UKC

Got back with another bunch of pix taken on my Canon EOS 20D yesterday with a brilliant blue sky only to be disapointed yet again, by the semi-washed out sky. Is there something simple I could/should be doing to sort that? I know it's an old camera but it is still smarter than I am and rarely comes off Auto or landscape settings.

In reply to Wiley Coyote:

Take pics at night or indoors? Buy an ND Grad filter?

In reply to Wiley Coyote:

Can you post a sample photo and find out the settings at which is was shot?

In reply to Wiley Coyote:
No it's not and that's probably the problem, it's probably metering for the (foreground) land, which is usually a fair bit darker than the sky, so your bright blue sky will be overexposed. Neutral density grad filters should sort the problem, otherwise multiple exposure/HDR, or just correct in Photoshop. Or yet, shoot subjects where there's not too much differentiation in exposure between the sky and the foreground - this is obviously a limiting factor.

In reply to Wiley Coyote:

Could be a few things really. It is relatively old, but to be honest there's not a lot to be gained from getting a new camera unless you need a specific function.

In reply to Wiley Coyote:
Thanks for ideas. I'll try the filter. I did not bother posting the pix because obviously without seeing the original sky it's hard to appreciate how much vividness has been lost. As you'll have gathered, I'm not a serious or skilled photographer but I'm told I do have a good eyue for a shot. I tend to take landscapes as I pass by rather than waiting for hours for the right light etc and occasionally get lucky with a good shot. I do take multiple exposures, exposing for different parts of the frame, but all too often I feel disappointed with the results, particularly skies.
Thanks again.

In reply to Wiley Coyote: with my point and shoot i auto focus at the brightest part of the scene (the sky) and then take a picture. usually you can recover slightly shady bits on the computer. its easier to recover dark bit than very light bits imo.

In reply to Wiley Coyote:

Circular Polariser for Deepening blue skies in colour or black and White, red filter for black and White.

I still use film, but Assume the same for digital?

In reply to Wiley Coyote:

What do you mean "got back"? It's not a film camera is it!?


Circular polarising filter. They cost less than a tenner. Screw it on, point camera at blue sky, twist filter until the sky looks really blue (normally that means turning it 90 degrees or so), take photo. Simples!

In reply to Wiley Coyote: The sky is much brighter than the foreground (most of the time). It's best to shoot at sunrise/sunset where the sun won't wash the sky out as easily. Photography is all about the right light, shooting at midday usually produces flat, non dramatic images, which may be why you often feel disappointed. But a few idea's for balancing the exposures are:

- Use GND filters
- Shoot multiple exposures and blend them in PP
- Reducing the exposure of the sky in pp, but this depends how much it differs. On a bright sunny day you'll probably blow the highlights too much to recover them.

Personally i'd advise against exposing for the sky and brightening the foreground. Increasing the brightness on an underexposed photo usually produces a lot of noise.

In reply to Wiley Coyote: I used a 20D for years, it is a great camera and although technology has moved on a lot there is no reason that it should not still give you good quality pictures. Only advise I would add to what has already been said is consider shooting in RAW for your landscape shots and learning a simple way to get the best out of them on the computer (I am assuming that you are getting jpegs from your auto settings).

In reply to Wiley Coyote: Many replies are mentioning your exposure, which could the the issue, and it's very likely. In my experience a camera will never expose every part of a landscape shot correctly.

Also look at your white balance, taking a shot in bright sun with the balance set to 'cloudy', for example, can dramatically alter the look in a bad way.

In reply to Wiley Coyote:

In reply to your last sentence, this is part of the issue - the camera can be pretty dumb! Don't trust it to set everything for you if you want to take your photography to the next level.

There are three crucial components to juggle when not taking pictures in Auto -

- aperture
- shutter speed
- ISO (which is really sensor sensitivity)

Learn what they all are, how to balance them. 'Exposure' is a fourth element kinda hanging off the side. It's really, really worth it and you'll be glad you did. One of those things that's really hard to get at first, really easy when you know.

In reply to TobyA:
>Hi Toby, No it's digital. 'I got back with...' ie I'd been bludering over the moors on a bright sunny day and the pix ain't terrible but I recall the reality being more vibrant than my pix.

Some useful tips. Thanks all. I did consider a polarising filter but my favourite zoom (which has probably not been off the camera for two years at least - I told you I was not a serious photographer) is 62mm which my local shop told me would mean £40 plus for a filter

In reply to Wiley Coyote:

Before buying filters, have you tried playing with the the Colour Temperature setting? It was a handy hint on a photography course I did a couple of years ago - tinkering turned watery high cloud into blue.

Google it for more info, or take your camera outside and experiment

In reply to Wiley Coyote:

Have a look on 7dayshop.com - £6 for a cheapy, £26 for a Hama one.

I think you're overexposing the sky - easy to do when shooting dark landscapes and cliffs. Use AE lock and recompose if necessary.

In reply to Wiley Coyote: stop it down a bit

In reply to Wiley Coyote:
You don't mention if you do any editing? The images come out of the camera looking 'flat' and a bit dull.
Usually a bit of basic levels adjustment, is the first thing needed to to get them looking livelier.
(assuming you have PShop or similar)?