OK, what am I doing wrong.....???

[Ranger 6]

Taking some shots while out on Epynt this weekend.

Same car, different corners:



My question is; why are they so 'washed out'? Others of white escorts are just awful.

e.g.


I know the framing and focus isn't perfect, but there doesn't appear to be any depth to the colours - is it as simple as a UV filter (had one on my old film camera) or is it just that an entry DSLR just isn't good enough?

[andy-xr]

Quality of light and flatness of light will do that.

In the first you have fairly harsh shadows from the sun, the last looks a bit overcast and the camera couldnt make it's mind up what to meter for with the white and dark green. Cameras dont 'do' white, if you've tried to shoot into snow you'll see the same as a white car. You bump up the exposure to get it where it needs to be. If using an auto mode, the camera will often compensate and slow down the shutter or change aperture

Generally you'll have to add a bit of punch to anything the camera spits out, regardless of the jpeg vs RAW, just to suit your taste.

Edited by andy-xr on Monday 30th July 12:16

[gingerpaul]

You don't need UV filters any more so don't worry about that. Depending on the conditions a circular polarising filter might increase contrast. It looks to me like the light was quite dull and the camera has picked up on that. You could jazz the Porsche pictures up a bit in post processing if you want them to have a bit more pop.

Edit - Andy's spot on.

[Simpo Two]

First two seem OK but as you say the white car is over-exposed - probably because the camera is trying to average the whole scene and not the car.

Quickest fix is to try centre-weighted metering, or use exposure compensation (EV) to adjust as required. Also worth noting that DSLR results frequently need a little tweak ('post-processing') to get the best image.

If you're assessing exposure/brightness on a computer make sure the monitor is not too bright or dark.

[SamHH]

Number one looks slightly overexposed, number two looks fine and not 'washed out' at all, number three is very overexposed.

So the solution in the case of these examples is to get the exposure right. This is mainly a case of learning how the metering system of your camera works and getting a feel for when it's going to need some guidance with the exposure compensation feature. Learning to read the histogram on the camera's screen will help with this. Also, you can adjust the brightness of the photos using computer programs. There's even more leeway to do this if you record the photos in RAW format. But getting the correct exposure in the first place is the primary solution.

You can also play with the colours on the computer by adjusting the contrast, saturation and white balance. But I don't think these are the main reasons the photos you've posted look washed out; overexposure is.

A UV filter will do nothing at all with a digital camera. And the camera is fine and is capable of giving very good results.

[Ranger 6]

Thanks

I'd better go and read the manual on over exposure

[gingerpaul]

A quick example of what a minute of processing can do. Bare in mind that the picture would be a lot better if starting out with the original image. With a little practice you'll get better images and you'll need less processing.

[davepoth]

Ranger 6 said:

Thanks

I'd better go and read the manual on over exposure

I'm going to take a guess - you shot these in full auto? That's the problem. For static scenes the camera can figure out what to do, but for fast moving situations it's just not quick enough. You need to flick the camera into manual mode and learn how to set it up correctly. Much easier now than it was with film though, since you can just keep shooting things until you get the hang of it.

[Ranger 6]

davepoth said:

I'm going to take a guess - you shot these in full auto?

Almost - shutter speed was set at either 320 or 400 and I left the camera to do the rest.

gingerpaul - guidance on what you changed there please? (I've got Phototshop, but it's a bad case of ATGNI )

[Ranger 6]

Have had a tweak - taking the guide colour as the yellow behind the dunlop on the screen strip & door plate

Is it too subtle?

Before:

After:


Before:

After:

[gingerpaul]

I just had a fiddle in Adobe Camera RAW. I was just trying to boost the contrast a bit but there are many ways of doing that beyond the contrast slider. I'd just fire it up and have a play. A word of warning though. Try not to go crazy with the saturation or making the colours unrealistic. Making it look good but real is the real trick of post processing. It's one thing that people on here are extremely good at.

[Synchromesh]

They just look a tiny bit 'flat' to me. Try bringing up the blacks.

[Crafty_]

On your first "after" the greens are screaming a bit. I've had this before and have dropped saturation on greens only to bring them back in to balance.

Had a quick go in lightroom, this is maybe a bit over saturated..

[Buzz word]

I'm far from an expert but for me the area where they suffer a bit is the hi-lights or just the amount of them. I guess it was a very bright day as most of the hi-lights are on the top of the car. Anyway I used the hi-lights and shadow control to pull some of that out. A shade of vibrancy too just to bring it up a bit. Generally I think stopping down a bit would have helped. I like spot metering to try and avoid the camera trying to average things too much, take lots and shoot RAW.

Anyway..

[Oxygen2k10]

To me it simply looks like you either:

- had the shutter speed too low or;
- if you were panning, you didn't quite manage to match the speed of the vehicle

Hence why the car doesn't look particularly sharp (looks abit blurred/washed out)

Next time you shoot, try shooting in 'Shutter priority'. This will allow you to choose the shutter speed manually and the camera will figure out the rest of the settings for you (i.e. aperture etc). If there's plenty of light try shooting at leave 1/500th or even higher to start with. This should be quick enough to freeze the subject and eliminate the vast majority of blur (blur caused by the motion of the vehicle). Once you've taken a few shots try decreasing your shutter speed to see the results. This will give you an idea of how the shutter speed affects the resulting image. Once you've got this nailed, try setting a relatively low shutter speed (one which would usually result in a rather blurred shot of the subject) and pan with the camera with the subject e.g. if the car is travelling from your left to your right, as you are taking the photo match the movement and speed of the subject with your camera. This should result in a sharp subject, while blurring the background giving a real sense of speed to your images.

It was using the panning technique that I was able to achieve this shot:


Panning 8 by Alex Matravers, on Flickr

As everyone has pointed out previously, a good bit of post processing can really help to improve your shots but it's always best to get it as good as possible in camera first.

Hope this helps.

[Ranger 6]

Thanks Alex, yes my panning isn't the best, but capturing a car 6 feet away at 60mph isn't easy

Ranger 6 said:

davepoth said:

I'm going to take a guess - you shot these in full auto?

Almost - shutter speed was set at either 320 or 400 and I left the camera to do the rest.

I was in shutter priority - I'll try upping the speed even further.

Keep the comments coming folks