Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Canon S1 IS on the nose

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
December 8, 2004 8:10:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

We have nice bourgainvilla creeper inthe backgarden. By accident it
got included in a birdpicture with the Canon S1 IS and it did not look
right. Well I have access to a Pentax Optio S and an Olympus 2100 IS
so I took three pictures one after the other with only a few minutes
difference in time.
I made an IrfanView Slideshow and placed that on my site for comments.
It is an exe file with 5 seconds delay and will therefore download -
there is no virus or other trouble - scan it if you like - it is at
http://www.members.iinet.net.au/~borge/Flowers.exe

You will I suspect notice that the Canon has a very poor red. I have
made pictures with the White Balance in Sun and AUTO and there is no
difference between the two - I wonder if there is an explanation. Both
the Canon and the Olympus have a UV Filter added. I have tried to take
them off and there is no difference.
Any suggestions - please

B.Pedersen Latitude -31,48.21 Longitude115,47.40 Time=GMT+8.00
If you are curious look here http://www.mapquest.com/maps/latlong.adp

More about : canon nose

Anonymous
December 8, 2004 8:10:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"nesredep egrob" <Long. -31,48.21 Lat. 115,47.40> wrote in message
news:rggdr09801v444qsgjg4gjb60rbt3j9n0r@4ax.com...
> We have nice bourgainvilla creeper inthe backgarden. By accident it
> got included in a birdpicture with the Canon S1 IS and it did not
look
> right. Well I have access to a Pentax Optio S and an Olympus 2100 IS
> so I took three pictures one after the other with only a few minutes
> difference in time.
> I made an IrfanView Slideshow and placed that on my site for
comments.
> It is an exe file with 5 seconds delay and will therefore download -
> there is no virus or other trouble - scan it if you like - it is at
> http://www.members.iinet.net.au/~borge/Flowers.exe
>
> You will I suspect notice that the Canon has a very poor red. I have
> made pictures with the White Balance in Sun and AUTO and there is no
> difference between the two - I wonder if there is an explanation.
Both
> the Canon and the Olympus have a UV Filter added. I have tried to
take
> them off and there is no difference.
> Any suggestions - please
>
> B.Pedersen Latitude -31,48.21 Longitude115,47.40 Time=GMT+8.00
> If you are curious look here
http://www.mapquest.com/maps/latlong.adp
>
In my experience Canons have always had poor reds. Both my S30 and S60
have always exhibited pinkish looking reds, and I always have to boost
the red level in Photoshop. They also can't accurately reproduce
colours that have a lot of red in like purple either.

The only suggestion is get another make of camera, although I'm
sticking with my Canons for the time being, even though I have been
well aware of the red problem from the very early days of ownership of
the S30.
Anonymous
December 8, 2004 8:10:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Baron Sloan" <alan.robsonIGNORALA@DISTUFbaesystems.com> wrote in message
news:41b6ce70$1_1@baen1673807.greenlnk.net...
> "nesredep egrob" <Long. -31,48.21 Lat. 115,47.40> wrote in message
> news:rggdr09801v444qsgjg4gjb60rbt3j9n0r@4ax.com...
>> We have nice bourgainvilla creeper inthe backgarden. By accident it
>> got included in a birdpicture with the Canon S1 IS and it did not
> look
>> right. Well I have access to a Pentax Optio S and an Olympus 2100 IS
>> so I took three pictures one after the other with only a few minutes
>> difference in time.
>> I made an IrfanView Slideshow and placed that on my site for
> comments.
>> It is an exe file with 5 seconds delay and will therefore download -
>> there is no virus or other trouble - scan it if you like - it is at
>> http://www.members.iinet.net.au/~borge/Flowers.exe
>>
>> You will I suspect notice that the Canon has a very poor red. I have
>> made pictures with the White Balance in Sun and AUTO and there is no
>> difference between the two - I wonder if there is an explanation.
> Both
>> the Canon and the Olympus have a UV Filter added. I have tried to
> take
>> them off and there is no difference.
>> Any suggestions - please
>>
>> B.Pedersen Latitude -31,48.21 Longitude115,47.40 Time=GMT+8.00
>> If you are curious look here
> http://www.mapquest.com/maps/latlong.adp
>>
> In my experience Canons have always had poor reds. Both my S30 and S60
> have always exhibited pinkish looking reds, and I always have to boost
> the red level in Photoshop. They also can't accurately reproduce
> colours that have a lot of red in like purple either.
>
> The only suggestion is get another make of camera, although I'm
> sticking with my Canons for the time being, even though I have been
> well aware of the red problem from the very early days of ownership of
> the S30.
>
>
Maybe my eyes aren't as discriminating as others, but I believe that my 20D
captures reds very well. One of the problems that I had with my previous
digital, an Epson 3100Z, was its failure to display correct color in the red
zone. The 20D seems to be very accurate.

Don Dunlap
Related resources
Anonymous
December 8, 2004 8:10:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Don Dunlap" <dondunlapremve@direcway.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:67dc2$41b6d736$45234d14$12121@allthenewsgroups.com...
>
> "Baron Sloan" <alan.robsonIGNORALA@DISTUFbaesystems.com> wrote in
message
> news:41b6ce70$1_1@baen1673807.greenlnk.net...
> > "nesredep egrob" <Long. -31,48.21 Lat. 115,47.40> wrote in message
> > news:rggdr09801v444qsgjg4gjb60rbt3j9n0r@4ax.com...
> >> We have nice bourgainvilla creeper inthe backgarden. By accident it
> >> got included in a birdpicture with the Canon S1 IS and it did not
> > look
> >> right. Well I have access to a Pentax Optio S and an Olympus 2100 IS
> >> so I took three pictures one after the other with only a few minutes
> >> difference in time.
> >> I made an IrfanView Slideshow and placed that on my site for
> > comments.
> >> It is an exe file with 5 seconds delay and will therefore download -
> >> there is no virus or other trouble - scan it if you like - it is at
> >> http://www.members.iinet.net.au/~borge/Flowers.exe
> >>
> >> You will I suspect notice that the Canon has a very poor red. I have
> >> made pictures with the White Balance in Sun and AUTO and there is no
> >> difference between the two - I wonder if there is an explanation.
> > Both
> >> the Canon and the Olympus have a UV Filter added. I have tried to
> > take
> >> them off and there is no difference.
> >> Any suggestions - please
> >>
> >> B.Pedersen Latitude -31,48.21 Longitude115,47.40 Time=GMT+8.00
> >> If you are curious look here
> > http://www.mapquest.com/maps/latlong.adp
> >>
> > In my experience Canons have always had poor reds. Both my S30 and S60
> > have always exhibited pinkish looking reds, and I always have to boost
> > the red level in Photoshop. They also can't accurately reproduce
> > colours that have a lot of red in like purple either.
> >
> > The only suggestion is get another make of camera, although I'm
> > sticking with my Canons for the time being, even though I have been
> > well aware of the red problem from the very early days of ownership of
> > the S30.
> >
> >
> Maybe my eyes aren't as discriminating as others, but I believe that my
20D
> captures reds very well. One of the problems that I had with my
previous
> digital, an Epson 3100Z, was its failure to display correct color in the
red
> zone. The 20D seems to be very accurate.

Just for the record: I didn't observe this red-problem with my G5 either.

Kind regards

robert
Anonymous
December 8, 2004 8:10:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Don Dunlap" <dondunlapremve@direcway.com> wrote in message
news:67dc2$41b6d736$45234d14$12121@allthenewsgroups.com...
>
> "Baron Sloan" <alan.robsonIGNORALA@DISTUFbaesystems.com> wrote in
message
> news:41b6ce70$1_1@baen1673807.greenlnk.net...
> > "nesredep egrob" <Long. -31,48.21 Lat. 115,47.40> wrote in message
> > news:rggdr09801v444qsgjg4gjb60rbt3j9n0r@4ax.com...
> >> We have nice bourgainvilla creeper inthe backgarden. By accident
it
> >> got included in a birdpicture with the Canon S1 IS and it did not
> > look
> >> right. Well I have access to a Pentax Optio S and an Olympus 2100
IS
> >> so I took three pictures one after the other with only a few
minutes
> >> difference in time.
> >> I made an IrfanView Slideshow and placed that on my site for
> > comments.
> >> It is an exe file with 5 seconds delay and will therefore
download -
> >> there is no virus or other trouble - scan it if you like - it is
at
> >> http://www.members.iinet.net.au/~borge/Flowers.exe
> >>
> >> You will I suspect notice that the Canon has a very poor red. I
have
> >> made pictures with the White Balance in Sun and AUTO and there is
no
> >> difference between the two - I wonder if there is an explanation.
> > Both
> >> the Canon and the Olympus have a UV Filter added. I have tried to
> > take
> >> them off and there is no difference.
> >> Any suggestions - please
> >>
> >> B.Pedersen Latitude -31,48.21 Longitude115,47.40 Time=GMT+8.00
> >> If you are curious look here
> > http://www.mapquest.com/maps/latlong.adp
> >>
> > In my experience Canons have always had poor reds. Both my S30 and
S60
> > have always exhibited pinkish looking reds, and I always have to
boost
> > the red level in Photoshop. They also can't accurately reproduce
> > colours that have a lot of red in like purple either.
> >
> > The only suggestion is get another make of camera, although I'm
> > sticking with my Canons for the time being, even though I have
been
> > well aware of the red problem from the very early days of
ownership of
> > the S30.
> >
> >
> Maybe my eyes aren't as discriminating as others, but I believe that
my 20D
> captures reds very well. One of the problems that I had with my
previous
> digital, an Epson 3100Z, was its failure to display correct color in
the red
> zone. The 20D seems to be very accurate.
>
> Don Dunlap
>
The red weakness may only be a problem on the PowerShot range, and is
most apparent on sunny days, but it's definitely not my imagination.
I'm quite prepared to admit the failing, despite the fact that I've
used Canon PowerShots exclusively for the last three years, and am
completely happy with them in all other respects.

IMHO all prosumer cameras have some drawback, but I'm happy to keep my
Canons in the knowledge that the poor red accuracy (in sunlit shots)
is the only major weakness that I've come across.
Anonymous
December 8, 2004 9:39:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

When I used film cameras, I always used Fuji film because I took a lot
of photos including leaves, trees and such; Kodak - great for skin tones
- rendered most greens with a pronounced blue cast. I imagine there are
similar issues with digital cameras.

When we reduce the whole spectrum of light to sensors of three types,
normally RGB, we are relying on the shortcomings of our vision to make
everything come out right. There are bound to be some glitches.

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
Anonymous
December 8, 2004 11:56:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 03:05:02 -0800, Justín Käse
<chupacabra@operamail.com> wrote:

>In Message-ID:<41b6ce70$1_1@baen1673807.greenlnk.net> posted on Wed, 8
>Dec 2004 10:00:07 -0000, Baron Sloan wrote:
>
>>In my experience Canons have always had poor reds. Both my S30 and S60
>>have always exhibited pinkish looking reds, and I always have to boost
>>the red level in Photoshop. They also can't accurately reproduce
>>colours that have a lot of red in like purple either.
>
>I've been considering getting a 720nm IR filter (R-72) for my S1,
>am I to interpret that the red sensitivity might be an issue?
>BTW: I took some bougainvillea shots over in a local park about a week
>ago and they came out fairly close with no UV or other filtration, not
>as pink as those in the pic2exe show, but more of the true magenta.


Well out here (Western Australia) we have lots of Bourgonvilias and
they range from near yellow to all sorts of other colours. There is no
substitute for taking shots of the same part of the bush with
different cameras.

Believe me I am otherwise totally happy with the S1 but I am going to
have words with Canon on the subject. I am surprised. I am a retired
TV tech who was in the job when we had to finalise the colours in the
customers home at the very start of colour TV.

Not two sets came out of the factory with the same adjustments. We had
the gear for setting them up properly - not the money nor the
showmanship but we challenged people to walk down the street and ask
the big shops to put all the sets on the same station and then ask the
salesman which set displayed the right colour; and I was this long in
seeing the discrepancy - I must be losing my sight and mind with age.

Thanks for the comments all of you.

Borge, Perth
Pentium P4 2.4Ghz, 1 Gb memory, 600 GB space
Olympus 2100UZ, Pentax Optio S, Canon S1.
Anonymous
December 8, 2004 11:56:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

nesredep egrob wrote:
[]
> Believe me I am otherwise totally happy with the S1 but I am going to
> have words with Canon on the subject. I am surprised. I am a retired
> TV tech who was in the job when we had to finalise the colours in the
> customers home at the very start of colour TV.

There's one other issue that I don't recall being mentioned. Some cameras
have some spectral response beyond what the eye can see, and this affects
the colour rendering. I have seen it both on flowers (blue/violet leaves)
and on artificial fabrics with (perhaps) brighteners added to convert
near-UV into visible light. Now all cameras of the same model should
respond in the same way, but of course they aren't checked at the factory
for this out-of-band wavelength response. Different makes and different
models will respond differently.

Perhaps this far-end spectral response is contributing towards the colour
issues you are seeing?

