More Colorful picture

harish_agawane

HI All,

How can I make my picture more colorful and attractive

Thanks,
Harish.

pathfinder

Welcome Harish,

It starts with first rate image capture at the time of exposure ( of course ) , but that is only the beginning.

Do you have image processing software, like Lightroom or Photoshop? Are you shooting in camera jpgs, or RAW files?

The images form your Olympus E520 should look pretty nice from your camera, but certainly can be usually improved with image editing software.

THe first place I would look for answers to your question is here - Click above on Photo Craft -> Tutorials ->http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=198239

One way to add more color is here - http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=198448, although with Lightroom3 or Adobe Camera Raw, punching up the Vibrance slider may be all you need.

Take a look through those tutorials and see if they don't help you get started.

arodney

+1 for Vibrance (in the raw processor).

zoomer

Unfortunately I can't see the picture here at work.
For me color is the same formula every time.
Take the photo at the right time of day in good light.
Get the levels correct, whites white, blacks black. Adjust contrast.
Normally that does it.

harish_agawane

pathfinder wrote: »

Welcome Harish,

It starts with first rate image capture at the time of exposure ( of course ) , but that is only the beginning.

Do you have image processing software, like Lightroom or Photoshop? Are you shooting in camera jpgs, or RAW files?

The images form your Olympus E520 should look pretty nice from your camera, but certainly can be usually improved with image editing software.

THe first place I would look for answers to your question is here - Click above on Photo Craft -> Tutorials ->http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=198239

One way to add more color is here - http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=198448, although with Lightroom3 or Adobe Camera Raw, punching up the Vibrance slider may be all you need.

Take a look through those tutorials and see if they don't help you get started.

Thanks Pathfinder, but is there any other that we can minimize the post production(photoshop) work and try to get original result, some time I fill like cheating with people....

harish_agawane

zoomer wrote: »

Unfortunately I can't see the picture here at work.
For me color is the same formula every time.
Take the photo at the right time of day in good light.
Get the levels correct, whites white, blacks black. Adjust contrast.
Normally that does it.

what you said in beginning lines (Take the photo at the right time of day in good light) but again playing with pics changing there original property is it ok ...

zoomer

Processing is intended to make the photo look as close to what your eye saw as possible. It is possible to tweak your Jpeg settings in camera to do this....within the capabilities of a camera.
Usually some processing is required to get you the rest of the way.
Yes changing it is OK.

Merlin_AZ

Peano, very nice work.

harish_agawane

zoomer wrote: »

Unfortunately I can't see the picture here at work.
For me color is the same formula every time.
Take the photo at the right time of day in good light.
Get the levels correct, whites white, blacks black. Adjust contrast.
Normally that does it.

Zoomar plzzz find the pic which I hv taken recently, please let me know what I need to do in this ...

harish_agawane

zoomer wrote: »

Unfortunately I can't see the picture here at work.
For me color is the same formula every time.
Take the photo at the right time of day in good light.
Get the levels correct, whites white, blacks black. Adjust contrast.
Normally that does it.

One more pic

harish_agawane

Peano wrote: »

Both images are greatly underexposed. To get good color, you first need to expose correctly.

wow! agreed peano, now plzzz guide me for same, I will be joining advanced photography classes in next month, till the time I will learn myself ....

ziggy53

Proper image exposure can get fairly complicated in some situations. Since your image examples are what could be called "product photography", let's start with that class and category of photography.

It all starts with light. The light that is naturally within a scene may be called "ambient" light. Ambient light may be from the sun or it may be from a continuously available source, like a floor or desk lamp, but it is light that can be measured by your camera's light meter.

The second most common light source is "incident" light. This is typically light from an electronic flash (or multiple flashes.) Use and control of both types of these sources of light contribute to the exposure.

Once you have established your basic lighting then you adjust your camera to control the exposure.

Basic camera exposure consists of a balance between ISO (sensor sensitivity), aperture and shutter speed. For product photography I generally start with aperture. A larger aperture can be used (potentially) for flat work that is parallel to the image plane. Subject matter that is deeper into the scene, as in subjects that have much depth or multiple subjects at different distances, generally require a smaller aperture to achieve the proper depth-of-field (DOF).

The next setting is the camera's ISO or sensitivity to light. a lower ISO, like ISO 100, is generally fine for still-life like your tripod and backpack.

The final setting is the shutter speed. In still-life images I use the shutter speed to control the basic exposure, as determined by the camera's light meter of the ambient, and to control the incident/flash contribution with respect to the ambient light. Use the camera's LCD, highlight clipping "blinkies" and histogram to determine optimum exposure.

A site with a good explanation on exposure:

http://www.digital-photography-school.com/learning-exposure-in-digital-photography

I recommend the "expose to the right" technique, as explained on this page:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml

I also recommend that you take some time and learn what your camera's histogram and the highlight warning (blinkies) really mean in the results. (There is no universal standard for either histogram creation or relationships, nor is there a standard for what the highlight warning might indicate.) Use post-processing software and its histograms to help form your opinion about the camera's implementation. Photoshop is very useful for this as is RAWTherapee.

Proper exposure of still-lifes is probably best accomplished through manual camera settings. I also recommend shooting to RAW files for best results. Digital photography also makes exposure bracketing fairly simple for difficult scenes, as needed.

---

The position of the lights and the intensity of the lights, as well as any light modifiers, are what help to form the particular type of lighting and shadows, as in:

Rembrandt lighting
Short lighting
Broad lighting
Butterfly lighting
Loop lighting

While these terms originate from portrait photography, they still have application in describing lighting setups for product photography. You should also learn about:

Background lighting
Rim/hairlight lighting
Catchlights

... as these too have applications in product photography.

Some good lighting sites:

http://www.photoflexlightingschool.com/Lighting_Lessons/Lessons_on_Shooting_Products_Still_Life/Shooting_the_Switcheroo_Catalog/index.html
http://www.photoflexlightingschool.com/Lighting_Lessons/Lessons_on_Shooting_Products_Still_Life/Shooting_Apparel_In_The_Studio/index.html
http://www.photoflexlightingschool.com/Lighting_Lessons/Lessons_on_Shooting_Products_Still_Life/Elevating_the_Quality_of_Your_Product_Shots/index.html

http://www.portraitlighting.net/patterns.htm
http://www.professionalphotography101.com/portrait_lighting/Portrait_lighting_diagrams.html
http://www.professionalphotography101.com/portrait_lighting/lighting_names.html

harish_agawane

ziggy53 wrote: »

Proper image exposure can get fairly complicated in some situations. Since your image examples are what could be called "product photography", let's start with that class and category of photography.

It all starts with light. The light that is naturally within a scene may be called "ambient" light. Ambient light may be from the sun or it may be from a continuously available source, like a floor or desk lamp, but it is light that can be measured by your camera's light meter.

The second most common light source is "incident" light. This is typically light from an electronic flash (or multiple flashes.) Use and control of both types of these sources of light contribute to the exposure.

Once you have established your basic lighting then you adjust your camera to control the exposure.

Basic camera exposure consists of a balance between ISO (sensor sensitivity), aperture and shutter speed. For product photography I generally start with aperture. A larger aperture can be used (potentially) for flat work that is parallel to the image plane. Subject matter that is deeper into the scene, as in subjects that have much depth or multiple subjects at different distances, generally require a smaller aperture to achieve the proper depth-of-field (DOF).

The next setting is the camera's ISO or sensitivity to light. a lower ISO, like ISO 100, is generally fine for still-life like your tripod and backpack.

The final setting is the shutter speed. In still-life images I use the shutter speed to control the basic exposure, as determined by the camera's light meter of the ambient, and to control the incident/flash contribution with respect to the ambient light. Use the camera's LCD, highlight clipping "blinkies" and histogram to determine optimum exposure.

A site with a good explanation on exposure:

http://www.digital-photography-school.com/learning-exposure-in-digital-photography

I recommend the "expose to the right" technique, as explained on this page:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose-right.shtml

I also recommend that you take some time and learn what your camera's histogram and the highlight warning (blinkies) really mean in the results. (There is no universal standard for either histogram creation or relationships, nor is there a standard for what the highlight warning might indicate.) Use post-processing software and its histograms to help form your opinion about the camera's implementation. Photoshop is very useful for this as is RAWTherapee.

Proper exposure of still-lifes is probably best accomplished through manual camera settings. I also recommend shooting to RAW files for best results. Digital photography also makes exposure bracketing fairly simple for difficult scenes, as needed.

---

The position of the lights and the intensity of the lights, as well as any light modifiers, are what help to form the particular type of lighting and shadows, as in:

Rembrandt lighting
Short lighting
Broad lighting
Butterfly lighting
Loop lighting

While these terms originate from portrait photography, they still have application in describing lighting setups for product photography. You should also learn about:

Background lighting
Rim/hairlight lighting
Catchlights

... as these too have applications in product photography.

Some good lighting sites:

http://www.photoflexlightingschool.com/Lighting_Lessons/Lessons_on_Shooting_Products_Still_Life/Shooting_the_Switcheroo_Catalog/index.html
http://www.photoflexlightingschool.com/Lighting_Lessons/Lessons_on_Shooting_Products_Still_Life/Shooting_Apparel_In_The_Studio/index.html
http://www.photoflexlightingschool.com/Lighting_Lessons/Lessons_on_Shooting_Products_Still_Life/Elevating_the_Quality_of_Your_Product_Shots/index.html

http://www.portraitlighting.net/patterns.htm
http://www.professionalphotography101.com/portrait_lighting/Portrait_lighting_diagrams.html
http://www.professionalphotography101.com/portrait_lighting/lighting_names.html

Thank you very much ziggy info is really helpful, links are really awesome ....

harish_agawane

I have taken attached pic in RAW format, please let me know what is necessary to make changes in this pic ....

Thanks,
Harish.

ziggy53

DGrin does not allow posting RAW files. Your image also lacks EXIF information. There's not much anyone can tell you from the image itself, as to what settings you used to take the image.

Looking at the image, there is little to separate the subject, the light fixture, from the background. The light fixture is very similar to the wall behind it in terms of color and basic appearance. They, subject and wall, are also too close in focus in order for the eye to distinguish much difference.

