Color question

Almost all my avian images have major color issues. I have just bought Lightroom and CS5 at good discounts, and I really and truly need to figure this out.

This is an unprocessed raw file, nothing done at all except for using Picasa exporting at 720 pixels. If the color is wrong on this, it came out of my camera like that, so do I need to change something in my camera? If the color is not wrong on this, how do I keep the color from changing when I process?

I greatly appreciate your extended patience with me about this. Thank you for any and all help.

You are opening a major can of worms with tihs as so many factors affect color:
- subject
- light
- camera settings
- software
- color space
- monitor calibration
- room lighting

Probably more that other people can add to the list.

1. If you don't have your monitor calibrated (or at least close to it) you'll never conquer this aspect of digital photography.

2. for any of us to judge color accuracy of an image you post we need to know what the colors of the subject were and the light when you took the image - i.e., you need to find a widely available color target and shoot it under controlled lighting conditions. For the LBHE the best anyone here can say is how the image on their monitor looks compared to their mental image of what the bird looks like in the wild in whatever light they think this was taken in.

3. what are your camera settings for this: color space sRGB, Adobe RGB, or something else?

4. you need to set up a consistent work flow with Photoshop and Lightroom - what the applications do regarding the color space of the files as they come out of your camera; what color space you work in; what color space you export.

5. I have no clue what Picasa might do to color space.

For what its worth I think this heron looks about right, but its been a long time since I've been able to looking closely at the species (they are common in NJ but rare vagrants here in AZ).

What can of worms?
It's quite a simple fix, actually. It really doesn't have to be as complicated as some may allow.

The best way to check that you have neutral colors in CS5 is to open a Levels Adjustment Layer:

Layer->New Adjustment Layer->Levels.
Layers are an important tool in PS and will enable you to work on your image while not causing any destruction to the base or primary image itself.
Now, click on the grey (middle) eyedropper in the Levels dialog box that opened and find a neutral tone in your image, zoom in and click on it.
If you like the neutralization, then you're finished. If not, then drag that layer down to the 'trash' and start anew if you wish.
While in that dialog is a good time to check the histogram for under/overexposure issues and adjust the black/white sliders to taste. One of the first things I do with almost all of my images is to check the histogram for exposure issues and to check for a color cast. Not all color casts are bad...the neutralization results are totally up to you and your taste.
In the image above, I clicked on the grey area around the bird's eye. That step primarily changed the background color and not the bird's color. It's up to you which you find more pleasing. While I was in the Levels dialog, I adjusted the histogram as well. You might also consider cloning out that out of focus branch in the background.

I think one of the best things you can do to improve your images is to invest in Scott Kelby's excellent book titled 'The Adobe Photoshop CS5 Book for Digital Photographers', which is a great way to learn how to optimize your images.

I disagree with John Mumaw. This procedure will remove color cast if you know what part of the image is supposed to be neutral gray. Why assume that the "area around the bird's eye" should the neutral in this image? Anybody have access to an avian collection of study skins to confirm that?

It will remove the warmth of early morning light that so many of us strive to get.

It won't guarantee that saturation is correct.

It won't address mis-matched color spaces in the work flow.

It won't allow you to see your image as it should be if your monitor calibration is off.

Richard:

1. I will look into this right now, I had momentarily forgotten about it.

2. I don't understand how birds can be shot in a controlled situation.

3. My camera is set up for Adobe RGB. Is that what it should be?

4. I installed Lightroom and CS5 last night and started developing a work flow, but did not look up things about color space.

5. I have Picasa's color management disabled.


John:

I will try the things you say right now and also look up that book.

Thank you both.

The absolute #1 thing you have to do is calibrate your display as Richard mentions. Without a calibrated display, all other discussion is moot. If your display is not calibrated, adjustments in PS or LR will be meaningless.

If you want absolutely "correct" or "accurate" color on your display ("correct" color in prints is a whole other can of worms), take a color target or 18% gray card out with you and shoot an image of it in the conditions your other images will be in (cloudy, sunny, foggy, etc.) to use in LR/PS and then use the eyedropper like John says and click on the neutral gray part of the target. You now have accurate color displayed on your calibrated display. (I personally do not click around the image with the eyedropper because I still can't determine what is neutral and what isn't so I end up clicking all over and getting very bizarre results! If you have a target with a known neutral patch, then you can click that but otherwise you're shooting in the dark.)

