G3 colors off in bright sunlight

It's not the eyes, I think it's the color temperature setting on the monitor. I have my set to 6500K (which is what the sRGB color profile specifies), which will display the picture with a much warmer tone than the ones with 9300K (which is the default for the PC). If your monitor let you choose the color temp, set it to different values and you can see the different effects on the pictures.
Adrian
Ab
So to illustrate my point, I turn the saturation on green down -20
using photoshop. And here is the result:



What do you think? Is it better? or is it just me and April? Thanks!
Hi Everybody

I take this picture on a sunny and very clear day, I think there is
no problem at all.



A.v.Polanen
http://www.van-polanen.com/foto
 
For anyone that gets very saturated green from a photo lab.

I have one final sugguestion:

The lab might be doing the color corrections once too many (once on hte camera, and once by the lab). Tell the lab tech to print without any corrections or adjustments, and ignore any color profile tag on the pictures.
 
I apologise for dragging the thread out, but I woulod very much like to know the outcome of April's problems.

I too have been looking at greens, and was just looking out of the window at the grass in the garden, comparing it with the 'dog' photo. The grass here, in SW UK, in sunlight, at 11:40, has just that degree of yellow cast that the first uncorrected photo has (probably a touch more actually). The problem is that it is impossible to tell the colour accuracy, without being there when a photo is taken, and even then our memory idea of what "green" looked like might differ from the actuality at the time.

For some time I've been looking at the Cannon forum, as I was thinking of moving to a G3/G5 sometime soon. I like the feel of the camera, and the way the controls are placed. But this thread brought me up short. In the UK we don't have the same generous returns policy, so buying any camera that is new to you is somewhat of a risk, even with all the research.
 
For some time I've been looking at the Cannon forum, as I was
thinking of moving to a G3/G5 sometime soon. I like the feel of the
camera, and the way the controls are placed. But this thread
brought me up short. In the UK we don't have the same generous
returns policy, so buying any camera that is new to you is somewhat
of a risk, even with all the research.
Buy the G3. It is an excellent camera. Don't be put off by this "green" discussion. Canon green is fine IMO. It is certainly representative of the green we see a lot of here in Australia where we have intensely bright outdoor light. It is also pretty accurate showing green in the shade. Green in sunlight trends to yellow, quite naturally. This whole discussion has been much ado about little. If April is not happy with the green she either has a defective camera (unlikely) or there is a production problem at the printers.
 
Hi again guys and gals. I really really appreciate your advice and your interest in my discussion. Well, Sunday I took the camera back to CC and got a complete refund. Do I know what to do now? NO!! Sheesh, I'm more confused. I'll tell you why.

I had nearly talked myself into getting an slr and even went to Wolf Camera and checked them out, with money in hand. However, there is a little part of me that just does not want to go this route. I don't want a bulky slr, I still want a digital camera.

Here is my delimma. I know for a fact that the slr will give me great pictures. But I got to thinking about all the advice you guys gave me and all of the discussion of self-editing my photos.(yes, I listened to you) If I buy a film camera, although the colors might be more accurate, I still am going to lose a lot more of my pictures for other reasons. I can't preview them and I have to leave them in the hands of a lab technician for tweaking. I was thinking about all the pictures I deleted from my digital because my daughter had her eyes closed or a weird expression on her face. Well, in film pictures, those will get developed and then be wasted. If a picture would have been good otherwise, but I accidentally got it a little underexposed or captured a background I didn't want, that will also be a throw away because I can't manipulate it on a computer.

I was planning on buying the photo editing software anyway and if I buy a compact flash reader for my computer, it wouldn't be that difficult or annoying to upload the pictures to my computer. The initial process of learning how to use the software and calibrating my monitor might take a while, but once I have a little practice, it shouldn't be a problem or take that long. Besides, I would probably want to upload all good pictures to my computer anyway, for putting backup copies on a disk.

In short, I miss the heck out of the G3. I've been looking and relooking at all the pictures. Yeah, the color green is horrible in sunlight and there is no doubt that I would have to manipulate it in Photoshop, but do all the other attributes of the camera outweigh that one flaw? I'm not sure yet but I can tell you there are a lot of things about the camera I love and miss. I love the size, the feel, the flip out lcd monitor, the crispness and clarity of the pictures, the bright onboard flash, the controls, the battery life, the zoom and heck, I already bought this really cool camera case that I can't return. LOL.

