G11 - 'BAD' Pictures & Solutions ... post em here! (PICS)

The average forum visitor here is not necessarily a professional photographer. I'm creating this thread for people to post their questionable G11 images. If anyone cares to share their problems and even solutions, they can post an image in this thread.

Pop into the 'Menu' and select the "Hold" option for images so they will appear on the LCD immediately after the shot has been taken. If the colors are wrong, or the image is out of focus or under/over exposed... you'll get a good look at it before turning the camera off or attempting another picture.

I don't shoot in RAW. The JPEGs from the Pro 1 and the G11 are more than ideal for the majority of publication related applications.

Generally speaking the G11 takes a fine picture.



Cockatoos Fleeing a Perceived Threat

Let's face it... Shots like this one are inevitable. In this case I was photographing a group of Cockatoos when they were startled by something and flew off as I was snapping a picture. I tried to track them in the shot but my selected shutter speed was too slow.
EXIF information not required.

If I was going to take shots of birds in flight, I would have selected the "Motion" setting on the G11. It selects the fastest shutter speed where possible to capture action shots.



Lizard Over Water Click on the image to reveal the second shot (crop).

This picture is also inevitable in its nature. The G11 needs to know what you want to photograph and the automatic focus may let you down when dealing with a complex subject with various target values.
EXIF information not required.

By taking more than one shot, I was able to capture the lizard at the correct focus. I tend to use the center target frame to lock focus....and then re-align the camera to frame the entire shot.



Convention Image Be sure to click on the image to reveal the second shot.

This first image was under exposed. The solution was to take a second shot (shown right) which was taken with the ambient neon lighting in the convention hall, rather than use the flash.
EXIF information not required.



Hotel LCD Television

There's really nothing wrong with this shot. I simply targeted the lamp highlight with the metering (set to 'spot'). I posted this image because people here said they couldn't capture such an picture, even with a DSLR. This is one of the first pictures I took in my first few hours with the G11. Easy enough.
EXIF information not required.



Rena with Bronson (expand image to see both samples)
Problem: Unsuitable and flattering lighting. Solution: Use the flash!

I took this picture of my wife with the Twilight sequel actor (Bronson) at dinner on my second day with the G11. Professional results would have been achieved with an external flash in "Bounce" mode. (where the flash head is swiveled to bounce the light off a wall or the ceiling). A better WB or color sampling would have also improved this shot... as would a lower flash output. This is the peril of using the P-Mode.
EXIF information not required.



Moon at Night (expand to see solution in Crop)

This is an easy solution to a blown-out highlight in the moon's details. I aimed the camera at a street light in "Spot Metering Mode" and then recomposed my shot of the moon. I picked a high ISO... but with a tripod - or even a street lamp to lean against, I could have knocked the noise down even further with a lower ISO.
EXIF information not required.



Rena with actor Seth Green

My Bad. I selected too slow a shutter speed to cut down on noise. I hadn't fully appreciated how soise free this cameras was when I took this image. We were doing some promo shots for another photographer and I took this picturse from a seated position. Note that the wall is sharp and somewhat in focus. I couldn't use Flash due to the photographer's flash sensors) - or I could have selected a faster shutter speed (and a better WB!).
EXIF information not required.

TIP: The Indoor Mode on the G11 is absolutely ideal for the majority of indoor shots with a flash... especially portraits.



Lizard Watching

I'd fallen down a ledge prior to taking this picture and still had the shakes. I was also extending the camera from my body single-handedly with too low (slow) an ISO. Should have set a higher ISO speed in the low light. Exposure was out due to backlighting with the sun (cropped from the image shown). You can see a little lens flare at the top.
EXIF information not required.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



Blurred Shot . Here it is.

This shot had me baffled as to why I managed to take SEVEN identical shots which were subsequently all blurred. No idea why. Any takers? I was resting on a railing and recomposed my focus and shot several times... even after turning the camera on and off between shots.



