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

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Tomek666
      Photos on Angelbird AV Pro SX 160GB vs SE 512GB

      By Tomek666 · Posted

      Im not partal to any brad, just opted to try these based on apparent price / performance.  I'm always looking for best bang per buck, hence Fuji I guess - haha Reliabilty does not concern me, as I always shoot to two cards for pro work (and burst shooting is not a part of that). Made sense for me to get the cheapest / fastest CF cards for hobby shooting.     I just got a Sabrent Rocket V60 512GB cheep (as the back-up card).   As long as neither of these freeze the camera I hope its a cheep solution for my needs. (AB AV Pro SE 512Gb and Sabrent Rocket V60 512GB).  Half a gig of redunat storge for $200USD is something I can live with. (Especially considering I can bust the hell out of the Anglebird). Cheers, Tomek
    • Tomek666
      Charing battery inside the X-H2 over USB

      By Tomek666 · Posted

      Would using an external charger be of benefit to the batteries life? I appreace it can be faster, but I doin't mind pluging in the camera over USB to charge. Does charging via the camera do as good a job as lets say the fuji's own external charger? Does the camera stop charging once the battry is full and not over charge? I couldn't find these deatails in these forums or in the manual. Thank you!   Image below shot on X-T2 in a sunny studio.  

      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!

    • jerryy
      How to turn OFF the wifi antenna

      By jerryy · Posted

      It is really easy to find out if the wifi is on. Your computer or tablet or cell phone will have a network settings dealing with wifi, bluetooth, ethernet or “other”. Open that up and go into the section for wifi, and take note of which networks are listed. Turn on the camera and keep watching the list of networks. If your camera’s wifi is turned on, a new network should suddenly show up in your computer/tablet/phone’s network listings. Now go into the camera’s menus and start a wireless connection (the x-app or camera remote app can help you with this). You should see a network show up now. It is not hidden because it has to be visible so that your computer/tablet/phone can join the camera’s network to transfer images. Turn the camera off and that network should disappear. Turn the camera back on and see what happens.
    • Fujiron
      black and white (open thread)

      By Fujiron · Posted

      Sweet Creek Falls, Oregon. X-H1, Viltrox 13mm F1.4, Acros.

      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!

    • Stogursey
      Sigma 500mm F4 + XH2S?

      By Stogursey · Posted

      I think my Fuji 150-600 F8 is a brilliant wildlife lens in terms of sharpness, portability and value but the small aperture does cause issues at the start and end of the day - even pushing the ISO as far as I dare, I can see shutter speed down to 1/25s - stabilisation isn't an issue but asking a deer to stand still for that is too much! In the same situation, an F4 would give 1/100s so the difference to the success rate would be phenomenal... and that's without the other improvements like shallower depth of field. I also find that the Fuji's subject detect AF gets pretty iffy in low light - I keep updating to the latest firmware but it doesn't seem to get any better. I was originally looking at the Nikon 500mm F4 E but good examples secondhand are still reasonably expensive but like-for-like Sigma lenses are around half the price. Reviews I have read suggest that they are as good optically, AF performance and IS-wise but you gain a few hundred grams of weight (but less than the older Nikon model). For a couple of grand, I can live with that. Does anyone have any experience mounting one on an XH2S? What about with the 1.4 teleconverter? It feels like that is pushing it anyway - hefty lens + TC + Fringer all sounds a bit...wobbly? It is on the Fringer approved list but I am wary about AF speed in particular. I had also considered looking for a used Nikon 400mm F2.8, which would be even faster (and heavier) and could couple with a TC to give 560mm F4 but again, it is that lens+TC+Fringer combination that worries me as being just too many links in the chain. Of course, what I really want is a native Fuji prime but that doesn't seem to be on the horizon - and if you look at what Nikon and Sony are doing, if Fuji do ever bring out a 500mm prime, it will probably be a small, light and cheapish F5.6, which is only 2/3 stop better than my zoom at the same focal length. Any thoughts anyone?
×
×
  • Create New...