I have had quite a bit of success using the Auto Color option. Also, you might take a look at the Color Variations option under the Enhance menu.
Stu, are you talking about TH’s photos from the Minoltatalk forum? Plain old levels adjusting each channel individually worked great for me.
BTW, a little dehazing with USM also helps those images.
Stu, are you talking about TH’s photos from the Minoltatalk forum? Plain old levels adjusting each channel individually worked great for me
Indeed yes, that’s what I’m talking about.
I just posted my improved version of his car picture, which includes some dehazing. If you look closely, though, there are a few magenta artifacts. I’ll give your suggestion a try.
Yes, for the green channel go by your eye rather than totally by the histogram and you’ll see a difference. It is kind of noisy in the car, so I used high-pass sharpening in overlay for the final sharpening to keep artifacts down.
have had quite a bit of success using the Auto Color option. Also, you might take a look at the Color Variations option under the Enhance menu.
I tried Auto Color, and it got rid of most of the green, but not quite all of it. I also tried Color Variations, but either it’s too much of a ham-handed tool or I’m too ham-minded to use it properly. I would have liked to try the equivalent feature under PS LE, which IMO was more useful, but I recently deleted LE from my computer since I hadn’t used it in a long time.
Barbara,
The high pass overlay would have been a good idea. I used just a little bit of USM, because there appera to be some sharpening artifacts already in the original, especially in the border between the front windshield and the foliage behind it – due, I think, to the in-camera sharpening that the A1 applies to JPEGs in "Normal" sharpness.
For anyone lurking and mystified about what we’re talking about, here’s a link to the whole sorry thread:
<
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1024&me ssage=8916812>
Yes, Stu, I also wonder how he created those web files because the jpg quality is pretty poor for the file size.
That thread is quite interesting to me, because the forced technicolor wonderland of my canon s400 is to me one of the few really hateful things about that camera. Curious to me that nobody has mentioned the horrific PF in the trees in the canon shots, especially #9.
In fairness, though, that blow-out thing is as much from not understanding how to use the canon correctly as from a camera defect, same as with the A1 shots.
To me, buying a camera like the A1 and complaining that it’s not a great P&S is about like whining because your Indy car lacks cruise control.
Barbara,
In fairness, though, that blow-out thing is as much from not understanding how to use the canon correctly as from a camera defect, same as with the A1 shots.
Absolutely, and I said as much in one of my replies to him. The S1 has a histogram and a manual exposure adjustment. He’s just too stubborn to use it.
I’ve known Tom for a very long time – he and I used to collaboratively edit and publish a newsletter on a now-defunct software program. I can’t understand what’s gotten into him.
To me, buying a camera like the A1 and complaining that it’s not a great P&S is about like whining because your Indy car lacks cruise control.
ROFL! Great line!
Well I preferred the Minolta shot! Canons do seem to overexpose like that in outdoor scenes – which is why I use exposure compensation. And when they overexpose trees against sky out comes the purple fringing. Barabara – I too dislike the dayglo colours that the canon’s processor seems to want to impose at times. (greens on the G3 are well known – Australian greens just aren’t that colour). This is the main reason I’m gradually shifting to PSCS from Elements – the RAW conversion plug in allows you to save default conversion parameters that give an image the way you want it rather than the way Canon’s DIGIC processor wants you to have it. I do keep on coming back to Elements as I can’t find all the things that I want in CS yet!
….And my colour vision is obviously not so sensitive as many other posters (or my monitor callibration os way off – which I would not discount – I need to redo it. I found the green tint very hard to discern. It is there, but I don’t find that irritating. And if I hadn’t had the canon pictures there as a comparison, I don’t think I would have noticed it at all!.
Susan S
I too dislike the dayglo colours that the canon’s processor seems to want to impose at times
That’s very interesting, Susan. I’d been wondering if that was just the default on the consumer digis or whether it affects their prosumers also.
I have to say that in my own experience I’ve never seen any digital camera that did as well with WB on auto as it does even left constantly on the daylight setting.
I also get that greenish cast my minolta with AWB, but since the Ax series are basically one-button for setting up a custom WB and allow you to store a whole bunch of custom settings I don’t know why anyone would care about it. Even the s400 does a much better job on the other WB settings than on auto.
I presume that all the Canons digicams that use their DIGIC processor will give pretty similar results – I think the G5 fixed up the green issue that a lot of people complained about with the G3. AWB on the Canon G3 is pretty good outdoors, but not so hot inside.
One thing I’m wondering about is how much correction of WB do I always want to do? To my eyes, often the white balance settings seems to overcorrect – if you are in a room with tungsten lighting then neutral colours will have a yellow cast. Outdoors, shadows in bright sun look bluseish to me -sometimes I want to keep that colour cast in the shadows -do I really want the white balance settings in the camera or the colour adjustments I can do with Elements to remove all those tints? It’s one thing if I’m a product photographer who needs to diplay accurate colour information under varying lighting conditions. It’s another if I’m trying to actually photograph the evening sunlight as a subject in itself – I find it very difficult to get a white balance setting in camera/Elements correction combination which will do this, particulalry as there is no way to go back and do a check on what the light actually looked like!
Susan S
I presume that all the Canons digicams that use their DIGIC processor will give pretty similar results
Well, I had always figured it was probably a conscious decision on Canon’s part about what settings to use–something like Sharpness +2, saturation+2, contrast +2 as the default in the P&S models, which would actually be a pretty smart decision for that market.
But since I’ve been pretty much assuming they set things up this way on purpose, I wondered if they were making the same decision for the cameras with more manual settings. So you think it may just be endemic to the processor?
Try this it remove green color cast
1.Open your image.
2.Take your eye dropper and click on the part of the image that is to be pure white. This will change your foreground color to whatever color cast the eye dropper sees.
3.Make a new layer.
4.Go to Edit- Fill and click click OK. This will fill this layer with the color your eye dropper has selected.
5.Go to Image – Adjustments Invert and click.
6.Go to your Layers Palette and change the blend mode to Color Dodge.
Ron
Thanks, Ron! Works like a charm!
Re: Stu Bloom message 7 ( link to 2 images, one Canon, one minolta…car ) Well, this has kind of been on my mind and I wasn’t going to say anything since I really am only just beginning to learn about this stuff BUT I have to say that I would prefer to have the Minoltas results than the Canon’s results. Seems like there is a heck of alot more information to work with in the Minoltas capture than the blown out highlights of the Canon’s capture. I am definietly NOT judging the quality of the cameras here but merely pointing out my opinion on the 2 images and which one I would prefer to ‘fix’ if I had to. There is still color to work with in the Minolta image and I feel with a little tweeking in Elements the image would be presentable. There, got it off my chest.
That was exactly the point, Jodi.
The gentleman who posted those images was trying to prove that the Canon S1 did a better job in full automatic mode than did the Minolta A1. He posted the Canon shot, overexposed by at least a full stop, as a "better" exposure than the Minolta’s, which was not overexposed. The ironic thing is that in a previous thread, he had raved about the Canon’s blue skies, saying that proved it was a better camera – yet in these shots, where the blue sky is totally washed out in the Canon shot, he said that wasn’t important since it was "background."
I agree that it says nothing about the quality of the two cameras – or, IMO, the skills of the photographer, because Lord knows, I’ve proven you can blow out highlights with any camera. It does speak volumes, however, about that one individual’s understanding of what "correct" exposure is!
Yup, Thanks Stu. 🙂
I guess he bugged me a little.
