Wes Rolley on sun 16 jan 05
This is just a comment for those who would consider a relatively cheap point and shoot digital camera.
Having gotten a $200 E-Coupon, I used it to purchase a 5.1 megapixel point and shoot digital camera. While it is easy to use in automatic mode, and contributes pictures of acceptable quality for general use, it falls far short of being usable for capturing anything like the accurate colors in art photography.
The problem lies in the limited light balance functions of an inexpensive camera. There are five white balance settings. Auto, Sunny day, cloudy day, florescent and incandescent lighting. I have attempted to use all of them to capture accurate renditions of my wife's paintings. In a number of works with both greens and whites occupying major sections of the piece, the greens are normally muddy, toned down by a warm cast to the rendition. If I manipulate the white balance to capture the greens nearly correctly, the whites take on an unwanted blue cast.
The actual lighting conditions were overcast with no electric lighting at all. The result is that nothing works as one would want it to.
Perhaps I could get something closer if a got rid of all external lighting, used only 5000 K photo lamps and reshot.
The more expensive digital cameras have a method of manually setting and locking the white balance that gives you more control than you have with point and shoot type cameras. I plan to continue using the point and shoot as a light weight camera that can be carried along whenever I go out, even if my purpose is not to take photos. You never know when you find a worthy subject.
Wesley C. Rolley
17211 Quail Court
Morgan Hill, CA 95037
(408)778-3024
"Why should we not be able to do what others have done before us? The answer must be that art is created not by human wisdom or intellect, but by human character as it is shaped by the times." Kitaoji Rosanjin.
Wesley C. Rolley
17211 Quail Court
Morgan Hill, CA 95037
(408)778-3024
"Why should we not be able to do what others have done before us? The answer must be that art is created not by human wisdom or intellect, but by human character as it is shaped by the times." Kitaoji Rosanjin.
Snail Scott on sun 16 jan 05
At 09:18 AM 1/16/2005 -0800, you wrote:
>The problem lies in the limited light balance functions of an inexpensive
camera...
I now have access to a digital camera, and
I find I use the 'manual white balance'
setting for almost everything. I've done
some site-specific installation projects
lately in indoor locations with lighting
that would be impossible to correct for
using film or any standard setting (multiple
colors of fluorescent tubes with a bit of
sunlight and some halogen thrown in -
whatever the location had installed, and
which can't be turned off to use photo
floods).
The manual white balance on the digital
camera has made it possible to document
these projects which could never be shown
elsewhere. The difference is amazing! It's
no substitute for slides, but the ability
to correct for the color of the light is
stunningly useful, allowing me to have
photos of work that would otherwise be lost
to my portfolio.
-Snail
Carl Finch on mon 17 jan 05
At 08:38 AM 1/17/2005 -0800, Wes Rolley wrote:
>At 06:06 AM 1/17/2005, you wrote:
>
>> Have you had any luck tuning the colors in your processing
>>software? Usually, I don't have to adjust color, but I do adjust
>>brightness, contrast and sometimes sharpness.
>
>I have only tried a little. Since buying a new PC, I have not upgraded my
>photoshop...the new pc came with Adobe Photoshop Elements 2.0
>preinstalled. It works for most things that I do, but does not have the
>range of color manipulation, filters, etc. that a full Photoshop has.
Elements 3.0 has been out for a couple months, but I'm surprised to hear
you say that 2's range of color manipulation is lacking. Most people find
Levels (Ctrl+L) and other color adjustments enough (perhaps it's Curves
that you feel is lacking?). I haven't seen version 3 yet, so don't know
what has been added to it over version 2.
>I actually got better color fidelity by taking a "still" shot using my
>Canon GL1 Digital camcorder. The white balance functions allow much more
>control. The only problem here is a maximum 72 dpi capture.
Huh? "72 dpi" has nothing to do with cameras! It has to do with the
relationship between camera resolution (e.g., 640x480 pixels) and the
resulting size of the print on paper.
I would think your concern might be that the camcorder has such low
resolution (which is true of camcorders) that it can take only mediocre
still pictures. High quality prints are made at 300 dots per inch--so that
640x480 pixel image would result in a print just over 2 inches (640/300)
wide. Blow it up larger and it will begin to look pointillistic!
The Pros (I'm told), when shooting with a digital still camera, capture
images in RAW mode, rather than JPG. If your camera has this capability,
then use the camera manufacturer's included utility to adjust the white
balance, color, contrast, etc., and then convert to JPG for further
processing in Elements. Photoshop CS (aka version 8) now includes RAW
format processing (version 7 required the purchase of a plug-in to do this).
Between December 12th and 20th of this past year there were a couple of
Clayart threads discussing this at some length. Search for "raw" in the
Subject.
--Carl
in Medford, Oregon
Lee Love on mon 17 jan 05
Wes,
I have good luck with color on both my Canon Powershot and my
Sony cybershot point & shoots.
Have you had any luck tuning the colors in your processing
software? Usually, I don't have to adjust color, but I do adjust
brightness, contrast and sometimes sharpness.
--
in Mashiko, Japan http://mashiko.org
http://www.livejournal.com/users/togeika/ WEB LOG
http://public.fotki.com/togeika/ Photos!
Wes Rolley on mon 17 jan 05
At 06:06 AM 1/17/2005, you wrote:
> Have you had any luck tuning the colors in your processing
>software? Usually, I don't have to adjust color, but I do adjust
>brightness, contrast and sometimes sharpness.
I have only tried a little. Since buying a new PC, I have not upgraded my=
=20
photoshop...the new pc came with Adobe Photoshop Elements 2.0=20
preinstalled. It works for most things that I do, but does not have the=20
range of color manipulation, filters, etc. that a full Photoshop has. I=20
may have to work on another WWW site so that I can spring for the bucks.
I actually got better color fidelity by taking a "still" shot using my=20
Canon GL1 Digital camcorder. The white balance functions allow much more=20
control. The only problem here is a maximum 72 dpi capture.
Wes
"I find I have a great lot to learn =96 or unlearn. I seem to know far too=
=20
much and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am=20
getting on." -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh
Wesley C. Rolley
17211 Quail Court
Morgan Hill, CA 95037
(408)778-3024
"I find I have a great lot to learn =96 or unlearn. I seem to know far too=
=20
much and this knowledge obscures the really significant facts, but I am=20
getting on." -- Charles Rennie Mackintosh
Wesley C. Rolley
17211 Quail Court
Morgan Hill, CA 95037
(408)778-3024
| |
|