Having said all that, I tend to think of color more as a subjective thing. (I don't even own a color target!) In LR I adjust the color temp slider till I get what I want. I'm not totally concerned with absolutely "accurate" color, I just want the shot to look like I remembered it or I want it to match the vision I have in my head. This is especially true of sunrise/sunset shots where you might have a strong color cast from the clouds/sun. Under these conditions, "accurate" color rarely looks right. For avian photography, color accuracy may be more important.

Color management can be a difficult subject to grasp but it is worth the time and effort learning about color spaces, setting up LR/PS correctly, getting prints that match your display, understanding out-of-gamut warnings, and even what settings you set in your camera. For example, if you shoot jpg, you need to specify a color space and a white balance. If you shoot raw, not so much! (you can adjust it later in LR/PS). There are lots of articles on the web about color management and rendering intents. Maybe even some here on NPN! Just find a few and start reading and don't feel bad if it doesn't "click" right away. I takes some reading and rereading for it to sink in. At least through my thick skull!

Color calibration:

Pantone huey Pro MEU113 $69.99
Datacolor DC S3X100 Spyder 3 Express $70.30
------------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Rite i1Display 2 Color Calibrator for LCD, CRT, and Laptop Displays $114.16
Datacolor DC S3EL100 Spyder 3 Elite $179.95


Would one of the first two be good?

X-Rite makes quality calibration tools. I can't comment on the rest because I haven't used them.

#2. No, you cannot shoot wild birds in a controlled way. I'm suggesting that if you want people on line to judge color accuracy of your camera/software/processing you need to find another subject (like a MacBeth Color Checker or whatever is used at dpreview). Any comments you get about colors in an image of a bird you post are very subjective, depending on the light you were working with, the individual bird, the monitor viewed on, and the experience of person commenting.

#3. camera set to Adobe RGB. That's fine. But what happens when the image is imported in photoshop? At some point in the work flow the image will have to be converted to sRGB to post as a jpg.

#4. You need to set up photoshop so it does what you want it to do with that Adobe RGB raw file.

#5. I don't have a clue what it means to have color management disabled in Picasa. Do you feed it a raw file? Or a jpg?

"This procedure will remove color cast if you know what part of the image is supposed to be neutral gray. Why assume that the "area around the bird's eye" should the neutral in this image?"

Because I trust my eyes, and they pretty much confirmed that the area around the bird's eye was neutral (not necessarily gray).
Now, you can test several areas and choose to keep the results or toss them. Kelby's book explains how to find a true neutral tone in an image quite simply, and it's also outlined in this simple tutorial.

From the tutorial that John Mumaw links:

Important: One thing to note up front here is that not all images actually have any areas in them that are supposed to be neutral gray, and obviously, you can't find what's not there, so if that's the case with your photo, no technique for finding midtone gray will work.

As far as I can tell from the tutorial it makes the point in an image already closest to 50% gray equal to 50% gray. That's not the same as finding a point that actually should be neutral and making it neutral.

To throw my hat into the ring and add another layer of confusion I'll bring up my favorite color variable. What browser are you using?

Firefox and Safari are probably the two best browsers to use for accurate colors. Chrome is terrible and IE is slightly better... what browser you use is important but your viewing audiences' browser is more important. You can take all the care in the world to make sure the colors are accurate but if they are viewing it in Chrome they won't look "right".

Also, monitor calibration and associated software (in my opinion) is not needed unless you have money to burn, are a pro, or want to do prints yourself. I have an iMac and am able to do some calibration using the mac software but I think some people get a little carried away with color accuracy. The images I process on my iMac look accurate on my iPhone, crappy PC monitor at home, crappy PC monitor at work, laptop monitors and most importantly on prints that I order. At some point, yes calibration might be a good investment but I think the benefits are overstated and your money is far better spent on equipment

Luke, I use Firefox, and I hear you about the money better spent on equipment. My problem is that in processing bird images with virtually every image people say the color is wrong. I understand that whereas the colors of flowers and frogs and bears and skies can vary the colors of birds are supposed to be whatever they are, but in trying to make them look that way I either end up oversaturating or being too flat or having a blue cast or a magenta cast or you name it. I really want to do birds. That's why I spent the money on the 400 lens. So this is a major sticking point for me.

I either end up oversaturating or being too flat or having a blue cast or a magenta cast or you name it.

Which is why you really need to calibrate your display!

I would have to respectfully disagree with Luke. If your display is not calibrated to a known standard, then you have no idea if the colors you are seeing are anywhere close to reality and any color adjustment you make in PS/LR will be, at best, a stab in the dark.

Calibrate your montior and get as good a monitor as you can afford. One with a wide color gamut that will hold a calibration. Process your images in dim light not bright day light. Once you have a good calibrated monitor and you have the same color space working in all realms, then trust your eyes and what you know the scene and bird looked like in the wild when you took the image. If it was sunrise orange light then expect to see those warm tones affecting the bird's colors. Same if it was high overcast grey light. Trust your eyes and memory. Last thing I will add here. Some of this could be your camera. When I was shooting a Canon 550D the color accuracy was not great out of camera. Mostly it was the AWB. It did not do well. I had to make changes in ACR to the white balance to get the colors to look correct. As far as calibrators I use a Spyder 3 and it does a great job.

Okay, thanks, everyone. I ordered the Spyder 3 Express. Hopefully that will be good enough.

Barbara,

I have the older Spyder 2 Pro and it's served me well. I do agree 100% that you need to start not only with a calibrated monitor, but a "calibrated" or consistent workflow. Having said that, for me there is something bigger. Something bigger that I think you are smack dab in the middle of learning. And that is trusting your own eye. I on occassion will use the color eye dropper, or gray, white and black point auto adjustments... but in the end, you have to base these decisions on what looks good to your eye. I look at your heron image and just by eyeballing it, it's too purple. the blue of the herons body (great blue right?) should be a a grayish blue. On the head some of the same color, but not purple. But the real question is, who is to say what my interpretation of the colors of a great blue heron are? Just as who can claim that the blue sky they look at during high noon is the same blue that I see in Livermore CA? We have to consider our own eyes, interpretations, etc. You need to learn to trust your own judgment. Otherwise you'll continue having to rely on someone else to tell you something is too saturated or the color is off.

An exercise you can do is simply study not only the light when you're out photographing, but also the color. Make mental notes how the colors change with the changing light (ie gets much warmer as the sun approaches the horizon.) Make a mental note of the blue sky - then go back some hours or days later on the computer and try and judge for yourself what version of blue is accurate - in your mind.

As Richard pointed out at the very beginning, there are so, so many variables. I believe you need to start with your own confidence in how the colors should be when you're processing them.

Lon

ps. In my opinion, placing a gray card in a scene is not meant to measure color, but to measure exposure value. If you place the same gray card in a bright daylight scene, an overcast shadow scene and a last-light-sun-is-on-the-horizon scene you will most definitely record different color on the gray card because it's reflecting light, not generating it and it's NOT neutral in color only in reflected luminosity. Hope that makes sense.

Thanks very much, Lon. It's a Little Blue Heron, not a Great Blue, though. ;)

See, if we can't identify a bird species, how can we all agree on its color???

I'm going to disagree with Luke as well. If the monitor is not right, or really close to right, then every other step in the process is going to be suspect. I'd start with the Spyder for monitor calibration. Is it a perfect tool? No, there are better tools out there but at higher cost. It is a good starting point and will get your monitor close enough. The other two calibration devices are great and possibly slightly better. I;ve never used the Pantone tool and am not real familar with it.

I'd also ignore the advice about browsers, for now. Yes, they are important but right now you are trying to set up a color workflow. The browsers are the last step and you'll need a "color correct" image first. The quotes are a practical issue - a given image may be technically wrong on color but right for the image. Let's get you through color correction first!

You are moving up from Picassa to Photoshop. This is a huge jump, kind of like going from 3'rd arithematic on Monday then calculus on Tuesday. Everything is learnable, it is just going totake some time.

In CS5, there are a bunch of ways to do color correction. The problem is to decide which way and more importantly, what are you trying to accomplish. John Mumaw gives a one good method - I'd spend some time playing with that one.

Also, the levels tool. This is some of a heavy-handed approach in that it is not real precise, but it comes in handy.

The curves tool is probably the next one I'd play with. It is sort of like the levels tool but you have a lot more precision in its application. The tools look very different but at least when learning, think of the curves tool as being a glorified levels tool.

Auto Tone and Auto Color almost always make the image look worse. Play with them a bit but after 6 months, you'll forget that they are there.

Auto Contrast is a mixed bag. It can improve the look of an image but it can often be heavy handed. Play with that one as well. I tend to use in on images that need just a little bit of contrast, I am being lazy and they are photos I am preparing quickly for stock submissions. Be prepared to hit undo button because you will go EEEEeeewwwwww! I won't use it on my personal work or for client prints but for quick and dirty and having the mouse over "Undo", it works. Don't rely on it.

