could be a problem: older versions of the RAW converter may not support the 400D. Please check it out at the Adobe Website:
http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/product.jsp?product=39&platform=Windows

Hope this helps.

--
My Webgallery: http://1to1-success.com/
Check out my own music: http://music.1to1-success.com/
All my songs for free.

Ah! I didn't realize that the RAW plug-in was part of PS! Well, here on my PC I have PS 7.0.0.0. I know... as old as the Earth itself. The RAW plug-in for that is 1.0, and I doubt it will work with 400D.

I don't remember what PS version is on my Mac (at home)... newer than 7.0, but definitely not CS. I'm starting to feel a bit discouraged about the plug-in and my ability to do proper color correction...

digirum said:

Ah! I didn't realize that the RAW plug-in was part of PS! Well,
here on my PC I have PS 7.0.0.0. I know... as old as the Earth
itself. The RAW plug-in for that is 1.0, and I doubt it will work
with 400D.

I don't remember what PS version is on my Mac (at home)... newer
than 7.0, but definitely not CS. I'm starting to feel a bit
discouraged about the plug-in and my ability to do proper color
correction...

Click to expand...

Well, if you're serious about your photos you should consider to upgrade to CS2. This programme is outstanding and really helps to get the best out of your pictures...

Wish you a lot of pleasure whichever way you choose to go.
--
My Webgallery: http://1to1-success.com/
Check out my own music: http://music.1to1-success.com/
All my songs for free.