This thread was in no way meant to deter potential camera buyers from buying the G3. I know that for a lot of you, the benefits of the camera far outweight the camera's bad points and therefor it isn't an issue. With any camera you are going to be giving up something. However, I also believe that this is a real problem and should at least be mentioned for people that want unedited pictures from the camera. When I researched this camera and I looked at all the great reviews on color, I never thought that there are some people that never even see the pictures on print, but only on a monitor. And there are a lot of you that never see a picture that hasn't been through a good tweaking in Photoshop. So, just how many opinions and reviews are out there for unprocessed pictures, straight out of the camera? Not many. I was wondering, when Phil does his reviews and when you see the reviews at Imaging-Resource, do they actually print out the unprocessed pictures or do they only look on a monitor? Just a question, because I really have no idea and I never thought to ask. There can be a big difference between what is on a monitor and what is printed and of course, it also depends on where you get it printed.

The only time that I had problems with the color was in bright sunlight with the color green. Inside pictures looked great and even outdoor pictures in the shade were acceptable. It doesn't have to be completely accurate to be acceptable to me. Just not outrageously bright and yellowish.

I was looking through some digital picture sample prints at Wal-Mart. They don't carry Canon but several other brands and then put them side by side for comparison. The objects in the picture were a multi-colored throw blanket and a green pillow. I was absolutely shocked at the differences in color between the different cameras. It was so different that the green of the pillow ranged from a light pea green to a darker bluish green. I never saw the pillow in person, so I have no which camera was more accurate with the color. I think that camera manufacturers need to worry less about which color that looks the best and just worry about making a camera with the most accurate color.

I'm going to call CC today and see if the price of the camera has dropped. When I bought it the first time it was still almost regular price but I know that they are going on clearance. I may try another one if I can still get the 14 day return policy. I regret not listening to you guys and spending a little more time with the camera and I regret not posting you samples for more advice. If I go with another G3, I promise to upload you all some samples and then await your sound advice. It has its flaws but I believe it is still one of the best digital cameras out there. I'm just going to think long and hard about why I need a camera and what functions are more important to me. Everyone is different and only you can determine what is best.
 
April,

Like others, I am very interested to hear your progress. It is just a pitty you weren't able to upload the photos so that 'the experts' (most people here other than me) could see the problem and give you their thoughts.

Good luck - and let us know how you get on.

(I must admit you made me pause for thought.)
 
Hi April,

Sorry this has become such an ordeal. All these crazy, complicated gizmos have made the buying experience exciting, yet very intimidating and frustrating. My mom put off getting a cell phone for a long time because of this. I must admit I get somewhat freaked out too at some of the experience.

From what I hear and my personal experience in the S.F. Bay Area, that camera is getting hard to find at CC. You might be able to buy yours back from the place you returned it to. Regular camera shops, even chains like Wolf, have been pretty inflexible with their $599 price, though that was as of a week ago. Another option might be Costco, if you are a member. The price is $599, but it comes with a spare battery and case (which I know you don't need). Return policy is 30 days at any warehouse store. http://www.costco.com/frameset.asp?trg=subcat%2Easp&catid=79&subid=83&hierid=3264&log=&NavTop=

Another option might be to look at less full-featured digitals that aren't such an investment, keeping a film camera for shots that might not turn out well with a digicam. That way you have a digital camera with all its advantages, without the expectations of a larger priced camera. Then, wait a year or so and see what digital has to offer in a little bit better camera.

Rob
 
My G3 tends to oversaturate the greens, too. I'm really surprised by how radioactive it looks under certain conditions. Sometimes it errs on the side of adding too much blue into the image, sometimes too much pure green. I shoot in RAW and make my initial adjustments when I'm converting them to tiff or jpg. For instance, I've noticed the greens have a lot of blue when the green foliage is in the shade so I change the WB to cloudy and it adds in a slightly warmer tone. Still, the hues are very "green."

I also have Nikons and I think the green there, at least in my 4500, is very neutral (though the greens are a bit blocked). All digital cameras have their own quirks. I will say the G3 out of the camera has needed much less processing (that is not to say no processing, however... no matter how much you spend, and I agree $600 isn't a piffle, you're going to have to do some of the heavy lifting) than any of the three Coolpixes I've owned.

