What's wrong with my 20D?

Started Sep 22, 2006 | Discussions
beerguy Senior Member • Posts: 2,539
Early AM pano...

This is one I did this past spring. I dont do many of these, I'd forgotten I had this. Not a work of art, but just an example of what better lighting can do.

20D, 70-200 f/4 L. Images were shot vertically and stitched. (I think there was about 8 images shot, with a good amount of overlap.)

-- hide signature --

Cheers,

bg

'I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my telephone. My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my telephone.'

  • Bjarne Stroustrup, inventor of the C++ programming language

Check out my gallery at http://beerguy.smugmug.com

(See profile for the gear collection)

 beerguy's gear list:beerguy's gear list
Canon EOS 20D Canon EOS 7D Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF-S 10-22mm F3.5-4.5 USM +5 more
GRick Forum Member • Posts: 60
Re: What's wrong with my 20D?

I like the stiched panorama.

Which white horse is that one?
Is it the same as can be seen from the train to London?

You might want to consider some Cokin filters. They're not expensive and really help to balance out the sky allowing you to capture more detail in the landscape.

cheers.

HenryL64 Contributing Member • Posts: 521
Re: What's wrong with my 20D?

Nice job on that pano...very well done!

Just a note on your adjustments to the original images. The sky does look nicer in both, but I think the rest of the images now appear too blue. Whatever adjustments you did would probably look better if you applied them only to the sky. Judicious use of layers and layer masks is called for here.
--
Regards,

Henry

Eirik Regular Member • Posts: 202
Re: What's wrong with my 20D?

Hia Tim,

I can see you get some good and very bad comment's in your post here. I haven't read all of them so this might have been said already.

When you want to take a picture like the once you have here there is a few thing you have to remember. The light meter will often get fooled so try to find the scenes mid tone and set the exposure by those reading. Get a neutral grad filter to even out the difference between the bright sky and the rather dull ground. And use manual exposure and partial metering. Using RAW is the best way to get a good picture as well because you can adjust the white balance and set the white and black-point in your pictures before you convert them to tiff or jpg and you will get pictures full of pop and blue sky :).

I have no clue how much you know about photography, but see if you can find a good book about exposure and light so you can learn more about finding the mid tone in a picture. I'm on a rather tough photography home study course and have learned a lot about exposure and mid tones and my pictures hardly need any pp any more.

I hope this was at least a little bit helpful for you :).
--
Eirik
http://eirik.notjustanothersite.co.uk
Aberdeen, Scotland

Eirik Regular Member • Posts: 202
BTW....

As already said, use SRGB colour space. A lot less hassle and I don't think you will notice the difference :).
--
Eirik
http://eirik.notjustanothersite.co.uk
Aberdeen, Scotland

OP Tim Corso Regular Member • Posts: 156
Re: What's wrong with my 20D?

Uffington White Horse is the one you can see from the train to London. You can see this one from the A4 just outside Calne. This is Cherhill Hill White Horse

GRick wrote:

I like the stiched panorama.

Which white horse is that one?
Is it the same as can be seen from the train to London?

You might want to consider some Cokin filters. They're not
expensive and really help to balance out the sky allowing you to
capture more detail in the landscape.

cheers.

andrewD2 Veteran Member • Posts: 9,152
Massive improvement in photoshop

Personally I think your "after" is washed out still.

In one simple (under used) equalize adjustment you can get very good contrast. So good it shows up any dust spots in the sky

Andrew

UnderWater Senior Member • Posts: 1,470
Even if you use sRGB.

You will find the colors a bit flat and dull straight out of 20d shooting RAW. I'd find a RAW processor that fixes this to your liking or move on to another camera, like a 400d or 5d. BTW I had this problem even worse with the 1Ds (I) and had to try several RAW processors before I found one with default processing settings that I liked on 95% of the images (Capture One was great). But then I hate Capture One color with some other bodies. Go figure. All of the above is purely to save time on default processing - once you individually PP, color can be made just fine.

-- hide signature --

len

UnderWater Senior Member • Posts: 1,470
Can't find that site.

I'd love to know more detail also.
thanks,

-- hide signature --

len

midwestshutterbug Senior Member • Posts: 1,513
Your images are NOT substandard !

I'd say their better than most. Their just not the perfection you desire.
Which is something that most of can relate to.

