Images a bit pale looking

[Dave Richards]

I have to get the kit to calibrate my monitor (Apple MAC) so any recommendations on what to buy would be welcome. I think some of my images are a bit on the light side. Some other opinions would be appreciated

[spacecadet]

To start with try your built-in display adjustments for gamma and contrast.

Maybe try the highlight and whites slider in LR.

[Ed Rooney]

Dave, when you or other newbies are asking tech questions in this forum, it would be helpful if you could supply contributors with some basic information: like how old is your Mac, and what editing programs you're using. 

 

My iMac dates back to 2008, and I don't need a kit to control image quality with this computer. I doubt that you need anything more either.

 

Open up System Preferences, go to Display, and click on Color. This is where you calibrate your screen. I have mine set at iMac Calibrated at the moment. I'm not sure what I did way back when, and since I'm not looking over your shoulder, I will not tell you what to select. Be advised that on the Internet and for book and magazine reproductions, Adobe RGB (1998) is preferred. All my images are set as Adobe RGB. 

 

I work on one image at a time using Lightroom 5.7, Photoshop CS5, and NX2. Looking at your images, you need to add saturation and a touch of contrast.

 

Good luck.

[MDM]

Your images look just fine to me in terms of brightness and contrast. I am really fussy and I am working on a well-calibrated monitor set quite dark (90cd/m2) as I do my own printing and I want to produce images at a brightness that match my prints. You may have your monitor set too bright if they look too bright. The simplest way to check brightness is to look at the histogram in LR or PS. I've had a look at a few of yours and they look good (full tonal range from balck to white and midtones are fine).

 

For best results, you should use hardware calibration. I would recommend the X-Rite i1 Display PRO or the Datacolor Spyder 5 Pro as mid-range hardware calibrators. If you do your own printing, then check out the ColorMunki Photo.

[John Mitchell]

Are you using a Canon camera? Their sensors seem to produce less saturated images than some other manufacturers, e.g. Sony sensors.

[Bill Brooks]

I am looking at your images on a monitor set with an old Spyder3 Pro calibrator (relatively cheap). I agree your images are pale. When adjusting your images you need to set the black point darker 000 and the white point brighter 255 255 255. I usually adjust the black and white points until I receive warnings in the blackest shadow and the whitest highlight. Then I back off to taste. Your mid point (exposure) is about correct. Your black point is way too light. Some shadows should be empty, and some highlights should be blown.

 

I think a cheap hardware calibrator would be worth the price.

 

Your images would be easier to print because they have a limited dynamic range, but that dynamic range makes them look pale on a monitor. The buying decision is made on the monitor, most client uses are for monitor display, so pale works against you.

 

Your images should be adjusted with the monitor background set to middle grey. Everything looks good on a black background.

 

Here is an example. There is enough data in this shot to retain detail in the dark areas under the mill and under the bridge (right). You could also maintain complete detail in the highlight areas where the sun glances off the weathered wall. I set the under mill and bridge areas to black because they were distracting and black adds contrast. I set the weathered highlights on the side walls to have some speckles of pure white because the sun is reflecting off of those areas, and it makes the image pop.

 

[TeeCee]

Monitors can change their density and colour appearance in next to no time, hence mine is re-calibrated every fortnight.

I use a Gretag MacBeth x rite i1, which I suspect is no longer made, though there will be an equivalent.

Wasn't massively expensive, takes five minutes to do, ensures consistent results.

[wiskerke]

The culprit may well be just the brightness setting. Apple likes bright.

Calibration is essential for photography. Unless it doesn't leave your house.

Mine is a X-Rite also. They can go bad though. This is my second one.

 

Pale is not always a bad thing.

From this page a client has just (it came in like 10 minutes ago) picked this one:

 

About the palest on the page.

 

I don't think it really stands out, being pale and common and all that, but all the others are a lot more sunny and saturated.

Is this because it's the buyers personal taste? Because of the season? Because it's different? Because it's on paper?

That last one I know: it's for online display.

The funny thing: it's a distributor sale and it's going back to Italy.

