Canon Rebel T1i -Specific Tips for Doll Photography

Thanks for this! This is the camera I have and I'm completely photography challenged. I really thought I'd get gorgeous photos just by purchasing a better camera (Canon T1I) but since I've gotten it, my photos are no better than with my point and shoot Kodak easy share I was hoping to get better pics in low light but Nope....I'll try your technique and see what happens. Can you explain (Or better yet, offer a photo since I learn visually) on what you mean by "white paper UNDER the light" ) I'm a wee-bit confused.

Thanks again for taking the time to post.

 

Canon Picture Styles basically affect the default processing of the camera. If you shoot JPEG, it determines what automatic adjustments the camera makes for you. If you shoot RAW, it only affects the preview image, i.e. it doesn't affect the file's data but will affect the histogram during review.

Canon themselves covers it a little more thoroughly:
Canon Japan's take
Canon USA's take

For the most part, they are pretty self-explanatory. The only styles you might really get confused on are Neutral and Faithful. They both tend to give pretty "dull" results--intentionally, for ease of use in post processing. The difference between the two is pretty subtle and I would say is really for the hardcore. But short version: if you want to use one of them but don't care about why, use Neutral.

 

I also have and use the same camera and also trying to learn more about it and photography in general.

For the white balance of yellowish/indoor light.. This idea may be old school -I don't know if it works or works well with digital photography?- but has anyone tried putting a filter on the lense to help correct that?

 

Using filters is an old-school technique, mostly for film, because you can't change your film's white balance. There are a LOT of these filters with names like 80A, 80B, 81A, etc. that describe different colors and different shades of that color.

I don't think it's a good idea if you shoot digital. The filter approach is more expensive and cumbersome: What sizes do you buy? How many colors? How many step-up rings? How dim will your viewfinder be? Because another practical matter is that it costs you light. Filtering takes away 1-3 stops depending on how strong it is. If you like shooting handheld at all when indoors, filters are really going to require that you use more serious/powerful lights. It is also two extra glass surfaces to shoot through; if not coated, you could get flare issues and coated filters cost more.

Honestly though, I think you're much better off using a white/gray card as described above, but most of the time I don't bother.

In DPP, which comes with every Canon SLR, you can set white balance in post by color temperature (e.g. a number like 3000K, 5400K or similar) on a slider. I find that gives much better control than the presets. You can also use click white balance (the eyedrop) and just click on something that's supposed to be white (eye whites perhaps?). That said, dolls are portraiture, so accurate is not necessarily the goal anyway. The temperature setting is an easy way to adjust to something that "looks nice". Most people seem to prefer a warmer look.

But much more important for white balance is simply not mixing light sources in the first place. Sunlight and flash is white. Skylight (indirect sunlight) is blue. Tungsten is yellow. Classical fluorescents are green. CFLs are all over the place. Streetlights (sodium) are orange. And most artificial sources except tungsten and full-spectrum have poor color rendering.

 

Yeah, there's no point whatsoever in using a filter to correct WB, the camera has exactly the same effect. Some filters, like Circular Polarizers and NDs are still useful in the digital age, but they don't really apply here.

If you're not shooting RAW, you should be. That way, you can stop worrying about WB in camera and just tweak it in post.

One thing that could be causing trouble is your lighting. WB can correct for a certain light, but if there are two lights with different temperatures in the same scene, it's basically impossible to deal with competently. At the bare minimum, make sure that all the lights in the room you're shooting in are the using the same brand and model of light bulb, since you can then correct and be reasonably sure that all the light sources will match. CFLs usually suck, but the "daylight" ones are useable for basic stuff. You can also go buy some real photo CFLs from a camera store and use them in regular light fixtures but they're quite expensive for what they are.

 

DPP, Digital Photo Professional, software intended for developing Canon RAW files. If you shoot RAW, white balance becomes more of an artistic concern than a day-to-day one. To me, that peace of mind alone is worth the size. There is no disappointment quite like seeing today's sunset shots ruined because you forgot to change the WB from yesterday's indoor shooting.
(Real life example. )

Editing each image is just different rather than hard. Usually I just tweak the white balance and let the software handle "punching up" the color automatically (they have buttons for that!). Then I crop and sometimes use tilt correction.

It's not that bad after you've done it a while. Editing afterwards lets me focus on the subject rather than babysitting even more camera settings. I find that liberating.

Here's a brief screen demo of the color temp slider, only available with RAW files:

------->

Also, you can also use the eye drop button to do a click white balance. Click on the dropper icon and then click a spot that should be white in the photo. This is pretty fast.

With SD cards being so large and cheap now, there is little reason not to use RAW. JPEG is a lossy data format--irreversible compression (i.e. intentional "mistakes") is used to keep the file small. So when you edit and re-save, you are basically introducing more errors into already "corrupt" data, reducing quality further with every edit.

RAW is uncompressed--everything the camera observed is retained. You can make some pretty wild adjustments any number of times and it will work off the original data every time. Why let compression ruin your hard work?

Theoretically if you keep the RAW, you can process an old photo again to its full potential years later, when your skill improves. Could be nice if the pic is of something "lost forever" like a family trip, a deceased pet or a doll that you have since sold.