Blurred Shot . SOFT fcous

IMAGE ABOVE: "Hotel Foyer at Night"
Mode: Program AE
My Colors: OFF
Shutter: 0.3 (other shots = 1/5)
Aperture: f2.8
Metering: Evaluative
Exposure Compensation: -1/3
ISO Speed: 200
Lens: 6.1 - 30.5mm
Zoom: 6.1
Digital Zoom: None
White Balance: 0, 0
Image Stabilizer: On
Flash: Off
AF Mode: Continuous Autofocus

Do you have a problem with your own G11 shots? Do you have an explanation for my own blurred shot? Post em here and let's see what the problem is?

--
Regards,

Marco Nero.
http://www.pbase.com/nero_design/powershot_pro1

I don't have my G11 yet, but will contribute when I can.
--
Paul

But people, some for their own dodgy motives, will still prefer to create threads titled: "G11 can't focus", "G11 too much noise", G11 Lousy Colour".

Then, in a few weeks we'll be getting messages from newbies saying: "I read the G11 can't focus, is too noisy, and has lousy colour."

Sometimes, not always, I do suspect some of these threads are deliberate brand sabotage attempts. Not every user can be this dumb, or as prone to hypberbolic thread titles.

--

“There is only you and your camera. The limitations in your photography are in yourself, for what we see is what we are.” Ernst Haas

http://garyp.zenfolio.com/p518883873/

I would agree. I see tremendous potential in the G11 without even having one yet. I laugh when I consider what the Magnum photographers were capable of doing, including Ernst Haas, when they had no where near the capabilities in their cameras that people have today. They'd have laughed to see all the Murphy-proof options in modern cameras. But it's the same old story isn't it. ....easier to find fault in the equipment rather than adapt to its technological limitations and expand your skills to make the best possible pictures. Hopefully, Marco's thread will bring a few of us together who sincerely want to learn from each others' mistakes and insights.
--
Paul

Here's one I took this evening where the WB is noticably off. This was after dark so the only ambient light was artifical. There was some light coming from the moon, but it is behind and above the subjects.

The issue in this scene is that there a number of different light sources. Florecent on the left, neon scattered about, and halogen from above and behind. This shot was using AUTO WB. I tried a couple other WB settings which didn't improve things much. I also tried using a custom WB which never failed me on the ole G3, but that still didn't yeild natural skin tones for this lighting on the G11. Finally I gave up and powered on the flash.

When you can't use the light the scene provides, might as well bring your own. As expected the flash made for perfect WB for the subjects, but the street in the background was almost completely gone. I would have prefered to use slow sync, but the flash button didn't seem to do anything. I later found that it seems to be disabled when using an external flash. Slow sync is still available, but its a few button presses via MENU/Flash Control/Slow sync.

I was not shooting in RAW as advised earlier in this thread. However, I believe this would have been a good case to have the RAW image so I could try differnt WB without forcing the impatient subjects to "hold on for one more" while I change the WB setting.

This is the original, no PP, only resized for viewing here. Is there anything else I could have done?



--
Greg

Greg C. said:

This is the original, no PP, only resized for viewing here. Is there anything else I could have done?

Click to expand...

Greg C. said:

Click to expand...

Hi Greg. Just my thoughts here.

Your photograph shows that you were holding the camera steady as the background is quite stable. I can even read the sidewalk sign on the right. Some of the clothing on the subjects (including the string around the Lightsticks) is sharp - and yet the faces are a little blurred. The ONLY way to avoid this is to have a flash involved and that will unfortunately knock out your light in the background or risk a blurred subject if the fill-flash technique is used. I don't think RAW would have made any difference for you at all.

FOCUS

The camera appears to have focussed on the background so I'm assuming you have turned OFF the Face Detection feature. This feature is usually switched to the "on" position at the time of purchase by default. It can be accessed via the menu. I tend to aim at the ground and then lock the focus before recomposing the shot. You can also focus on the chests of your subject before recomposing.

FLASH

Using the flash in a shot like this would have meant you'd lose much of the background light unless you warn your subjects to remain still just after the flash and use the Night Mode for the "Fill Flash Effect".

WB

The downside of accuracy with the WB is that there's little you can do when the lightsource is varied. Something I would have done in your shot would be to aim at the white on the costumes and 'resample' to correctly determine the WB.