 

wim

[MDM]

 

I am looking at your images on a monitor set with an old Spyder3 Pro calibrator (relatively cheap). I agree your images are pale. When adjusting your images you need to set the black point darker 000 and the white point brighter 255 255 255. I usually adjust the black and white points until I receive warnings in the blackest shadow and the whitest highlight. Then I back off to taste. Your mid point (exposure) is about correct. Your black point is way too light. Some shadows should be empty, and some highlights should be blown.

 

Your images would be easier to print because they have a limited dynamic range, but that dynamic range makes them look pale on a monitor. The buying decision is made on the monitor, most client uses are for monitor display, so pale works against you.

 

 

I don't agree with Bill's assessment in that the images do mostly go to maximum black if you download some and check the histos in Photoshop. So I don't think it's a dynamic range issue as they do have a full tonal range (the ones I've looked at in any case). I do think, however, that the shadow areas have been lightened a bit too much so that they look a bit like HDR images. You could darken the shadows a bit and increase the midtone contrast, then maybe add a touch of Vibrance to make them pop a bit more.

 

As wim says, Apple monitors are way too bright. A hardware calibrator like the X-Rite i1 Display PRO (about £170) is highly recommended as that allows you to control the brightness and the colour. If you want to go all the way, get an X-Rite Color Checker Passport with the calibrator and you can start creating your own camera profiles which gives you a lot of control over how your images look - not hard to learn and well worth getting to grips with.

 

And as Ed says, you have not given much information - are you shooting raw, how are you doing the raw conversions etc.

[Dave Richards]

Dave, when you or other newbies are asking tech questions in this forum, it would be helpful if you could supply contributors with some basic information: like how old is your Mac, and what editing programs you're using. 

 

My iMac dates back to 2008, and I don't need a kit to control image quality with this computer. I doubt that you need anything more either.

 

Open up System Preferences, go to Display, and click on Color. This is where you calibrate your screen. I have mine set at iMac Calibrated at the moment. I'm not sure what I did way back when, and since I'm not looking over your shoulder, I will not tell you what to select. Be advised that on the Internet and for book and magazine reproductions, Adobe RGB (1998) is preferred. All my images are set as Adobe RGB. 

 

I work on one image at a time using Lightroom 5.7, Photoshop CS5, and NX2. Looking at your images, you need to add saturation and a touch of contrast.

 

Good luck.

 

My iMac is about a couple of years old running Mavericks. I shoot in raw using Nikon kit and edit using Lightroom 5.7. I am a complete novice as far as editing goes; usually just adjust basic stuff like exposure, highlights, shadows, black, white and lens profile. Maybe some clarity and on occasions contrast. I think I probably overdo the  shadows adjustments in an effort to get more detail out of them. Many thanks for your advice, I'll have a look in system preferences and will probably chicken out and go to the Apple store, but I will reset the camera from sRGB to Adobe RGB.

[Dave Richards]

 

 

I am looking at your images on a monitor set with an old Spyder3 Pro calibrator (relatively cheap). I agree your images are pale. When adjusting your images you need to set the black point darker 000 and the white point brighter 255 255 255. I usually adjust the black and white points until I receive warnings in the blackest shadow and the whitest highlight. Then I back off to taste. Your mid point (exposure) is about correct. Your black point is way too light. Some shadows should be empty, and some highlights should be blown.

 

Your images would be easier to print because they have a limited dynamic range, but that dynamic range makes them look pale on a monitor. The buying decision is made on the monitor, most client uses are for monitor display, so pale works against you.

 

 

I don't agree with Bill's assessment in that the images do mostly go to maximum black if you download some and check the histos in Photoshop. So I don't think it's a dynamic range issue as they do have a full tonal range (the ones I've looked at in any case). I do think, however, that the shadow areas have been lightened a bit too much so that they look a bit like HDR images. You could darken the shadows a bit and increase the midtone contrast, then maybe add a touch of Vibrance to make them pop a bit more.

 

As wim says, Apple monitors are way too bright. A hardware calibrator like the X-Rite i1 Display PRO (about £170) is highly recommended as that allows you to control the brightness and the colour. If you want to go all the way, get an X-Rite Color Checker Passport with the calibrator and you can start creating your own camera profiles which gives you a lot of control over how your images look - not hard to learn and well worth getting to grips with.

 

And as Ed says, you have not given much information - are you shooting raw, how are you doing the raw conversions etc.

 

Lots of good information coming from you guys. Your comment about HDR has hit a sore spot, I really am not a lover of HDR images, but you have confirmed what I suspected as regards my over enthusiastic use of the shadows slider. Your advice is much appreciated.

[spacecadet]

You might like to try Auto Tone in LR. I find it pretty helpful for most images, with a slight tendency not to rein in clipped highlights. But you can always program a preset for that.

[Bill Brooks]

you have confirmed what I suspected as regards my over enthusiastic use of the shadows slider. 

 

 

 

I think you and MDM are correct about the shadows. HDR has led to a style of opening up the shadows, sometimes too much. Shadows are shadows, and should usually be placed in the lower quartertones.

 

 

Save up for a monitor hardware balancing kit. Not only your internet browsing experience will be much better, but you will have more confidence in “what you see is what you get”

[Dave Richards]

 

I am looking at your images on a monitor set with an old Spyder3 Pro calibrator (relatively cheap). I agree your images are pale. When adjusting your images you need to set the black point darker 000 and the white point brighter 255 255 255. I usually adjust the black and white points until I receive warnings in the blackest shadow and the whitest highlight. Then I back off to taste. Your mid point (exposure) is about correct. Your black point is way too light. Some shadows should be empty, and some highlights should be blown.

 

I think a cheap hardware calibrator would be worth the price.

 

Your images would be easier to print because they have a limited dynamic range, but that dynamic range makes them look pale on a monitor. The buying decision is made on the monitor, most client uses are for monitor display, so pale works against you.

 

Your images should be adjusted with the monitor background set to middle grey. Everything looks good on a black background.

 

Here is an example. There is enough data in this shot to retain detail in the dark areas under the mill and under the bridge (right). You could also maintain complete detail in the highlight areas where the sun glances off the weathered wall. I set the under mill and bridge areas to black because they were distracting and black adds contrast. I set the weathered highlights on the side walls to have some speckles of pure white because the sun is reflecting off of those areas, and it makes the image pop.

 

 

Thanks Bill. I do use the black and white sliders and more or less use them in the way you say and just back them off when I get the blue and red warnings. I guess I'm a 'lead foot"with the highlights and shadows sliders though.

[Dave Richards]

Thank you all so much for your help. I'll take all the advice on board...........and read the Lightroom manual!!

[spacecadet]

Thank you all so much for your help. I'll take all the advice on board...........and read the Lightroom manual!!

The what?

[Joe Gaul]

Hi Dave,

 

I use a Windows PC rather than a Mac so this may not be relevant but I use a Spyder 3 pro for monitor calibration once a month with a constant light source in my work room. Everything is set to Adobe RGB 1998.

Hope this helps.

Joe

[Gennadii Rybalov]

My two pence ...

Work behind the monitor in a dark room, no matter what the monitor, you will see immediately without calibration does not suffice.

I hope it will help to understand, and on the calibration - then we must also understand how the monitor, not everyone can be an external device actually calibrated.

[MDM]

 

Dave, when you or other newbies are asking tech questions in this forum, it would be helpful if you could supply contributors with some basic information: like how old is your Mac, and what editing programs you're using. 

 

My iMac dates back to 2008, and I don't need a kit to control image quality with this computer. I doubt that you need anything more either.

 

Open up System Preferences, go to Display, and click on Color. This is where you calibrate your screen. I have mine set at iMac Calibrated at the moment. I'm not sure what I did way back when, and since I'm not looking over your shoulder, I will not tell you what to select. Be advised that on the Internet and for book and magazine reproductions, Adobe RGB (1998) is preferred. All my images are set as Adobe RGB. 

 

I work on one image at a time using Lightroom 5.7, Photoshop CS5, and NX2. Looking at your images, you need to add saturation and a touch of contrast.

 

Good luck.

 

My iMac is about a couple of years old running Mavericks. I shoot in raw using Nikon kit and edit using Lightroom 5.7. I am a complete novice as far as editing goes; usually just adjust basic stuff like exposure, highlights, shadows, black, white and lens profile. Maybe some clarity and on occasions contrast. I think I probably overdo the  shadows adjustments in an effort to get more detail out of them. Many thanks for your advice, I'll have a look in system preferences and will probably chicken out and go to the Apple store, but I will reset the camera from sRGB to Adobe RGB.

