# T2i - Colors look dull and lifeless



## NayLoMo6C (Jan 6, 2011)

I went to the San Jose auto show today to snap some pics of some new cars, and I have came to notice a problem with my T2i DSLR. Certain colors weren't as realistic and saturated as it had looked in real life, especially colors like red, green, and yellow color. Here's a few...

Here's a picture of a car that looked yellowish-gold with my naked eyes, but the camera made the color of the car seem dull and washed out. The accuracy of the color was WAY off. I tried tinkering with the picture settings and white balance but still couldn't get the color to look right. My friend's Nikon D5000 seemed to pick up the color just fine.











Here's another example. The red of this car in real life looked a lot more vibrant and punchy, but the picture made the color look dull, even a bit dark looking ( again, I've tried to tinker with ISO, shutter & aperture, white balance, etc...)









Lastly, the green of this car appeared lime-greenish and was pretty vibrant. The colors of this one seemed a bit better than the other two, but still didn't look like what I saw with my own eyes...










So what is the problem with my camera and how do I diagnose it? Is something wrong with my sensor, or am I just delusional? 
Any answer is appreciated! :mrgreen:


----------



## Big Mike (Jan 7, 2011)

The first thing to be aware of, is your exposure.  Exposure is controlled by aperture, shutter speed and ISO.  Although, in any of the auto modes, you will get the same exposure, so you may need to use EC (exposure compensation) or M (manual) mode.

Exposure is akin to brightness, but with colors, you get deeper colors with less exposure and brighter colors with more exposure.  It's up to you to decide which looks best for the shot you are taking at the time.

What type of image files are you saving (RAW or JPEG)?  With JPEG, your camera processes the image before saving it to the card.  So the 'in-camera' settings will make a difference.  You can try different picture styles and/or custom settings, changing the WB etc.
If you shoot RAW, the images may look a little bland straight from the camera, but you can then use software to apply those settings.  This gives you much more control and flexibility.

So it's not a problem with your camera, you just need to figure a few things out and find what workflow works for you, to get what you want.


----------



## John Mc (Jan 7, 2011)

Might also be your White balance, They look like fluorescent Bulb's, So it's most likely user Error,then Camera error. but maybe boost the contrast in Ps


----------



## ls6firebird (Jan 7, 2011)

NayLoMo6C said:


> Lastly, the green of this car appeared lime-greenish and was pretty vibrant. The colors of this one seemed a bit better than the other two, but still didn't look like what I saw with my own eyes...


 
i know what ya mean. i love the green they use on the new camaros. i believe they call it synergy green. it looks amazing in person, especially after getting buffed


----------



## timzo (Jan 7, 2011)

try using auto white balance


----------



## Drake (Jan 7, 2011)

There's nothing wrong with the camera. I have a Rebel XS, used to have XTi, and the shots you posted are pretty typical, at least for rebels, when using auto white balance. Try editing them a bit, shifting the WB, adding some vibrance or contrast, see what comes out.


----------



## pbelarge (Jan 7, 2011)

erose86 said:


> However maybe it is *I* who is delusional. It's entirely possible.


 

Your always shooting in the dark...:mrgreen:





It seems to be easy to "_blame it on something else_"

1. How well do you know your camera?
2. Have you tried any pp?

Digital camera images will need some time of adjustments. Either directly through camera settings or else in pp, or both.


----------



## wec12 (Jan 20, 2011)

Try adjusting your WB first and do whatever Big Mike said :thumbup: .


----------



## ghache (Jan 20, 2011)

For shooting still object like car. I use Vivid. it gives a little pops to colors directly from the bat.


----------



## PASM (Jan 20, 2011)

It needs a large-format, true-color, scanning back.. not a Bayer sensor, DSLR.

Full Resolution Zoomify Image List



NayLoMo6C said:


> Is something wrong with my sensor, or am I just delusional?
> Any answer is appreciated! :mrgreen:


----------



## KmH (Jan 20, 2011)

> So what is the problem with my camera and how do I diagnose it? Is something wrong with my sensor, or am I just delusional?
> Any answer is appreciated! :mrgreen:


Forty seven, because - a motorcycle doesn't have doors.


----------



## RobWyse (Jan 20, 2011)

I have Photoshop set up to use ProPhoto RGB, and just dragging the images into photoshop made a difference. After converting them back to sRGB, they still seem to have more pop, maybe like what you wanted.


----------



## PASM (Jan 20, 2011)

To me, the original pics look ok/'lifelike'..:er: Whatever.


----------



## jrphoto (Jan 20, 2011)

Check your color space, adobe RGB will give you a much larger gamut of colors.  If its set to sRGB the gamut will be much smaller.


----------



## swimswithtrout (Jan 20, 2011)

RobWyse said:


> I have Photoshop set up to use ProPhoto RGB, and just dragging the images into photoshop made a difference. After converting them back to sRGB, they still seem to have more pop




I was going to suggest almost the same thing and see if you were shooting in Adobe RGB.

There's many threads around the web about the "missing colors" in Adobe RGB's when viewed online and the simple answer is that most web browsers don't support it completely.

It throws another small wrench in the work-flow but to get Adobe RGB's to display properly, you need to convert them to sRBG, the conventional web colorspace.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 20, 2011)

Now you've crossed over in to clownish colors...


----------



## skyy38 (Jan 24, 2011)

If it was me, auto white balance would not be a consideration, not under fluorescent lighting.

I would take a white card reading or set WB to fluorescent. Vivid color setting would  be standard.

Other than that...?


----------



## dnavarrojr (Jan 29, 2011)

jrphoto said:


> Check your color space, adobe RGB will give you a much larger gamut of colors.  If its set to sRGB the gamut will be much smaller.



Hmm... interesting... I'll have to try this.


----------



## skieur (Jan 30, 2011)

jrphoto said:


> Check your color space, adobe RGB will give you a much larger gamut of colors. If its set to sRGB the gamut will be much smaller.


 
Adobe rgb will give you a larger gamut of colours BUT NOT on most printers and NOT on the web. It is not a good idea to use Adobe rgb space if these are the end uses.

Moreover if the photo has embedded adobe rgb, it will show up darker on most monitors with the exception of over brightened LCDs which some do not get calibrated or adjusted.

skieur


----------

