Color gone wild on my D70s. It seems to stink

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D

10/20/2007 11:21:51 PM · #1

I used to have good color on my D70s, but now, it is very poor at times, and unreliable at best. Any suggestions?
I have changed nothing.
It doesn't matter if I am using default settings in auto mode, or modifying settings...

If you are familiar with Colorado this time of year, the trees are supposed to be Golden, and the rocks are generally not pinkish.

However, the trees are showing up light yellow, and the rocks have a pinkish hue. I thought I could attach an image, but alas, i cannot.

Louis

Nikon D800

10/20/2007 11:22:22 PM · #2

Have you changed your white balance settings lately? Post some examples.

Message edited by author 2007-10-20 23:22:55.

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D

10/20/2007 11:26:48 PM · #3

Yes, i have tried changing white balance to different settings, just to see... As a matter of fact, it seems to look like I have fluorescent set, when Auto is actually set.

I wish I could post a sample, but not sure how. I don't have a website to send people to.

Louis

Nikon D800

10/20/2007 11:29:39 PM · #4

Try taking shots of a scene lit by the same light source, for example incandescent light, using several different white balance settings. They should look very different. If taking shots of an identical scene using different white balance settings does not show colour shifts, something's wrong with your camera and you need it serviced.

thegrandwazoo

Nikon D750

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

10/20/2007 11:30:25 PM · #5

Does the image look OK on the camera LCD? Could it be a color setting in PS? Just a thought...

Phil

Canon EOS-7D

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) for Canon

10/20/2007 11:33:20 PM · #6

Originally posted by paden:

email it to me and I'll post it.

Message edited by author 2011-02-20 13:57:03.

10/20/2007 11:36:23 PM · #7

You never realize how incomplete your description is until someone gives feedback. Apologies.

OK, pictures taken within 30 minutes of each other, same weather conditions, same camers settings, same viewing software, same computer, same lens.

Some pics are fine, some are great, and some show aspen trees with pinkish trunks, Elk with pink hydes, rocks that are blue and pinkish...

Very frustrating.

I might just take the camera to a wolf and have them look at it.

10/20/2007 11:38:10 PM · #8

Originally posted by paden:

it seems to look like I have fluorescent set, when Auto is actually set.

Aarghhh.... NEVER use auto. Take the time to at least approximate the color of the light you are shooting.

The trouble with Auto is that it is influenced by WHATEVER COLOR is in the image. The camera has no idea what kind of light you're in. It only knows what colors are being reflected by the subject.

If you shoot a red dress. The camera will think you're under heavy red lights and adjust the WB accordingly! If you shoot colorful fall foliate, the camera will be looking at the reds and yellows and greens and mixing them together to come up with whatever it "thinks" is the average color. Then it will subtract that "average" out of the image and left whatever is left. And that, most certainly, will NOT be the color you were expecting.

If you have any time to think at all before snapping the shot... set the WB on your camera. If you have no time to think, shoot raw and fix it later. :-)

10/20/2007 11:39:22 PM · #9

Thanks dudephil, sending to you

10/20/2007 11:40:02 PM · #10

Originally posted by paden:

Some pics are fine, some are great, and some show aspen trees with pinkish trunks, Elk with pink hydes, rocks that are blue and pinkish...

This is EXACTLY what the AUTO WB setting will do to you. Because every image you take will be adjusted according to the colors that are entering the lens at *that* time. So every image will have a different white balance. Every image will look different from every other.

The only way to maintain consistent colors is to set your WB before you start shooting.

Fujifilm XC 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 OIS

10/20/2007 11:48:42 PM · #11

I used to set the WB, but the darn Nikon software leaves your setting, even if you switch to auto shooting mode. I kept forgetting to change the white balance and would shoot without the correct setting...

I guess I need to go back to utilizing the white balance on each shot, if that's the cause.

buzzrock

Fujifilm X-M1

10/20/2007 11:49:13 PM · #12

David, do you always set your WB? The reason I ask is because of your amazing raw (lightroom) workflow-results..

Im new to raw and thought auto wb was where to be when shooting raw, since the raw conversion can easily correct it--

Sorry for the semi-hijack, just wondering, cuz Im yearning to use raw more effienctly..

Phil

Canon EOS-7D

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) for Canon

10/20/2007 11:50:20 PM · #13

.

Message edited by author 2007-10-22 14:15:49.

10/20/2007 11:50:41 PM · #14

Louis, i will try shooting as you suggested. That makes perfect sense, I can't believe I didn't think of it. I guess that's why I posted here.

10/20/2007 11:53:03 PM · #15

Here's an easy experiment for you...

Buy a couple of pieces of large card stock in different colors. Let's say Red, Green and Blue. Then get a small white toy or stuffed animal (much smaller than the card stock).

Lay one piece of card stock on the ground and place the toy or stuffed animal on top of it. Set your camera to AUTO WB and take a picture of the setup, pulling the camera back (or switching to wide angle) so that the card stock just barely fills the frame (leaving the toy/stuff animal within the center of the frame).

Take several pictures in a row. Zoom in as you go, until the toy/animal fills the frame as your last shot.

Repeat the experiment with each of the other colors of card stock.

Now repeat all three series of shots again, only this time set the WB of your camera to match the lighting used (fluorescent, or whatever you're shooting under). Leave the WB "fixed" at that point.