Crank up your color and contrast settings by one, maybe even two. Shot RAW and use ACR to get teh Temp right.

Google Dr Brwons Image Proccessor and see how to batch proccess RAW files. Essentially applying one images setting to a whole slew of images, automatically and with a single click of the mouse.

Cuts down on post proccessing time, immensely.

-- hide signature --

Dave Patterson
---------------------
Midwestshutterbug.com
----------------------------------
'When the light and composition are strong, nobody
notices things like resolution or pincushion distortion'
Gary Friedman

UnderWater Senior Member • Posts: 1,470
And I'd add.

That English countryside can be really hard to photograph. I used to specialize in it for many years. There is frequently a high humidity haze in the air that wrecks photos. Polariser can help, but doesn't get the great no-haze shot.

Early morning can work, but then you are fighting the fog and the mood is different.

If you see something you have to take it that second because the light changes so frequently there. I remember laughing at a friend there a long time ago who was bemoaning the fact that the time between seeing a scene and taking the shot was very often too long for getting the great shot. He'd drive around in his car looking for shots and hit this problem all the time.

-- hide signature --

len

DavidBuck Senior Member • Posts: 1,596
Re: What's wrong with my 20D?

-- hide signature --

Courage is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm. Dave

coolpixboy Senior Member • Posts: 1,408
deja vu

Exactly the same thing happened to me, same flat images, same masses of RAW files to work through. After using the camera for 8 months and the 350D for 6 months before that I eventually moved to another manufacturer.. one that understands how to make a good looking JPG.

Tim Corso wrote:

Or may be whats wrong with what I am doing? I've had my 20D a
little over a year now and it nearly always fails to impress me.
The main issue I have with it is the consistent dull and brown
looking images that I get. Take a look at a couple of typical shots
below.

BTW both shots were taken on a bright blue sky sunny day, virtually
no clouds

Original files can be found here:
http://www.place2view.co.uk/pictures/Misc_MG_0294_small.jpg
http://www.place2view.co.uk/pictures/Misc_MG_0281_small.jpg

I think that the white balance is getting it wrong most of the
time. Generally I use AWB and usually shoot RAW+JPG knowing that
RAW is the only way I'm going to get any kind of satisfaction.
Sometimes I use my Whilbal, but that isn't as fool proof as some
would have you believe.

Anyway I don't want to be post processing every last picture,
particularly where I've been on holiday and have more than 800
shots to process. What I want is a more satisfying result straight
from that camera.

I really want to like the 20D but the poor results are killing my
enthusiasm for taking pictures. I'm beginning to force myself to
take my camera out with me, knowing that when I download my days
shots, I'm going to be disappointed.

Any suggestions on how I can get better looking images straight
from the camera? I've explored all of the different parameter
settings to the point where I wonder if a 30D with picture styles
would help me? I have the 17-85 EFS lens which I think is OK, as
well as a 70-200 L f2.8 which is much revered, but both lenses
give, what to me, are disappointing results.

 coolpixboy's gear list:coolpixboy's gear list
Fujifilm X-T10 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Samyang 12mm F2.0 NCS CS
Bo Joergensen Regular Member • Posts: 236
Re: deja vu

coolpixboy wrote:

Exactly the same thing happened to me, same flat images, same
masses of RAW files to work through. After using the camera for 8
months and the 350D for 6 months before that I eventually moved to
another manufacturer.. one that understands how to make a good
looking JPG.

:::Coolpixboy
What did you choose? Did it help? Show Your photo please (with data)!

Best regards Bo Jørgensen (Sherman)

jhvl Forum Member • Posts: 68
It is in fact so easy :o)

Just a few tips if you want to shoot jpeg, not RAW:

1. use sRGB colorspace, NOT adobeRGB. adobeRGB looks dull when viewed with sRGB software which most is. Read the manual to find out how.

2. Adjust image parameters in 20D to give you more sharpening, contrast and saturation. Parameters are from the factory set low to allow for postprocessing. Read the manual to find out how.

3. Watch your histogram. You camera might underexpose even when you don't expect it. hit the info button to make it show you the histogram after each image, correct exposure if needed and shoot again.

This should get you on the right track.

Failure to comply will lead to dull images

j.
--
http://www.exprimere.dk
...a photograph is a copy of a moment.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads