Jump to content

Incorrect color displayed

Daryl Chan

By Daryl Chan
in Fuji X-T1 / Fuji X-T10

 Share

Recommended Posts

Daryl Chan Rookie

Daryl Chan

Posted
Posted

I'm using an XT-1 with current firmware and 18-55mm lens.  I'm shooting a colored light display and the color doesn't come out right.  The reflection of the display off of the water in front of it is correct but the display is not.  I tried different white balance settings but it doesn't change.  I don't think it's a WB issue.

 

Any ideas?  See the attached photo.  The lettering is red but it appears yellow.  It's correct in the reflection.  

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites
milandro Grand Master

milandro

Posted
Posted

From the reflection in the R it looks like you have used a flash too? I wouldn’t do that. I would shoot this when the lights just come on, hopefully when there is some residual ambient light ( it would be perfect if you were looking west). 

 

However, I think that you should play with different color temperature settings because it can only be a color balance issue generated by the fact that you might be using the correct or not type of balance relative to the spectrum of the light source.

 

The light inside the letters Toronto might be fluorescent or not and even if fluorescent there are many types of fluorescent light ( currently your camera should be having 3 different ones). The eye is a very bad judge of these things but the sensor really shows what the light emits and can be corrected accordingly but if you imput the wrong color temperature then everything will be off.

 

If you would be able to enquire about this, from the technical service maintaining that site, they might be able to tell you exactly the type of light used and you might be able to correctly set its color temperature in your camera.

 

Perhaps this helps. Good luck!

 

http://www.apogeephoto.com/july2004/jaltengarten7_2004.shtml

Link to post
Share on other sites
flysurfer Experienced

flysurfer

Posted
Posted

It's also Adobe RGB, so only useful for CMYK printing and home viewing on wide-gamut displays, but not for showing it on the web or to other people's devices.

 

Reprocess the RAW in-camera using sRGB and a different film simulation (Pro Neg Std offers mode DR), or process the RAW in Lightroom or a similar converter with good highlight recovery.

 

You can also post the RAW file here via Dropbox, so we can fix it for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Daryl Chan Rookie

Daryl Chan

Posted
  • Author
Posted

From the reflection in the R it looks like you have used a flash too? I wouldn’t do that. I would shoot this when the lights just come on, hopefully when there is some residual ambient light ( it would be perfect if you were looking west). 

 

However, I think that you should play with different color temperature settings because it can only be a color balance issue generated by the fact that you might be using the correct or not type of balance relative to the spectrum of the light source.

 

The light inside the letters Toronto might be fluorescent or not and even if fluorescent there are many types of fluorescent light ( currently your camera should be having 3 different ones). The eye is a very bad judge of these things but the sensor really shows what the light emits and can be corrected accordingly but if you imput the wrong color temperature then everything will be off.

 

If you would be able to enquire about this, from the technical service maintaining that site, they might be able to tell you exactly the type of light used and you might be able to correctly set its color temperature in your camera.

 

Perhaps this helps. Good luck!

 

http://www.apogeephoto.com/july2004/jaltengarten7_2004.shtml

 

From the reflection in the R it looks like you have used a flash too? I wouldn’t do that. I would shoot this when the lights just come on, hopefully when there is some residual ambient light ( it would be perfect if you were looking west). 

 

However, I think that you should play with different color temperature settings because it can only be a color balance issue generated by the fact that you might be using the correct or not type of balance relative to the spectrum of the light source.

 

The light inside the letters Toronto might be fluorescent or not and even if fluorescent there are many types of fluorescent light ( currently your camera should be having 3 different ones). The eye is a very bad judge of these things but the sensor really shows what the light emits and can be corrected accordingly but if you imput the wrong color temperature then everything will be off.

 

If you would be able to enquire about this, from the technical service maintaining that site, they might be able to tell you exactly the type of light used and you might be able to correctly set its color temperature in your camera.

 

Perhaps this helps. Good luck!

 

http://www.apogeephoto.com/july2004/jaltengarten7_2004.shtml

I did not use a flash.  It was too far away anyway to make a difference anyway.  I thought it could have been a white balance issue also so I tried them all to no avail.  The fact that the reflection is the correct color makes this confusing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Daryl Chan Rookie

Daryl Chan

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hi Daryl,

Have you tried shooting in raw and then adjusting the color balance/hue in your converter? This should provide an answer, but perhaps you are not conversant with raw processing?

hth

Jeremy

Very familiar with shooting in RAW and processing it.  If I shot it in raw I would have had to change the hue and tint and it would change the whole photo unless I made a selection in Photoshop.  This still wouldn't suggest what causes this situation in the first place.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Daryl Chan Rookie

Daryl Chan

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hi Daryl,

Have you tried shooting in raw and then adjusting the color balance/hue in your converter? This should provide an answer, but perhaps you are not conversant with raw processing?

hth

Jeremy

I even tried adjusting the Kelvin temperature while looking at the view in the LCD and I couldn't get the letters to appear red.

Link to post
Share on other sites
milandro Grand Master

milandro

Posted
Posted

Daryl, just a nothe on the answering method, you can answer to all the previous posts in one answer ( even edit the first answer successively), there is no need to give a separate answer to all one in a different post. It makes tedious reading with a lot of space.

 

By adding @ to the moniker of the person whom you are addressing your answer to, one will receive an alert that his name was quoted 

 

I have no reason to doubt your abilities whether shooting or post processing, but, if I may, I will elaborate on my previous suggestion.

 

The reflection in the water is obviously a more saturated version of the light source. The light source is therefore overexposed being the direct source and not the reflection by at least 2 stops.

 

I would try again to go at dusk when the lights are just tuned on. This would provide some ambient light to outline the building at the back ( if that’s what you want) and expose for the light source.

 

This would probably cause the reflection to be dimer but you can select that area alone and push it a little bit.

 

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites
cug Community Regular

cug

Posted
Posted

How does one overexpose a color in one section of a photo and have it not affect that same color in other parts of the photo when taking the photo?

 

Brightness and intensity of a neon sign is a lot different than the reflection of said sign in the water. There have been threads around this on other forums. Blown out red channel isn't uncommon and hard to gauge, unless you check results in camera right when you take the photo and take corrective measures.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Daryl Chan Rookie

Daryl Chan

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Daryl, just a nothe on the answering method, you can answer to all the previous posts in one answer ( even edit the first answer successively), there is no need to give a separate answer to all one in a different post. It makes tedious reading with a lot of space.

 

By adding @ to the moniker of the person whom you are addressing your answer to, one will receive an alert that his name was quoted 

 

I have no reason to doubt your abilities whether shooting or post processing, but, if I may, I will elaborate on my previous suggestion.

 

The reflection in the water is obviously a more saturated version of the light source. The light source is therefore overexposed being the direct source and not the reflection by at least 2 stops.

 

I would try again to go at dusk when the lights are just tuned on. This would provide some ambient light to outline the building at the back ( if that’s what you want) and expose for the light source.

 

This would probably cause the reflection to be dimer but you can select that area alone and push it a little bit.

 

Good luck.

@milandro Thank you for your posting tips.  I'm new to this and don't know my way around.  "MultiQuote/Quote" don't know what they mean or how to use them.  Anyway I wish I could return to the location to underexpose the photo by 2 stops or so but I was on a vacation.  Thanks for your explanation.  You raise a point that I will have to remember the next time I find myself in a similar situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
davidmold Contributor

davidmold

Posted
Posted

It seems like this sign changes color all the time anyway: https://www.google.com/search?q=Toronto+sign+Nathan+Phillips

 

But if you really want it red, just fiddle with the color channels in Lightroom or Photoshop until it is red. You can doubtless do better than my hasty attempt.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • PoorAlchemist
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By PoorAlchemist · Posted

      I found the reddit topic i refere to :  https://www.reddit.com/r/davinciresolve/comments/1pc3f1e/cant_apply_new_fujifilm_gfx_55_lut/ "Update for y'all, It's just like what @ExpBalSat said, it's because of the backslashes in the names break them. I changed the file name and it works now. "   For me it was the solution. Realy annoying if it doesn’t work for you 😕  
    • Don Barar
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By Don Barar · Posted

      Here is the solution to using the Eterna 55 file simulation LUTs in Davinci Resolve.   In general, do not use the FLog2C to film simulation LUTs as they are not supported by Davinci Resolve for two reasons: 1) Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut Color Space and 2) Davinci Resolve does not support FLog2C gamma.  Instead, use Flog2 which is supported by Davinci Resolve.  Here is an example.  Let's say that you want to use Classic Chrome simulation.  Do the following: Complete your color grade and use a CST to get to Rec 709. Add a node.  Use a CST to convert from Rec 709 to FLog2.  Output Color space is Rec 2020 and Outout Gamut is FLog2. Add a node.  Apply the FLog2 to Classic Chrome LUT Create a combination node from node in steps 2 and 3. Apply a Key to the combination node and adjust the Key Output Gain to get the amount of the combination node that you want applied. So that you do not have to do this over and over again, generate a LUT for the combination node.  Remember to turn off all other nodes before generating the LUT. Hope this helps others. Don  
    • crazyfields
      Please save me from insanity 23mm f2 vs F1.4r

      By crazyfields · Posted

      Thanks for the insights. I think it's really hard to make a decision without having the two side by side! 
    • George_P
      Please save me from insanity 23mm f2 vs F1.4r

      By George_P · Posted

      I don’t have the 23 f2 but I have read several times that it is considered a little soft at close distance, compared to the 23 f1.4 lenses. These will also focus at shorter distance from the subject, esp. the new one. So that might make a difference. The new 23 f1.4 LM WR  has better resolution, esp. in regard to the 40Mpix sensors, which you don’t have on the X-T2. What practical difference that makes for the value of the pictures one makes is disputable and subjective.  f1.4 will gather more light but with a smaller DOF, which may be desirable in some situations but not so in others, depends. If you like to shoot close ups, you will probably use higher f numbers to get a bigger DOF. Same for landscapes. If you are a bokeh fan, yes the f1.4 lens are better.  The older 23 f1.4 lens that you are considering is a very good and respected lens. The f1.4 vs f2 aperture per se is perhaps not so important. The 23 f2 is very small, light and practical and a great lens for travel and landscapes. So, go figure. I am afraid I just sent you further down the road to insanity !
    • crazyfields
      Please save me from insanity 23mm f2 vs F1.4r

      By crazyfields · Posted

      First post here but long time fuji shorter. I use the XT2 with the 23mm f2 / 35mm 1.4 / 16-80mm f4 I'm considering the 23mm f1.4 r (Non-WR) About me: - I shoot black and white only. - I like macro details to wide open landscapes and everything in-between. - I shoot mostly for art, intrigue and creativity of the image. My question - is the 23mm f1.4 going to offer me any meaningful difference over the f2 for the above scenarios Thanks and sorry for bringing it up again...
×
×
  • Create New...