Also, when anyone else stops in the same position to be photographed, the new WB will usually be fine for them as well.

Not much you can do now. But the next time you are presented with a similar subject on a night like Halloween or at an outdoor evening event, you may wish to try using the night settings or party settings for indoor use.

Something I often do is take a snapshot just as people are arranging themselves for the photograph and I explain that "I'm just testing the camera settings". If there's any obvious problems with the preview image, I can address them quickly before taking the photograph that I'm after. Perhaps others have a similar suggestion for similar photographic situations?

All the best,

--

Marco Nero.
http://www.pbase.com/nero_design/powershot_pro1

Hi again Greg,

I forgot to mention that I'll often pull a white paper receipt from my pocket or something similar that is white. I then aim the camera at the paper to force it to acknowledge the correct WB for the scene I am shooting. You can use this trick with closeups, video or just about anything else... including Flash.

--
Regards,

Marco Nero.
http://www.pbase.com/nero_design/powershot_pro1

You mentioned the lights behind you were halogen.

I wonder though if they might have been sodium lighting. Sodium lighting has such a restricted wavelength that there's little any camera can do to push up the colours that are not there. Even Vincent Laforets latest video on the EOS 7D, is predominantly orange in the street lighting.

Low pressure sodium vapour street lights used in many countries only produce light at two wavelengths, both of which are orange-yellow. High pressure sodium lights, more often used in town, produce other wavelengths that would allow colour recognition, but only in limited quantity.

Some fluorescents have the same problem. There are just plain gaps in their frequency. And digital cameras can balance what's there, but when a colour isn't, there's not much you can do. And it isn't really photographer error either.

--

“There is only you and your camera. The limitations in your photography are in yourself, for what we see is what we are.” Ernst Haas

http://garyp.zenfolio.com/p518883873/

Brilliant post, thanks for all the info so far

Most people blame the camera for their own lack of photographic knowledge and ability.
--
Mac

Hello everybody,
I also own a G11 since several days and I am in the "learning phase".
I also own an OLY E520 wich has an image stabilizer.
Just one tip for the blurred photos.

When you use a tripod or anything that avoid moving your APN, disable the image stabilizer.
Hopping it will work.

I am pretty happy with the G11 but I would appreciate to have the capability to shut off the noise reduction and I would also appreciate to have better quality JPEGs.
Best regards.

(pls excuse my typing just a few words. sitting here without use of left hand and arm temporarily.)

Tired of reading about unsuccessful captures with blame going to equipment.

An idea about your blurred image: vibration in railing. Too much motion all around to believe that railing was completely vibration free. Could have used higher ISO and handheld.
--
Olga

Excellent post. Most of your shots you have explained why they didn't turn out the way that you might have expected. Too slow of a shutter speed causing blur because the subject was moving or camera movement ect. Fill flash in poor lighted areas. IS works very good on a lot of subjects but sometimes you need to use a tripod to keep camera movement to a minimum for instance shooting a macro or a moon shot. Your last shot was a tough one to capture. Low light, several reflections from the lights ect. Pehaps a higher ISO of 400-800 would have helped with the lighting and eliminiated the blur by a higher shutter speed. It pays to experament some as a camera meter and auto focus system can be fooled by different lighting situations. A camera can do amazing things but the photographer controls the final outcome of the image. Reading good books on photography can be a good guide but in the end it's experiance that one learns by. This should be a most interesting post. Ansonn

Marco and Gary,

Thanks for the replies, excellent info. Additional comments below.

Marco Nero said:

Hi Greg. Just my thoughts here. I don't think RAW would have made any difference for you at all.

Click to expand...

I was thinking about using the RAW image to try out differnt WB settings rather than having to take multiple shots changing the WB setting between shots. My subjects aren't very tolerant of the photographer fiddling with the camera settings.

GaryJP said:

FOCUS

The camera appears to have focussed on the background so I'm assuming you have turned OFF the Face Detection feature.

Click to expand...

