Very disappointed with Canon T4i (650D) - over-exposed/washed out pictures

Started Dec 10, 2012 | Discussions
WilbaW
WilbaW Forum Pro • Posts: 11,562
Re: Very disappointed with Canon T4i (650D) - over-exposed/washed out pictures

karl mohr wrote:

WilbaW wrote:

karl mohr wrote:

Even with ALO turned off I think most Rebels - including my T4i, seem to overexpose a little. In very bright sunlight I usually have to dial down the EC a little to get the type of exposure I'm looking for. So basically, I have to monitor the LCD after taking pictures to make sure I'm getting what I want. And looking at the histogram as well. I've even noticed this with my T2i and my Xti to some degree.

That's the way photography works with reflectance metering. The meters in your cameras are not incompetent or faulty. They are functioning perfectly by providing information for you to do what you described, and you have to do that to get the image brightness you want. The problem is the expectation that the meter should always know what you what you want and do it for you.

Agreed, and sometimes the captured image could probably be more accurate exposure-wise than we think - it's just that most people probably like their image with more saturation and richer colors.

Mm, you could say a good image is one you like. (Is there more to it than that?) 

Having said that, I have noticed when out photographing with friends that own 60Ds that they seem to get a nicer picture when standing side-by-side photographing the same subject. Just my 2 cents...

Yeah, I'm sure my 450D took more work to get what I wanted.

-- hide signature --

Check out the unofficial Rebel Talk FAQ - http://snipurl.com/RebelFAQ

 WilbaW's gear list:WilbaW's gear list
Canon EOS 60D Canon EOS 7D Mark II
marilynR New Member • Posts: 18
Re: Very disappointed with Canon T4i (650D) - over-exposed/washed out pictures

Hi - Just a suggestion...

If you want to get more enjoyment out of your vacation photos, and can live with a few imperfections (which come from editing JPGs, vs. RAW photos), then I suggest trying out Adobe Lightroom or Photoshop. They both contain a plug-in, called Adobe Camera Raw, which is useful for bringing out more detail from the highlights and shadows, as well as other effects.

Here is a sample, using your beach photo:

Beach photo processed in Adobe Camera Raw

And also using Adobe Camera Raw will work even better if you shoot your photos in RAW mode, since the RAW photo will contain more details from the highlights and shadows.

Here is a link to Adobe, for more information about how useful Adobe Lightroom can be:

http://www.adobe.com/feature/photoshoplightroom/highlight-and-shadow-recovery.modaldisplay.._s_content_s_dotcom_s_en_s_products_s_photoshop-lightroom.html

 marilynR's gear list:marilynR's gear list
Fujifilm XQ1
OP Omni88 New Member • Posts: 21
Re: Very disappointed with Canon T4i (650D) - over-exposed/washed out pictures

marilynR wrote:

Hi - Just a suggestion...

If you want to get more enjoyment out of your vacation photos, and can live with a few imperfections (which come from editing JPGs, vs. RAW photos), then I suggest trying out Adobe Lightroom or Photoshop. They both contain a plug-in, called Adobe Camera Raw, which is useful for bringing out more detail from the highlights and shadows, as well as other effects.

Here is a sample, using your beach photo:

Beach photo processed in Adobe Camera Raw

And also using Adobe Camera Raw will work even better if you shoot your photos in RAW mode, since the RAW photo will contain more details from the highlights and shadows.

Here is a link to Adobe, for more information about how useful Adobe Lightroom can be:

http://www.adobe.com/feature/photoshoplightroom/highlight-and-shadow-recovery.modaldisplay.._s_content_s_dotcom_s_en_s_products_s_photoshop-lightroom.html

Thank you for the valuable information.  Using Adobe Camera Raw did make quite a bit of difference in the photo... even though it's stored in native JPG.   I have photoshop at home and will have to give it a try.   I notice the Camera Raw did tend to give more contrast/shadow detail to the picture, and also did a good job of cleaning up what appeared to be too much brightness in the beach sand.   With this picture I can now see details in the sand that I couldn't see before.

BAK Forum Pro • Posts: 23,641
We already learned the camera was set wrong
1

Didn't you already tell us there was some setting buried in the menus that was set wrong and messed up your 1000 photos?

BAK

BAK Forum Pro • Posts: 23,641
Automatic Lighting Optimizer

I've looked it up.

It looks like a real menace, deciding for you if shadows are too dark. In the cave-mouth shot, the man in shadow should be darker, but I bet tis ALO made everything lighter, as it did with most photos.

BAK

BAK Forum Pro • Posts: 23,641
Good news
1

I dropped some of the photos into Adobe Photoshop Elements, adjused the lighting shadows and highlights, and the pictures look very good.

Have fun.

BAK

AJohn Veteran Member • Posts: 9,461
Over winter?...

