How can I get white and not blue with G5

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Pedro, Feb 8, 2004.

  1. Pedro

    Pedro Guest

    Hi All,

    With my G5 I took some pictures of damage to white suffit, but the white
    came out pale blue, should I have exposed +1 or +2 or exposed -1 or -2 or
    what should I have done pictures taken in sunlight.

    I suspect it could be white balance or exposure, any ideas would be
    appreciated.

    A desperate Pedro
     
    Pedro, Feb 8, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Pedro

    dirtycow Guest

    > With my G5 I took some pictures of damage to white suffit, but the white
    > came out pale blue, should I have exposed +1 or +2 or exposed -1 or -2

    or
    > what should I have done pictures taken in sunlight.
    >
    > I suspect it could be white balance or exposure, any ideas would be
    > appreciated.


    Does sound like you white balance wasnt set properly. Dont know about the
    G5, but my Nikon CP995 has various options such as 'Cloudy', 'Incandescent'
    etc. I suspect you should have something similar, and should probably have
    selected the 'sunlight' setting.

    Hope that helps, best to have a look in your manual for the proper setting
    and how to change it.
    Matt
     
    dirtycow, Feb 8, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Pedro

    HRosita Guest

    Hi,

    For photographing white objects you have to set the exposure to +1 or +2,
    otherwise the camera averages everything to 18% grey and underexposes white
    object. Just experiment with different settings. If it is very sunny, I would
    try +2 otherwise +1 should be enough.
    Also I would try to take the picture when the object is in the shade.
    Rosita
     
    HRosita, Feb 9, 2004
    #3
  4. Pedro

    Wdflannery Guest

    The G2, and hence I assume the G5, has a 'custom' white balance ... which lets
    you click on a white object to set the white balance .... read up on it in the
    manual and use it.
     
    Wdflannery, Feb 9, 2004
    #4
  5. Pedro

    Pedro Guest

    Hi the white balance was set to automatic, but I remember reading in this
    news group that I should ether add or subtract exposure but I cannot
    remember.
    Pedro
    "Wdflannery" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The G2, and hence I assume the G5, has a 'custom' white balance ... which

    lets
    > you click on a white object to set the white balance .... read up on it in

    the
    > manual and use it.
     
    Pedro, Feb 9, 2004
    #5
  6. "Pedro" <> wrote:

    > Hi the white balance was set to automatic, but I remember reading in this
    > news group that I should ether add or subtract exposure but I cannot
    > remember.


    Automatic white balance can't tell the difference between a sunburnt guy in
    a pink shirt under white light and a nerd in a white shirt under a pink
    light.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Feb 9, 2004
    #6
  7. Pedro

    gr Guest

    "Pedro" <> wrote
    > Hi the white balance was set to automatic, but I remember reading in this
    > news group that I should ether add or subtract exposure but I cannot
    > remember.


    Canon has crappy automatic white balance. You're stuck with having to set it
    manually in this case. Try the shade setting, and pump up the exposure by
    +1.0EV or more.
     
    gr, Feb 9, 2004
    #7
  8. Pedro

    Bob Guest

    On my Canon I always expose at 1/3 under. On some shots 2/3. Set it like
    that in program and forget it. The darker image is easily brought to life
    with a levels adjustment, with plenty of shadow detail. I think you will
    find you will blow the highlights if you overexpose. My results are
    excellent. Remember Auto settings are for perfectly normal situations to be
    used only by perfectly normal non photographers !

    "gr" <> wrote in message
    news:c080ht$13q39v$-berlin.de...
    > "Pedro" <> wrote
    > > Hi the white balance was set to automatic, but I remember reading in

    this
    > > news group that I should ether add or subtract exposure but I cannot
    > > remember.

    >
    > Canon has crappy automatic white balance. You're stuck with having to set

    it
    > manually in this case. Try the shade setting, and pump up the exposure by
    > +1.0EV or more.
    >
    >
     
    Bob, Feb 9, 2004
    #8
  9. Pedro

    gr Guest

    "Bob" <> wrote
    > On my Canon I always expose at 1/3 under. On some shots 2/3. Set it like
    > that in program and forget it. The darker image is easily brought to life
    > with a levels adjustment, with plenty of shadow detail. I think you will
    > find you will blow the highlights if you overexpose. My results are
    > excellent. Remember Auto settings are for perfectly normal situations to

    be
    > used only by perfectly normal non photographers !


    Don't be stupid. He's shooting a white soffit that he wants to come out
    light, not dark! He may as well expose it correctly in the first place.
    Brightening it later is a wasteful step, and if there happens to be deep
    shadow detail it will be lost.
     
    gr, Feb 9, 2004
    #9
  10. Pedro

    Pedro Guest

    Hi GR,
    I don't it and it is an improvement
    Pedro
    "gr" <> wrote in message
    news:c080ht$13q39v$-berlin.de...
    > "Pedro" <> wrote
    > > Hi the white balance was set to automatic, but I remember reading in

    this
    > > news group that I should ether add or subtract exposure but I cannot
    > > remember.

    >
    > Canon has crappy automatic white balance. You're stuck with having to set

    it
    > manually in this case. Try the shade setting, and pump up the exposure by
    > +1.0EV or more.
    >
    >
     
    Pedro, Feb 9, 2004
    #10
  11. Pedro

    Pedro Guest

    Hi Bob, So far I over exposed now I will try under and use soft ware to
    bring back as suggested by you and I will see what happened. I was pic
    taking dirt on plastic which was not easy.
    Pedro
    "Bob" <> wrote in message
    news:c08qro$jnc$...
    > On my Canon I always expose at 1/3 under. On some shots 2/3. Set it like
    > that in program and forget it. The darker image is easily brought to life
    > with a levels adjustment, with plenty of shadow detail. I think you will
    > find you will blow the highlights if you overexpose. My results are
    > excellent. Remember Auto settings are for perfectly normal situations to

    be
    > used only by perfectly normal non photographers !
    >
    > "gr" <> wrote in message
    > news:c080ht$13q39v$-berlin.de...
    > > "Pedro" <> wrote
    > > > Hi the white balance was set to automatic, but I remember reading in

    > this
    > > > news group that I should ether add or subtract exposure but I cannot
    > > > remember.

    > >
    > > Canon has crappy automatic white balance. You're stuck with having to

    set
    > it
    > > manually in this case. Try the shade setting, and pump up the exposure

    by
    > > +1.0EV or more.
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Pedro, Feb 9, 2004
    #11
  12. Pedro

    Bob Guest

    "Pedro" <> wrote in message
    news:c08trs$j86$...
    > Hi Bob, So far I over exposed now I will try under and use soft ware to
    > bring back as suggested by you and I will see what happened. I was pic
    > taking dirt on plastic which was not easy.
    > Pedro


    Cheers thanks for a polite reply. There is good conversation on this group
    about Digital dynamic range which will explain why get good results from
    underexposing.

    > "Bob" <> wrote in message
    > news:c08qro$jnc$...
    > > On my Canon I always expose at 1/3 under. On some shots 2/3. Set it like
    > > that in program and forget it. The darker image is easily brought to

    life
    > > with a levels adjustment, with plenty of shadow detail. I think you will
    > > find you will blow the highlights if you overexpose. My results are
    > > excellent. Remember Auto settings are for perfectly normal situations to

    > be
    > > used only by perfectly normal non photographers !
    > >
    > > "gr" <> wrote in message
    > > news:c080ht$13q39v$-berlin.de...
    > > > "Pedro" <> wrote
    > > > > Hi the white balance was set to automatic, but I remember reading in

    > > this
    > > > > news group that I should ether add or subtract exposure but I cannot
    > > > > remember.
    > > >
    > > > Canon has crappy automatic white balance. You're stuck with having to

    > set
    > > it
    > > > manually in this case. Try the shade setting, and pump up the exposure

    > by
    > > > +1.0EV or more.
    > > >
    > > >

    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Bob, Feb 10, 2004
    #12
  13. Pedro

    Guest

    In message <c09aqm$ach$>,
    "Bob" <> wrote:

    >Cheers thanks for a polite reply. There is good conversation on this group
    >about Digital dynamic range which will explain why get good results from
    >underexposing.