There is the photo filter for mimicking the effects of warming and cooling filters from the days of film. With digital, I rarely use this but it is nice that it is there.

The color balance tool - I've never really used this one. Once you play with Levels a bit, this one will also operate similarly.

Channel Mixer - I'd ignore this one at the start, unless you want to do black and white conversions, but that is a different thread.

The Hue part of Hue/Saturation can sometimes shift color in a good way, especially if you only go 1-3 points. This really isn't the way to address color balance issues. This is a tool you'll need to know but not for color balancing.


The best place to start with color correction post-capture is in the RAW converter. Start with a straight conversion and do nothing, then open up the image in PS. What does that look like? Too red, too blue, too green, needs contrast, needs some vibrance or saturation, blah blah blah... Now go back to your original RAW file and reopen it, trying to account for what you felt was wrong when you first opened it. Rinse, lather and repeat. What I am trying to get you to do with multiple openings of the same files to to get you to play with the options in the RAW convertor and get some feel as to what to do with the RAW files and what the various options do.

PS greatest strength is, for a beginner, probably it is its biggest weakness. There are so many ways of doing things that it is hard to know where to start. Which tool? How much? Why? What is it about this image that I am trying to correct? (which goes back to making sure the monitor is properly calibrated!) Unfortunately, there is no good way to know this until you play around in PS for a while and throw an object or two in frustration

Picassa is a decent program for what it is but it is really geared to someone interested in making pretty pictures rather than serious images. I got really frustrated with the program, its limitations and its lack of control when I was teaching it to someone last Summer.

Play with the program a lot just to see what happens and MAKE AS MANY MISTAKED AS YOU POSSIBLY CAN! Right now, I think you are at the Good grief, what have I done to my checkbook?? stage. Don't worry, in six months (and probably sooner, given questions you ask here and your attitude), you'll be working an image and suddenly realize that wasn't as hard as it seemed six months ago.

Just play,play and play some more.

One more thing - I'd be happy to work up some RAW files for you for comparison/teaching. Email me where to send a cd to, or just email questions.

Dan, thank you so very much. The Picasa thing was misleading, because I do have Photoshop Elements -- BUT there is a big, big difference between Elements and CS5. Honestly, at this point I still think the menu locations of things in Elements are much more intuitive than in CS5, but that's probably just the difficulty of change, plus, well, really, it's almost all different except that I do know some things to look for. But I'm so thankful to have all you wrote to review carefully.

I downloaded a free e-book (Practical Colour Management Guide) about managing your colo(u)r workflow from the Colour Collective. It contains lots of useful information. I keep it on my desktop and laptop as a useful reference book.
http://www.colourcollective.co.uk/uk/products/practical-colour-management-guide/
Dave Sparks

Barbara, there's a lot said here that I need to review myself because the people saying it know a lot more than I do, but one thing that I haven't really seen emphasized that I think is crucial is white balance. I use ACR (in Photoshop/Bridge) to do the initial processing of my RAW files, and find that for me the most important factor in getting color and light to look right is adjusting the white balance. Usually selecting one of the presets (daylight, cloudy, shade) that most closely matches the conditions I was shooting in gets things very close, then a bit of tweaking of the slider gets the color "just right."

Thank you, David and Brian.

John Mumaw, if you see this, I ordered the Photoshop CS5 book and the Lightroom 3 book by that author.

You won't regret it, Barbara!

Your version looks more accurate on my monitor than John's. Most of the people looking at your images don't have calibrated monitors. You should be trying to calibrate to match your printer, but otherwise, not so much. I should also point out that natural light is not neutral light. With film, emulsions had inherent casts to be dealt with. I know of no such problem pervading the modern digital work-flow. A bold statement. I guess I will find out, huh?

So, I finally calibrated my monitor tonight with the Spyder 3 Express. Yay for me! ;) The only difference I can see is that the calibrated colors are all a bit lighter, if that's the right word. So looking at my images calibrated they are the same colors and shades as far as I can tell except a bit lighter. I don't know if that makes any sense. Does it seem logical that my monitor would not have been off very much without calibration?

Does it seem logical that my monitor would not have been off very much without calibration?

Yes, that's certainly possible. I've had different monitors be off by a lot, or hardly at all.

(And just a reminder, since this is your first time calibrating - did you set a luminance point during calibration, and did you keep it low enough (around 120 or lower)? The number one problem with people having print problems is that their monitor is too bright.)

Just a side note, if you're using Lightroom, you can do your raw conversion there quite intuitively without, or before, even getting into Photoshop proper.