I don't know where you're at, but if you have snow in your winters, that's the best time to get used to the EC adjustment and see what it will do. Snow in full bright sun is a real test. I shot this in full blown sun.

Enable the EXIF at the bottom and note the exposure bias value (-2/3 EV). See how fast of a shutter speed it created, allowing the capture of all the detail in the bright snow.

http://imageevent.com/ajrphotos/cubamarsh?p=17&c=3&n=1&m=24&w=4&s=0&z=9&y=2

-- hide signature --

Andy
FCAS Member #120
http://imageevent.com/ajrphotos

marilynR New Member • Posts: 18
Re: Good news

I just want to mention the method for opening a JPG file in Adobe Camera Raw, if you have Photoshop.

As far as I know, the only way to open a JPG file in Camera Raw is to first start up Adobe Bridge. From there, you find and right click on the photo or its icon, and then select "Open in Camera Raw...

 marilynR's gear list:marilynR's gear list
Fujifilm XQ1
OP Omni88 New Member • Posts: 21
Re: Over winter?...

AJohn wrote:

I don't know where you're at, but if you have snow in your winters, that's the best time to get used to the EC adjustment and see what it will do. Snow in full bright sun is a real test. I shot this in full blown sun.

Enable the EXIF at the bottom and note the exposure bias value (-2/3 EV). See how fast of a shutter speed it created, allowing the capture of all the detail in the bright snow.

http://imageevent.com/ajrphotos/cubamarsh?p=17&c=3&n=1&m=24&w=4&s=0&z=9&y=2

-- hide signature --

Andy
FCAS Member #120
http://imageevent.com/ajrphotos

I had actually thought of this on the drive in this morning.  Yes I have snow where I live.  So I'm going to wait for a bright sunny winter day, and do a bunch of trial shooting, playing with the EC adjustments, turning on/off the Auto Light Optimization, shooting in RAW vs JPG, etc.  Shooting on a sunny winter's day against snow will obviously be the ultimate in brightness and a good way to test adjustments of various settings.

OP Omni88 New Member • Posts: 21
Re: Good news

BAK wrote:

I dropped some of the photos into Adobe Photoshop Elements, adjused the lighting shadows and highlights, and the pictures look very good.

Have fun.

BAK

Like you, I'll give it a try in PS Elements.   Thanks for the advice.

OP Omni88 New Member • Posts: 21
Interesting how taking photos has progressed

It's interesting to see the progression (or regression, depending on which way you look at it) over the past number of years (and decades) of photography in general, and the complexity of taking photographs.

It's interesting to see the progression (or regression, depending on which way you look at it) over the past number of years (and decades) of photography in general, and the complexity of taking photographs.

I've travelled much of the world, and have obviously taken thousands (probably tens-of-thousands) photographs over the years and decades... from 35mm to digital to DSLR.

In the days of 35mm, you hoped and prayed that the photos you were taking were actually going to turn out as expected when you had the photos developed. In many cases it's not like you could simply go back and re-shoot if you screwed up the settings while taking pictures. And unless you had your own dark room, it usually took a minimum of 24 hours, and in many cases days before you got to see your results (or your failures). You had some limited creativity during the picture taking process of what the camera could or couldn't do.

Along came digital. I purchased a Sony F828. It was a good camera (until it recently died). It had a high average of turning out good quality pictures. Out of every 100 pictures I took with that camera, I may have 1 or 2 pictures that were bad. All other pictures were of good quality in shadow, detail, contrast, color saturation, skin tones, etc.  I shot most everything in default JPG. The pictures I took with the F828 were in many cases "view ready" and rarely did I ever have to adjust or clean up photos in post.

Along comes the Canon T4i with a multitude of settings (to replace my F828). It should be known that I am a fanboy of Canon. My 35mm was a Canon. I have a pocket Canon.  So I am definitely not here to diss Canon. The interesting observation I've noted in these threads is the amount of additional time and/or complexity that has been introduced with the DSLR picture taking process. Yes I acknowledge that with this additional complexity/settings comes a layer of freedom to be more creative during the picture taking process... especially in pre and post image adjustments. Taking a picture now is not as simple as point-and-shoot....  as mentioned in these threads, be aware of or make pre-adjustments (EC, bracketing, meter mode, etc.) and review the histogram after each picture you take.  And it's obviously become the "norm" as mentioned numerous times in these threads to shoot RAW then fix/adjust pictures later in post with Photoshop or other software.   This adds more time and complexity to the entire process before photos are typically view ready, but I can see how it also allows for more creative freedom after the picture has been taken to fix, cleanup, or alter photos after the fact.

Seems like taking photographs with 35mm cameras were a much simpler time... at least until you got a batch of photos back from the developer only to find you shot something in a wrong mode or setting and the entire batch was wrecked... and you had no way to go back and re-shoot.   Now talk about a bad set of photos which you had no way of fixing at all!  