When you look at subjects you, as the photographer, need to find ways to isolate, and/or promote the subject from the background, or at least to "showcase" the subject against the background.

When you are learning photography, one of the best ways to learn is to look and study a subject with your eyes first, trying to determine how to best compose and frame the subject. Then take several images from several vantages and viewer perspectives. When you review the images, choose the best of the series and try to decide why you like that image best. Use software to crop the images to try to improve framing and composition.

Afterwards, apply what you learned into future compositions in the camera.

For a really good introduction into photography, start here:

http://www.digital-photography-school.com/digital-photography-tips-for-beginners
http://www.digital-photography-school.com/digital-photography-composition-tips
http://www.digital-photography-school.com/learning-exposure-in-digital-photography

harish_agawane

ziggy53 wrote: »

DGrin does not allow posting RAW files. Your image also lacks EXIF information. There's not much anyone can tell you from the image itself, as to what settings you used to take the image.

Looking at the image, there is little to separate the subject, the light fixture, from the background. The light fixture is very similar to the wall behind it in terms of color and basic appearance. They, subject and wall, are also too close in focus in order for the eye to distinguish much difference.

When you look at subjects you, as the photographer, need to find ways to isolate, and/or promote the subject from the background, or at least to "showcase" the subject against the background.

When you are learning photography, one of the best ways to learn is to look and study a subject with your eyes first, trying to determine how to best compose and frame the subject. Then take several images from several vantages and viewer perspectives. When you review the images, choose the best of the series and try to decide why you like that image best. Use software to crop the images to try to improve framing and composition.

Afterwards, apply what you learned into future compositions in the camera.

For a really good introduction into photography, start here:

http://www.digital-photography-school.com/digital-photography-tips-for-beginners
http://www.digital-photography-school.com/digital-photography-composition-tips
http://www.digital-photography-school.com/learning-exposure-in-digital-photography

Hi Ziggy, plzz find the setting I used for this pic.
f/4.6
1/400s
ISO 100
40-150@70mm

ziggy53

harish_agawane wrote: »

Hi Ziggy, plzz find the setting I used for this pic.
f/4.6
1/400s
ISO 100
40-150@70mm

Considering the subject, I think that moving your shooting position to the left when you shot that image might have placed more of the background building behind your subject, instead of the wall. Framing the light with the arch might look fairly nice too. Anything to help the basic composition and separate the subject and background would be a benefit.

The processing that Peano suggests and demonstrates might be worth considering, if you're willing to make the time and money investments that would be required. You can get pretty far with freeware like the RAWTherapee and GIMP offerings, but it might take some extra ingenuity.

harish_agawane

ziggy53 wrote: »

Considering the subject, I think that moving your shooting position to the left when you shot that image might have placed more of the background building behind your subject, instead of the wall. Framing the light with the arch might look fairly nice too. Anything to help the basic composition and separate the subject and background would be a benefit.

The processing that Peano suggests and demonstrates might be worth considering, if you're willing to make the time and money investments that would be required. You can get pretty far with freeware like the RAWTherapee and GIMP offerings, but it might take some extra ingenuity.

Ziggy accepted what you said, but I want to improve my photography not the photoshop work, I dont want anything artificial I am trying to get original result as much as possible, even if you see pics on my website are original n untouched .....

basflt

harish_agawane wrote: »

Ziggy accepted what you said, but I want to improve my photography not the photoshop work, I dont want anything artificial I am trying to get original result as much as possible, even if you see pics on my website are original n untouched .....

you cant
digital photography and post-processing go hand in hand
you need to edit your pics , if you want them to look great , always , no matter how good they are
thats also the reason you should shoot in RAW

ziggy53

harish_agawane wrote: »

Ziggy accepted what you said, but I want to improve my photography not the photoshop work, I dont want anything artificial I am trying to get original result as much as possible, even if you see pics on my website are original n untouched .....

To produce the best images you need to improve "everything".

• How you perceive scenes and subjects.
• How you manage your shooting position.
• How you control depth-of-field.
• You choices for exposure.
• Your choices for lighting.
• Your choices for in-camera processing.
• Your choices for post-processing.
• Your choices for printing and distribution.

All of these things matter and your decisions and choices greatly affect the outcome and results.

If you change some of the settings on your camera, like contrast or saturation settings for JPGs, those settings can be more carefully adjusted and controlled by shooting to RAW files and using post-processing software with arguably better results. That improves your photographs.

It's true that Photoshop can alter the reality of the subject and the scene. I am not suggesting that.

I am suggesting that you can do much to improve your images and to make your images closer to your "vision" of the subject and scene.

If you decide to pursue photojournalism, shooting for a newspaper or a magazine, they will be very restrictive about any post-processing which alters the scene or the subject. They will probably allow basic processing which allows correct color and to improve sharpness. Generally you can also crop the image to improve the composition, as long as the crop doesn't alter the message and meaning of the original image.

If you decide to pursue a more artistic form of photography, you may even get to impose your own limits of acceptability in post-processing. Like anything digital, you can experiment to see what works and what does not work for you and for your applications.