Lacking vibrancy in my pics - Why?

mumof2

Are my settings wrong - I don't know, as I have tweaked them for the last year or so but still getting the same dull images. See what I mean or is it just me..... Thanks for C&C n advice:D (I want to get a telephoto lens but not sure if my camera - Canon450D is ok at this stage). btw the lenses I used in these pics were kit lens to zoom in closer (18 - 55), and Tokina 12 - 24 F4. the other problem I seem to have all the time is trying to get images sharp. I just dont get the sharpness I want, even with a stand. Pics are originals.

Thecageyone

Are you shooting RAW? or straight Jpeg from the camera? Any processing at all?

Most of use do a little post processing to lift the vibrance and clarity of out images. if you don't have Photoshop or lightroom, there are free post processing programs available online, like GIMP [really, genuine name ] Otherwise, if you're just shooting jpeg and using the images straight off camera, you can set the camera to do a little processing. Usually you can up the sharpness/saturation/contrast in the menu somewhere. I'm not familiar with canon cams though.

Borderfox

If you shooting Canon go to you picture style and go to user defined and add sharpness/contrast/saturation all +1

http://www.canon.co.jp/imaging/picturestyle/editor/index.html

hbr

mumof2 wrote: »

Are my settings wrong - I don't know, as I have tweaked them for the last year or so but still getting the same dull images. See what I mean or is it just me..... Thanks for C&C n advice:D (I want to get a telephoto lens but not sure if my camera - Canon450D is ok at this stage). btw the lenses I used in these pics were kit lens to zoom in closer (18 - 55), and Tokina 12 - 24 F4. the other problem I seem to have all the time is trying to get images sharp. I just dont get the sharpness I want, even with a stand. Pics are originals.

Cheap point & shoot cameras usually produce images that have very
high colour saturation, sharpness and contrast. DSLRs tend to produce
more accurate, but relatively dull images. Use your favourite editing software
to boost sharpness, colour and contrast. Alternatively, you can get the camera
to do it for you.

This is one of your photos after a few slight tweaks in GIMP:

FoxT

The magazine page and the newspaper business page seem to be somewhat out of focus.

Both could also benefit from a White balance adjustment. This can be done in camera prior to taking the shot, or with the RAW or jpeg file afterwards.

I suggest you try those again, as follows:

1 - take a pic using AF

2 - Use Live view, zoom in on the pic as much as you can, and focus manually (tripod is a big help here)

Compare the AF to the MF pictures .

If you have an issue, then try with a few different lenses - It is fairly common for Camera AF to require servicing/adjustment from time to time.

Regarding the outdoor shots, I think they are fine, just need a bit of post processing to improve them.

Cheers,

- FoxT

mumof2

I shoot in RAW, use Picasa3 for editing. However if my settings are wrong, I don't think any amount of editing is going to get the results that are similar to this:

http://www.pixel-peeper.com/lenses/?lens=17&p=1

Thanks borderfox for the link. (I have tried adjusting the settings in Picture style editor). Now off to try pics outside n see how colours stand out this time.

mumof2

@ hbr, thanks for showing me the edited version. Just want to ask people what they think of this edited version?

*eadaoin

Remember too that the time of day you shoot will have an impact on how your photo looks due to the quality of light. You might find that shooting in the early morning & late evening light can make colour & light richer, so perhaps try one of these outdoor shots again at a different time of day and see what difference it makes.

sheesh

the one of the horses looks like one of the grey days we had over the weekend the light was not good for photography, also we are just at the start of spring so the grass is going to be a bit dull looking.

I suppose you could try upping the saturation and contrast and see what you get.

Promac

mumof2 wrote: »

I shoot in RAW, use Picasa3 for editing. However if my settings are wrong, I don't think any amount of editing is going to get the results that are similar to this:

http://www.pixel-peeper.com/lenses/?lens=17&p=1

Thanks borderfox for the link. (I have tried adjusting the settings in Picture style editor). Now off to try pics outside n see how colours stand out this time.

A lot of what you're seeing there is processing.

Check out this one of the bride from that same series:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/9026217@N05/3483894679
Do you think anyone in real life has skin that smooth? This has been processed to remove any blemishes from the girl's skin. It's also been sharpened and had the contrast and colour boosted. You need to do this with RAW files - they were never intended to be used straight off the camera. They're for giving the photographer the control over what exactly is done to produce the final image. Have a look for a free trial of Lightroom 3 and see how that affects your images.


Then there's the fact that the bride picture is taken with a Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 L. L type lenses are far superior to your kit lens and will produce lovely sharp, vibrant images. The camera itself will make a difference but the 450D will give you some lovely shots too - most of mine are from a 450D - and at least some of them are nice

You can rent a nice lens from Conn's and other places I'm sure for around 10% of the total cost for a weekend. It's worth it too if you have something special to go to that you'd like to photograph or if you just want to see the difference in the lenses.

Freddie59

hbr wrote: »

Cheap point & shoot cameras usually produce images that have very high colour saturation, sharpness and contrast. DSLRs tend to produce more accurate, but relatively dull images. Use your favourite editing software to boost sharpness, colour and contrast.

That's it in a nutshell. I couldn't believe the difference in quality (very poor) when I upgraded from a Fuji S5000 Bridge Camera to a Canon 450D.

The main problem was that I was shooting in Auto - just like on the Fuji. The Canon just wasn't up to it. I was advised on this forum to buy Understanding Exposure. This will open up a whole new world to you once you start using M mode on the camera. Takes some getting used to, but it's what you have to do.

Here's two pics. Both taken on a 450D. First one with the kit lens, second with the Tokina 12-124. Both were taken a couple of weeks after buying the book.


View West from the Muckross Road Bridge by Vadrefjord (Ireland), on Flickr



Boulevard Of Trees, The Quay, Waterford City, Ireland by Vadrefjord (Ireland), on Flickr

mumof2

I use the Tokina 12 - 24 and love the lens, but it doesn't stretch far enough for me a lot of the time. So sometimes (as I have nothing else) I switch to the kit lens, but lose quality. Im still learning and I so appreciate all your tips links and advice!

Im off this morning while its dry to practice, am going to write down in my note book so I remember what settings I used and results I got when I get home and transfer pics.

I wil try Lightroom and see what I get I use picasa but guess thats not great in the end.

Thanks so much everyone. I will post later again.