OP Omni88 New Member • Posts: 21
Re: Good news

BAK wrote:

I dropped some of the photos into Adobe Photoshop Elements, adjused the lighting shadows and highlights, and the pictures look very good.

Have fun.

BAK

Did you bring those photos into PS Elements as JPG's or did you convert them to some other format first before you applied shadows/highlights?

zigi_S Senior Member • Posts: 2,219
Re: Interesting how taking photos has progressed

Simple, DSLR quality photos can be had with olympus pen cameras. Press and get great jpeg pictures without any additional work. T4i is more for the enthusiasts on budget.

ARShutterbug
ARShutterbug Veteran Member • Posts: 8,971
Not really bad
1

There's nothing really objectionable about your examples.  The camera correctly exposed for the people, the rocks, the building, the walkway, the steps, and the trees.  Do some simple adjustments to your RAW files if you want to change the output.  The camera doesn't understand what you want.  The camera only tries to do what you tell it to do, and if you don't understand how to work with the camera, you will get inconsistent results.  I also suggest the use of a polariser.

marilynR New Member • Posts: 18
Re: Interesting how taking photos has progressed

I think the Olympus PEN cameras are known to have a better dynamic range than the Canon Digital Rebel cameras. Maybe that has something to do with how well your PEN JPG shots come out.

For example, here are some ratings from DxOMark Labs:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Ratings/List-view

 marilynR's gear list:marilynR's gear list
Fujifilm XQ1
zigi_S Senior Member • Posts: 2,219
Re: Interesting how taking photos has progressed

Only the new line with sony sensors. The old has worse.

iancrowe Senior Member • Posts: 1,477
Re: Automatic Lighting Optimizer

BAK wrote:

I've looked it up.

It looks like a real menace, deciding for you if shadows are too dark. In the cave-mouth shot, the man in shadow should be darker, but I bet tis ALO made everything lighter, as it did with most photos.

BAK

Sadly ALO is enforced in all the "basic modes". No matter what the OP sets in the menus if he insists on shooting in the "Basic" zone ALO will be on.

Ian

iancrowe Senior Member • Posts: 1,477
Re: Not really bad

ARShutterbug wrote:

There's nothing really objectionable about your examples. The camera correctly exposed for the people, the rocks, the building, the walkway, the steps, and the trees. Do some simple adjustments to your RAW files if you want to change the output. The camera doesn't understand what you want. The camera only tries to do what you tell it to do, and if you don't understand how to work with the camera, you will get inconsistent results. I also suggest the use of a polariser.

Sadly the OP was shooting in the "Basic" modes, to quote:-

"shot around 1000 pictures in various modes (automatic, landscape, night, some portraits shots, etc. etc.)"

This means no RAW files to tweak

Ian

ProtoPhoto Contributing Member • Posts: 984
Re: Interesting how taking photos has progressed

Omni88 wrote:

Taking a picture now is not as simple as point-and-shoot.... as mentioned in these threads, be aware of or make pre-adjustments (EC, bracketing, meter mode, etc.) and review the histogram after each picture you take. And it's obviously become the "norm" as mentioned numerous times in these threads to shoot RAW then fix/adjust pictures later in post with Photoshop or other software. This adds more time and complexity to the entire process before photos are typically view ready, but I can see how it also allows for more creative freedom after the picture has been taken to fix, cleanup, or alter photos after the fact.

Seems like taking photographs with 35mm cameras were a much simpler time... at least until you got a batch of photos back from the developer only to find you shot something in a wrong mode or setting and the entire batch was wrecked... and you had no way to go back and re-shoot. Now talk about a bad set of photos which you had no way of fixing at all!

Here is a simple tip that will make things easier for you:  don't wait until the image is taken.  Just move your thumb, hit the "live view" button and take a quick one second look.  No need to focus, which is slow, but you will see a "live simulation" of the ending photo just the way the camera plans on taking it, and you can see whether there is an issue with white balance or exposure.   Be sure the histograms are displaying as well, which you can do by cycling through the options with the INFO button (assuming your T4i works like my T3i).

Again, you are NOT focusing or composing with Live View, which can be time consuming.  You are just doing a very quick check of exposure and color, flick it on and flick it off, then take the photo the normal way through the viewfinder.  You don't need to do it every photo, but every now and then and in new situations is good.

 ProtoPhoto's gear list:ProtoPhoto's gear list
Canon PowerShot S90 Canon EOS 550D Canon EOS 600D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +7 more
WSteveP
WSteveP Senior Member • Posts: 1,071
With a little work...

They don't actually look bad at all.

Some quick adjustments in Photoshop or Elements and you can make your images look like you want them to.

Here's my take on two of them.  I took the liberty of straightening the horizon a little in the beach scene.





Cheers

Steve

 WSteveP's gear list:WSteveP's gear list
Canon EOS 70D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Canon EF-S 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS STM Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5–5.6 IS STM
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads