Wondering about consistently low exposure & vibrance

chexone · Sep 17, 2008

Hi, I'm pretty new to all this cool stuff. I'm having a slight annoyance.

Here's some info: Body:
Canon 30D
Lenses: EF 70-200 4.0L, EF 50 1.8, Tamron 17-50 2.8

Problem:
My pictures come out consistently under-exposed and lacking in color, no matter which lense I use. I use Adobe Lightroom for post-production, and by adjusting the exposure and vibrance there, I get what I'm looking for, but I'm always having to make the same adjustments, it seems.

I'm either doing something wrong when taking the pics, or there's something wrong with the camera. I've tried playing around with Exposure compensation and some camera settings (Picture Style), but it doesn't seem to help much. I'm shooting mostly on Av to control the aperture.

Any ideas about this?
Before and after pics: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28705826@N07/sets/72157607345992868/

Thanks!

chrisburke · Sep 17, 2008

are you shooting in auto or manual mode?

chexone · Sep 17, 2008

chrisburke said:
are you shooting in auto or manual mode?

I'm shooting in what they call the "Creative Zone" using Av. So not completely manual, just setting the aperture.

chexone · Sep 17, 2008

Here's what I'm talking about (before and after pics):

http://www.flickr.com/photos/28705826@N07/sets/72157607345992868/

Jon0807 · Sep 17, 2008

The original pic does look way under exposed. Looking at your exif data I see that the exposure bias is 0/3 EV. Also looking at your other pictures on your flickr it seems alot of your photos has the exposure bias. I'm guessing it's flash compensation so make sure you set that to 0. Also are you shooting in RAW or JPG? If you're in RAW then there usually is always some sort of PP. With JPG the camera adds some proccessing to the picture depending on what kind of style you choose. But I usually always do some sort of PP to all of my pictures.

Edit - After some research it seems that "Exposure Bias 0/3 ev" means 0. But what I don't understand is why my photos say Exposure Bias 0 ev.

chexone · Sep 17, 2008

Jon0807 said:
The original pic does look way under exposed. Looking at your exif data I see that the exposure bias is 0/3 EV. Also looking at your other pictures on your flickr it seems alot of your photos has the exposure bias. I'm guessing it's flash compensation so make sure you set that to 0. Also are you shooting in RAW or JPG? If you're in RAW then there usually is always some sort of PP. With JPG the camera adds some proccessing to the picture depending on what kind of style you choose. But I usually always do some sort of PP to all of my pictures.

Thanks! I'm shooting in RAW, yes.

aprileve · Sep 17, 2008

just bumping because I have the same problem and wonder if anyone else has advice!

chrisburke · Sep 17, 2008

heres a link i found of other people having the same problem with that camera

http://photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00MO4X

and heres another

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=385575

chexone · Sep 18, 2008

Thanks for those links. It looks like the Canon cameras underexpose slightly on purpose, to avoid over exposing and losing detail. I'm glad I have Lightroom!

twozero · Sep 18, 2008

my 30D is the same way. i have found that just bumping it up 1/3-2/3 helps a ton. i just about leave my camera this way, i tend to find it more forgiving. not everyone will agree, but for me it works best.

also, what metering mode are you using? mine seems to do better in daylight with spot metering and for indoors or anything other than daylight, i like the center-weighted average.

hope this helped a little

chexone · Sep 18, 2008

Thanks twozero. Yep bumping it up does seem to help. I'll try it out some more.

I've been shooting with spot metering. Have not gotten around to experimenting with others, but I'll keep that in mind.

Early · Sep 18, 2008

chexone said:
Thanks twozero. Yep bumping it up does seem to help. I'll try it out some more.

I've been shooting with spot metering. Have not gotten around to experimenting with others, but I'll keep that in mind.

There's nothing wrong with spot metering. You just have to learn what to meter on. To be that underexposed, it seems you had to have exposed on the sky. Even the manipulated version is underexposed, and to correct it further, you will be desaturating the sky.

That was a hard shot to begin with, no matter which mode you used. I'm also pretty sure you would have blown out the sky to get the proper exposure, so a polarizer would be a definite asset in a shot like this. Bump it, bump it, and bump it again. Don't worry about the cost. Film is cheap when you're shooting digital.

PS How are your shots when you don't have such a bright background?

mrodgers · Sep 18, 2008

Isn't this why everyone says to the new guys (me not long ago), 'learn and understand how your camera shoots?'

With my camera, I have found that -2/3 EV exposes the best. I shot with my coworker's XTi the other week and it my first experience with a dSLR. I found the results were extremely overexposed. I only shot a handful in the quality lab at work under fluorescent lights. I didn't have time to play much with the camera and only had it set in Av and didn't play with the EV value, it was centered I believe.

If you find that you have to change the EV value when in Aperture or Shutter priority mode, then in manual mode, you just adjust so the meter is reading the equivalent value that you would normally change on the EV in other modes. As I said, I consistently get better exposed shots when at -2/3 EV with my camera, thus I always have it set at -2/3 EV or I adjust in manual mode to display -2/3 on the meter display.