Like others, I enjoy doing the processing and my own printing and I've been extremely pleased with the G3. On the other hand, I became really, really frustrated with film for some of the very reasons April has listed... you have no immediate feedback, you can't erase mistakes instantly, you really don't know what you have until you get your prints back... and I don't know how many times I got back pictures that were so disappointing... I thought the colors were alive and vivid and got them back from the processor incredibly washed out. Sure, you could take the negative in, explain what you want and have an enlargement made that probably looks pretty decent. But with digital, it's all in your control. I love it and don't miss film for an instant.
--
Diana
http://www.pbase.com/dlundin
 
Which one do you mean by "first"? If chronologically, then you think the original is more natural. If based on location w/in the post, then you're agreeing w/ a couple of us using 6500K setting.

Man
Adrian
Ab
So to illustrate my point, I turn the saturation on green down -20
using photoshop. And here is the result:



What do you think? Is it better? or is it just me and April? Thanks!
Hi Everybody

I take this picture on a sunny and very clear day, I think there is
no problem at all.



A.v.Polanen
http://www.van-polanen.com/foto
 
Another option might be
Costco, if you are a member. The price is $599, but it comes with a
spare battery and case (which I know you don't need). Return policy
is 30 days at any warehouse store.

http://www.costco.com/frameset.asp?trg=subcat%2Easp&catid=79&subid=83&hierid=3264&log=&NavTop=
Hmmm... I thought Costco offers essentially unlimited return period on everything, except computers. Even computers have a 6-month(!) return period.
Another option might be to look at less full-featured digitals that
aren't such an investment, keeping a film camera for shots that
might not turn out well with a digicam. That way you have a digital
camera with all its advantages, without the expectations of a
larger priced camera. Then, wait a year or so and see what digital
has to offer in a little bit better camera.
Maybe add a cheap (

Man
 
Also, something else to consider is getting an affordable dye-sub printer for 4x6 prints. The popular HiTouch dye-subs for

Check out the Printers and Printing forum for more info on that. Maybe people over there already have a printer profile for the HiTouch to match Canon digicams so you don't always need to manually retouch the colors. Can't hurt to ask.

Also, someone else posted a suggestion earlier to use an easy-to-use program like PhotoGenics to setup simple profiles for auto retouching on the computer. The program is free(!) and sounds easy enough to use for your needs as soon as the profiles are set up.

Also, the G3 comes w/ Photoshop LE 5.0, which is powerful enough for most photo touchable needs, although the learning curve is a bit steep.

Man
Another option might be
Costco, if you are a member. The price is $599, but it comes with a
spare battery and case (which I know you don't need). Return policy
is 30 days at any warehouse store.

http://www.costco.com/frameset.asp?trg=subcat%2Easp&catid=79&subid=83&hierid=3264&log=&NavTop=
Hmmm... I thought Costco offers essentially unlimited return
period on everything, except computers. Even computers have a
6-month(!) return period.
Another option might be to look at less full-featured digitals that
aren't such an investment, keeping a film camera for shots that
might not turn out well with a digicam. That way you have a digital
camera with all its advantages, without the expectations of a
larger priced camera. Then, wait a year or so and see what digital
has to offer in a little bit better camera.
Maybe add a cheap (
G3, if you decide you don't want to deal w/ the G3 for bright
outdoor shots. You can get a Canon APS Elph for that. Since the
only concern seems to be bright outdoor shots, you don't need a
fast lens and can probably get by w/ something small, cheap and
minimalist for that.

Man
 
For what it's worth, the grass colour of the untouched image (the one with the 'yellower' grass) is far closer to the colour of grass in sunlight arround here (SW UK). The 'corrected' version does not look the same as grass I see in real life - too blue. Of course the colour of grass might be different in the location where the photographs were shot.

One problem (besides location differences) is that our memory of colours isn't always true, and that our mental image of the colour of, say, grass doesn't always correspond with how it actually is.
 
April - trust your own eyes and judgement. Everything you said about your G3 sounded horribly familiar to me - it was as though you were externalising all my doubts about the G3 that I gave my wife as a Christmas present. (Ironically she seems quite happy with the colours!)

I cringe every time I see any brightly-lit grass in pictures taken with the G3, and I use a Sony camera! Sony were known for their cartoon-like colours until recently, but in the last year or so they seem to have listened to what people were saying about their cameras in forums like this, and have done something about it.

I cannot recommend the Sony V1 based on any personal experience, but I can tell you that the F717 is a significantly better camera in colour terms than its predecessor (the 707), and would therefore suggest that you read Phil Askey's review of the V1. One of his concluding remarks seems particularly relevant - "Sony have stepped away from their old image of 'Disney color' images and instead concentrated on quality, neutrality and balance." The link below will take you to the whole review.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscv1/

Good luck, and don't give up on digital - you sound far too sensible to revert to the F word.

--
David Barker
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top