    People get good results from under-exposing only as a matter of safety.
    For maximum image quality in terms of noise and quantization, you have
    to expose so that the brightest highlights are just short of clipping.
    For a low contrast scene, this could be +2 EC in RAW mode.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Feb 10, 2004
    #13
  14. Pedro

    Pedro Guest

    Hi Bob,
    Its done the trick I did experiment -1/3, -2/3, -1, it great thanks m8.
    Pedro
    "Bob" <> wrote in message
    news:c09aqm$ach$...
    >
    > "Pedro" <> wrote in message
    > news:c08trs$j86$...
    > > Hi Bob, So far I over exposed now I will try under and use soft ware to
    > > bring back as suggested by you and I will see what happened. I was pic
    > > taking dirt on plastic which was not easy.
    > > Pedro

    >
    > Cheers thanks for a polite reply. There is good conversation on this group
    > about Digital dynamic range which will explain why get good results from
    > underexposing.
    >
    > > "Bob" <> wrote in message
    > > news:c08qro$jnc$...
    > > > On my Canon I always expose at 1/3 under. On some shots 2/3. Set it

    like
    > > > that in program and forget it. The darker image is easily brought to

    > life
    > > > with a levels adjustment, with plenty of shadow detail. I think you

    will
    > > > find you will blow the highlights if you overexpose. My results are
    > > > excellent. Remember Auto settings are for perfectly normal situations

    to
    > > be
    > > > used only by perfectly normal non photographers !
    > > >
    > > > "gr" <> wrote in message
    > > > news:c080ht$13q39v$-berlin.de...
    > > > > "Pedro" <> wrote
    > > > > > Hi the white balance was set to automatic, but I remember reading

    in
    > > > this
    > > > > > news group that I should ether add or subtract exposure but I

    cannot
    > > > > > remember.
    > > > >
    > > > > Canon has crappy automatic white balance. You're stuck with having

    to
    > > set
    > > > it
    > > > > manually in this case. Try the shade setting, and pump up the

    exposure
    > > by
    > > > > +1.0EV or more.
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > >
    > > >

    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Pedro, Feb 11, 2004
    #14
  15. Pedro

    Pedro Guest

    Thanks M8 under expose works great I went the wrong way originally by over
    exp. Under works great.Thx.
    Pedro
    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In message <c09aqm$ach$>,
    > "Bob" <> wrote:
    >
    > >Cheers thanks for a polite reply. There is good conversation on this

    group
    > >about Digital dynamic range which will explain why get good results from
    > >underexposing.

    >
    > People get good results from under-exposing only as a matter of safety.
    > For maximum image quality in terms of noise and quantization, you have
    > to expose so that the brightest highlights are just short of clipping.
    > For a low contrast scene, this could be +2 EC in RAW mode.
    > --
    >
    > <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    > John P Sheehy <>
    > ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    Pedro, Feb 11, 2004
    #15
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. jeff liss
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    516
    Andrew
    Sep 5, 2003
  2. Mark C

    My black and white looks blue and gray

    Mark C, Nov 12, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    1,958
    Bill Hilton
    Nov 13, 2003
  3. DVD Verdict
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,020
    DVD Verdict
    Mar 18, 2005
  4. embee

    Black and White (and Blue)

    embee, Dec 12, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    750
  5. What are these blue and white dots

    , Mar 11, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    546
    Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!)
    Mar 11, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page