 

 

Hi Dave - thanks for appreciating the advice and here are some more snippets.

 

The camera color space is irrelevant if you shoot raw.

 

The people in the Apple Store are very very very unlikely to be able to help you with anything discussed here in relation to monitor calibration - you need to calibrate with hardware not software.

 

Invest in a colorimeter to calibrate your monitor and, if you can afford the £170, buy the X-Rite i1 Display PRO. There are cheaper ones like the ColorMunki Smile (£79) but these are completely automatic and will ultimately be really frustrating when you find you have no control over what it does. The X-Rite i1 Display PRO can be operated in fully automatic or manual mode so you can start in basic mode and then take control as you learn. You can tell it to set your monitor brightness to an exact level and then forget about it. Brightness is only one aspect of monitor calibration, colour is the other and is the much more difficult one.

 

You can also get 20% off an Adobe CC subscription at the moment with the X-Rite i1 Display PRO. LR6.7 is a massive advance over 5 and is well worth getting, either buy or subscribe.

 

If you can learn from books, I strongly advocate buying Martin Evening's Lightroom book as a proper manual and reference book which can be read easily by beginner to advanced LR users and maybe something like Scott Kelby for a more tutorial style approach. Jeff Schewe's The Digital Negative is an excellent book about raw processing. It really is worth learning this stuff rather than just hacking away and realising down the line that you have been doing it wrong all along. Absolutely forget things like Autotone as suggested by spacecadet and just take control.

 

Knowledge is empowering. Look on it as an investment which it is and the stuff I've suggested here is not expensive. Imagine the time you can waste not knowing what you are doing and where you are going.

[spacecadet]

 

 

 

 I merely suggested the OP might like to try it. 

It works well for me, I think- have a look at my images and tell me if you think otherwise.

Sorry if this sounds a bit sniffy, but it occurs to me that just telling someone not to do something that some of us find helpful isn't helpful.

[MDM]

 

 

 

 

 I merely suggested the OP might like to try it. 

It works well for me, I think- have a look at my images and tell me if you think otherwise.

Sorry if this sounds a bit sniffy, but it occurs to me that just telling someone not to do something that some of us find helpful isn't helpful.

 

 

I wasn't saying it to be insulting or nasty to you so apologies if it seemed that way. I was just advocating a general principle that using auto anything, either in software or in camera, is generally not the best way to go in terms of really getting to grips and taking control of one's photography. In my opinion, it's much better to learn to see each image or set of images and work on the different parameters oneself rather than allowing Lightroom or Photoshop (or a camera light meter) to make these decisions. While auto tone (and auto white balance) may be good starting points for some images, they use some sort of averaging algorithms and often don't work well - so I think it is better to go the manual route if one really wants to understand raw processing.

[spacecadet]

Fair enough but I think the OP might want to try it. I use auto tone on import and I find it only really falls down on highlights, as I said. But then I use AWB and program for exposure so I may be beyond help.

[MDM]

But then I use AWB and program for exposure so I may be beyond help.

 

I thought that you were beyond help before when you refused to shoot raw, kept failing QC and then one day you saw the light and now you are number 1 raw evangelist.

 

But do you really use program mode when shooting? If I recall you have been a photographer since the 70s?? Aperture or Shutter priority maybe but Program mode? I am a little incredulous and that is not intended as an insult either.

[spacecadet]

Usually, yes, since I got my A1 in about 1991. A for the sweet spot on my long zoom though.

Seems to work out.

[Robert M Estall]

Too much lightening of the shadows seems a likely bit of advice, but I would also suggest being more critical at the moment of shooting. People often say of my stuff "you get good skies" No, I wait for good skies. Do look at the light; if it's rubbish, put the camera away and come back when you stand a better chance. Or take note that this would be better taken at a different time of day and plan to return. This photography thing takes lots of patience, and being realistic about lighting is a big part of it

 

I know that sounds a bit grumpy, but I often wonder why people put stuff up on Alamy when the conditions were so far short of ideal that positive results would be so unlikely