A few things to note in your results:

1) All of the "fill the frame with card stock" shots show the white toy/stuffed animal to be COLORED. It will be colored the opposite color of the color of the card stock!

2) The closer you zoom in on the toy/animal ... the more correct the color of the toy/animal will become (because it is white, and the camera wants to see white, it will gradually become white as it begins to fill the frame).

3) If you set your camera to a fixed WB, the white toy/animal should be "close to white" on the first shot ... and stay the *same* color on every shot after that, regardless of what color of card stock it is laying on. (not entirely true, the card stock will reflect colored light upwards which will affect the color of the toy/animal, but that's to be expected).

Fujifilm XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 R LM OIS

10/20/2007 11:58:21 PM · #16

Originally posted by buzzrock:

David, do you always set your WB? The reason I ask is because of your amazing raw (lightroom) workflow-results..

Hehe... after the lecture I just gave, you're gonna hate me. :-)

The answer is yes ... I always set it. But I don't always set it right! lol Most of the time I set my camera's WB to "cloudy". It gets the colors I want "most of the time". If I move indoors, I'll either set it to the color of the light I'm shooting under, or set it to flash if I'm using the flash to light the subject.

But in reality, I shoot EVERYTHING (except sports) in raw. And so if I mess up, I just use Lightroom to fix it. So my main reason for setting WB on camera in the first place is simply to get as "close as possible" to the colors I want to see before I have to start making adjustments.

fotomann_forever

10/21/2007 12:02:58 AM · #17

You haven't accidentally set the camera to the Adobe RGB color space have ya?

MelonMusketeer

Nikon D7000

Nikon MF 50mm f/1.4

10/21/2007 12:04:25 AM · #18

Check the way you have your metering set too. Spot metering can fool the camera if the particular spot that you focus on is not neutral in color.

ursula

Fujifilm X-T2

10/21/2007 12:05:17 AM · #19

Originally posted by dwterry:

Originally posted by buzzrock:
David, do you always set your WB? The reason I ask is because of your amazing raw (lightroom) workflow-results..

Hehe... after the lecture I just gave, you're gonna hate me. :-)

The answer is yes ... I always set it. But I don't always set it right! lol Most of the time I set my camera's WB to "cloudy". It gets the colors I want "most of the time". If I move indoors, I'll either set it to the color of the light I'm shooting under, or set it to flash if I'm using the flash to light the subject.

But in reality, I shoot EVERYTHING (except sports) in raw. And so if I mess up, I just use Lightroom to fix it. So my main reason for setting WB on camera in the first place is simply to get as "close as possible" to the colors I want to see before I have to start making adjustments.

Does changing the WB in post-processing really work well? I'm asking because I've noticed that if I get the WB wrong to start, and try to fix in in PS (I always shoot RAW), it's not as easy as it would seem to fix it. It's like the original captured data is somehow skewed to the setting under which it was shot, and when you change WB in post, the pictures lose some of their quality, in particular with outdoor shots. Is that just my imagination or could there be something to this?

10/21/2007 12:13:46 AM · #20

I don't think so, Ursula.

As far as I know, the raw data is just that. There is, of course, some level of processing that has already taken place. But WB shouldn't be one of them (other than to set the WB of the embedded jpeg).

Now... I'll admit that white balancing any given image is never quite an easy task. The trouble is ... without a gray card within the image, it's difficult to ever find a truly neutral color.

I get "funky casts" in my images all the time simply by clicking on different parts of a bride's white dress or the groom's black tux. And seldom is there a "gray" object to be found. Ultimately, I try to find the WB that works best (sometimes it requires a tiny bit of hand tweaking). And then I copy that WB to all images in the series.

Fujifilm XC 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 OIS

10/21/2007 12:19:42 AM · #21

dwterry, did you look at those pics? Do you think that's white balance? Nasty pics. And I am not just talking about the photographer

buzzrock

Fujifilm X-M1

10/21/2007 12:22:36 AM · #22

Is that to say David (and I think we have turned this into a raw post now) sorry, that you use the eyedroper dohicky to set your WB in Lightroom, versus the as shot/auto/daylight,etc presets?

I first was using the presets and then found the selector was alot more accurate, but like you said sometimes its hard to find a nice light grey, I found that the white points are more accurate, just find one not so white..

And with that said, after setting the WB, my next step in lightroom is to then goto exposure and jump it up untill I see some clipping, tthen just drag it down a spec, then I do the same for blacks, Untill I see some black lines apearing, then once agin, adjust it down a spec,..

Am I overdoing it as far as lightroom is concerned> for the WB/exposure settings--

Once agian--- sorry for the Hijack

I would love a David Lightroom workflow tut!!

MelonMusketeer

Nikon D7000

Nikon MF 50mm f/1.4

10/21/2007 12:27:00 AM · #23

Looking at the posted pics, I am wondering if the D70 has a saturation adjustment in the settings which may have gotten set to low. The S3 Pro Fuji has that choice for contrasty situations where you need a lot of latitude in color contrast.
I have seen polarizers change the WB as well.
Another thing, one of my lenses, an old 400mm 5.6 Sigma has quite a lot of blue in it's images, so much that I set a custom WB when I want to use it.
There are also times when your eye may be seeing color that just isn't there, like when you are in tungsten light, your mind adjusts things to look right even though the light is very orange to the camera.
If the light on the elks was filtered thru the trees, it may have a greenish cast to it.

Message edited by author 2007-10-21 00:32:47.