Again with regard to lights, it doesn't matter too much what kind you use as long as they match.

Take a simple example of a north facing window (skylight/blue) and an indoor incandescent (tungsten/yellow). Say you take a picture mixing the two. If you balance for the sky, anything lit by the tungsten will look REALLY yellow. If you balance for the tungsten, anything lit by the sky will be REALLY blue. Because there will be places where the two lights overlap, this kind of problem can be very difficult to fix, certainly requiring more effort than just getting it right in the first place.

 

One option would be to load the Canon Digital Photo Pro on your computer if you have not yet. You can set the white point in any jpg or raw file by using the dropper icon on the tool pallet. This setting can be applied to a group of photos, so you only have to do it one time per load. I pick an item I know is white, like the eyes. Zoom in on them, even the profile shots have enough to do this with.

You said that you did not want to change every file. In that case, what I do is to use a grey card. The camera is actually setup to meter white balance from a grey reference. White paper may or may not work well. Most of the time for me it has not. Get a grey card and set the custom white balance in the camera at the start of every session. This has worked wonderfully for me. I have a flexible gray target that folds up and can fit in my bag. When unfolded it is a target about 12 inches around. I shot it before the photo session and set the custom balance on it. This has solved almost all of my Canon related metering issues. Canon makes a great camera, but every one of them I own that is not a point and shoot has this white balance issue. Its a Canon thing. My Nikons have never had this issue, but thats another story.

All this being said, I have found that the T1i and T2i can produce some of the most fantastic shots you can get. If the lighting is right, these cameras equal the top end that Canon makes. I have also found that they require more from the photographer. My point and shoots just get it right most of the time. My cameras that cost 5 times more get it wrong more often than not if I use the automatic settings on them. I now shoot raw plus jpg most of the time. Even if I don't use the raw, I take it anyway. But as you said the sizes are an issue. My work flow has changed. I have lots of small hard drives to keep photos and backups on. I have to make sure the laptop is cleaned off before going on a trip and I have lots of SD cards ready. The T1i and T2i benefit from the faster SD card, however I can still fill up the buffer in just a few seconds at a meet-up if shooting raw regardless of the speed of the card.

Best Regards,

Bobby

 

Good question, yes there is a specific grey standard that the camera light meters are set to. In the case of Nikon and our Canons it is an ANSI standard. The cameras are set to 12 percent. Be careful as 18 percent grey is used for print in the US and so a lot of the grey cards are actually 18 percent and not 12 percent. Note that if you call Nikon USA, they will say the cameras are set to 18 percent, but if you talk to Nikon Japan, they will tell you 12 percent.

Grey cards are not just cards. Some are paper and or card stock, but many of those for photographers and videographers are plastic or a fabric material like window shades. The small 12 inch x 12 inch one I have is like a window shade. There are also small plastic ones that fit on a key chain. I did not do that as the 12 x 12 was a nice size to shoot and folds up to a 5 inch x 1 inch thick zippered case.

I recommend that you search on Amazon for grey card photo and you will set lots of hits. Just watch out for the ones marked 18 percent and don't buy those.

Bobby

 

I thought I'd posted a whole reply about gray cards as well, not sure where it went. You can also try searching for a grey card on B&H or Adorama, or just going to a local photography store. I would swear that somebody makes a pop-open fabric one that's a grey card on one side, and a reflector on the other, that'd be a really useful thing to have, but I can't find it.

As for storage, it's really worth buying an external hard drive. They're super-cheap in the scheme of things, and it's nice getting stuff off of the computer and onto one in general, which will speed things up as well as give you more space. Under $100 gets you a 1TB model these days. Shooting RAW is definitely worth it, especially for the WB element. What's cool with RAW is you can shoot a single shot with the grey card, and then set white balance using that one RAW and have it match all the other RAWs to that first photo, so you don't have to deal with doing it in-camera.

DPP is one of the big perks of shooting Canon. Nikon's equivalent is about the same, but you have to pay for it. Lightroom 3 (and to some degree, Apple Aperture) are the clear masters of the class, but there's a lot to be said about including a free program that's 90% of the $300 commercial ones.

 

Ok one thing I noticed was that your iso was waaaaay to high. It's recommended that you use 100 indoors and 200 outdoors and only use the higher ISOs for sports photography and things of that nature. the higher the ISO, the more unattractive 'noise' is subtly added into the picture and only seen when you go into edit it.

Also, as I learned how to shoot on a Ti you should just be able to set the white balance for whatever situation your in by pressing the arrow surrounding a central button to the right of the screen that says WB and picking the one that suits your situation. If you have any adobe product, you have adobe bridge with is freaking handy for importing pictures. Even if you shot in jpeg, if you right click on your photo in bridge, you can edit your photo in RAW.

 

400 is not "way too high". If anything, it's a rather typical speed for indoor use. Using 100 requires quite a bit of light, usually provided by a celestial body or a tripod.

I would have swapped your indoor and outdoor numbers at least - or are you suggesting that outdoors is darker than indoors? At night I suppose...

 

ha yes, meant 200 for indoors. ^^; It was rather early in the morning as I typed that. xD