Face detection was on. Not sure what happened with the focus. I thought the blur was due to the shutter speed of 1/15. IS works great as long as your subject doesn't move

GaryJP said:

Something I often do is take a snapshot just as people are arranging themselves for the photograph and I explain that "I'm just testing the camera settings".

Click to expand...

Good tip.

GaryJP said:

I forgot to mention that I'll often pull a white paper receipt from my pocket or something similar that is white.

Click to expand...

Another good tip! I usually have a small white card that attaches to the flash when bouncing. This doubles as a white card for setting custom white balance when the lighting isn't working with any of the WB settings. This technique was used for this scene (not this pic but others in the series) and it didn't help. Gary explains why.

GaryJP said:

But the next time you are presented with a similar subject on a night like Halloween or at an outdoor evening event, you may wish to try using the night settings or party settings for indoor use.

Click to expand...

I've never been confortable with the "scene modes". The manual doesn't describe (in detail) how each camara setting is biased for each mode. Though the correct scene mode could possibly yield better results than I can get with manual settings (today), I'd rather learn how to use all the settings. However the scene modes do have the advantage of letting the photographer quickly jump between shooting modes. Regardless, I'd feel much better if I knew exactly what they doing to the camera settings. It might worth a more detailed discussion about "scene modes"; how they bias the camera setting and when they are preferable to manual settings.

GaryJP said:

You mentioned the lights behind you were halogen. I wonder though if they might have been sodium lighting.

Click to expand...

Gary, you are absolutely correct, my mistake. I forgot the street lights are usually sodium. I'm not sure what type they were, but definely not halogen. That would explain why setting a custom white balance using a sample from the scene didn't work.

--
Greg

Your thread is a breath of fresh air . . . thanks for spending the time and energy!

Onwards and upwards!
--
Digart

--
Digart

While I don't have the photo online to show, I recently had a few portrait shots where the people were very blown out. Only after a few minutes and playing with settings, did I remember that the night before I had set the Flash EC Comp to +2. Oops.
--Set it back to Zero, and my portraits were perfect.

Great post, and as to your last blurry, indoor images, all I can suggest is that sometimes, at least in my experience with my G9, the camera just has a really hard time acquiring accurate focus in darkly lit, indoor scenes like the one you've shown here. I noticed that you had your flash turned off. Maybe if you had used the flash, the flash assist would have helped your G11 acquire proper focus on such a difficult indoor scene, especially since you were so high up, and far away from any one single object within the "mall" environment that you were shooting.

B

Since you mention Sodium lighting and white balance. I was just thinking about the various white balance settings. With halogen lighting gaining popularity, especially the small low voltage halogen lights used in many retail locations, and some homes. What are the chances of the addition of a Halogen white balance setting ever coming into play? Not long ago flourescent lights were flourescent lights, now there are high output flourescent lights, also known as daylights.

Is it something that could be added to firmware, just as correction in WB are made via firmware?

Also, asie from "Auto WB" as this photo has shown us that too often there are multiple lighting sources. What are chances that instead of picking only one WB. That a user may tell the camera which light sources are visible in the image. That you click on and off the WB choices in the function menu.

Just some various thoughts about what future of WB may hold for us.
Maybe in the G17?

GaryJP said:

You mentioned the lights behind you were halogen.

I wonder though if they might have been sodium lighting. Sodium lighting has such a restricted wavelength that there's little any camera can do to push up the colours that are not there. Even Vincent Laforets latest video on the EOS 7D, is predominantly orange in the street lighting.

Low pressure sodium vapour street lights used in many countries only produce light at two wavelengths, both of which are orange-yellow. High pressure sodium lights, more often used in town, produce other wavelengths that would allow colour recognition, but only in limited quantity.

Some fluorescents have the same problem. There are just plain gaps in their frequency. And digital cameras can balance what's there, but when a colour isn't, there's not much you can do. And it isn't really photographer error either.

--

“There is only you and your camera. The limitations in your photography are in yourself, for what we see is what we are.” Ernst Haas

http://garyp.zenfolio.com/p518883873/

Click to expand...

If we can apply white balance prior to the shot, and I-Contrast before/after, it would be nice if in the touch-up menu we could apply a white balance adjustment. Do it in-camera,