Cheers,
David
Anonymous
December 9, 2004 12:37:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

nesredep egrob wrote:
> We have nice bourgainvilla creeper inthe backgarden. By accident it
> got included in a birdpicture with the Canon S1 IS and it did not look
> right. Well I have access to a Pentax Optio S and an Olympus 2100 IS
> so I took three pictures one after the other with only a few minutes
> difference in time.
> I made an IrfanView Slideshow and placed that on my site for comments.
> It is an exe file with 5 seconds delay and will therefore download -
> there is no virus or other trouble - scan it if you like - it is at
> http://www.members.iinet.net.au/~borge/Flowers.exe
>
> You will I suspect notice that the Canon has a very poor red. I have
> made pictures with the White Balance in Sun and AUTO and there is no
> difference between the two - I wonder if there is an explanation. Both
> the Canon and the Olympus have a UV Filter added. I have tried to take
> them off and there is no difference.
> Any suggestions - please
>
> B.Pedersen Latitude -31,48.21 Longitude115,47.40 Time=GMT+8.00
> If you are curious look here http://www.mapquest.com/maps/latlong.adp

I never experienced so low-quality photo on my S1 in one year period. I bet
you shot it in auto mode...Note that this camera has a bunch of manual and
half-manual settings, so auto mode is there just for the most stupid ones.
All others doesn't use it (me neither - i mainly use "P" mode or shutter
priority). With minor adjustments that picture would become as good as with
other two cameras. Look at this review:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_s1-re...

where (towards the bottom) shows night mode photos with purple fringing(made
with auto mode, f 3.1), which can effectively be neutralized with closing
aperture a bit (manual mode, f 5).

One other thing i noticed at S1 - kinda bug or similar - when i shoot and
suddenly change scene a lot(like from dark to light or when you shoot with
flash and then next photo without it), than sometimes camera doesn't correct
color temperature when you first half-press shutter. But if you release it
and half-press it again, then it's corrected. Maybe this happened to you...?
It can be annoying sometimes, but when you know this problem, you get used
to it...
I guess nothing is perfect...damn...at least they improved low-light
focusing with recent firmware.
Anonymous
December 9, 2004 2:09:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:25:33 -0000, "David J Taylor"
<david-taylor@invalid.com> wrote:

>nesredep egrob wrote:
>[]
>> Believe me I am otherwise totally happy with the S1 but I am going to
>> have words with Canon on the subject. I am surprised. I am a retired
>> TV tech who was in the job when we had to finalise the colours in the
>> customers home at the very start of colour TV.
>
>There's one other issue that I don't recall being mentioned. Some cameras
>have some spectral response beyond what the eye can see, and this affects
>the colour rendering. I have seen it both on flowers (blue/violet leaves)
>and on artificial fabrics with (perhaps) brighteners added to convert
>near-UV into visible light. Now all cameras of the same model should
>respond in the same way, but of course they aren't checked at the factory
>for this out-of-band wavelength response. Different makes and different
>models will respond differently.
>
>Perhaps this far-end spectral response is contributing towards the colour
>issues you are seeing?
>
>Cheers,
>David
>
It has been suggested that I have used the Auto mode for Shooting -
well as far as the While Balance is concerned I have. I never use the
Main Auto as that stops me getting at the functions and I am stuck
with point and shoot as is the case with most other cameras.

I phoned the local Canon (Perth) office and waited 20 minutes for a
connection - then I took time off and went to see them. I moaned a
little when they said that it would be in until after Christmas and
the counter lady eventually took it in to the service department.

When she returned the comment was that I had set the camera to user
White Balance and not set it. Quite what that means is not clear. I
had taken some white paper out to set the WB and the colours were then
mostly washed out all together.

It had been set to Auto and a shot was taken in the department of a
red box and that was supposed to clear the trouble - there was nothing
wrong - good job they did not have it for Christmas for such a lousy
examination.

I have another 6 months of guarantee - they will hear from me again.
Good job that I have other camera's to compare with. Might even bring
the Hasselblad out of hibernation or one of the 35 mm minoltas.

Borge, Perth
Pentium P4 2.4Ghz, 1 Gb memory, 600 GB space
Olympus 2100UZ, Pentax Optio S, Canon S1.
Anonymous
December 9, 2004 7:56:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

nesredep egrob wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:25:33 -0000, "David J Taylor"
> <david-taylor@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>> nesredep egrob wrote:
>> []
>>> Believe me I am otherwise totally happy with the S1 but I am going
>>> to have words with Canon on the subject. I am surprised. I am a
>>> retired TV tech who was in the job when we had to finalise the
>>> colours in the customers home at the very start of colour TV.
>>
>> There's one other issue that I don't recall being mentioned. Some
>> cameras have some spectral response beyond what the eye can see, and
>> this affects the colour rendering. I have seen it both on flowers
>> (blue/violet leaves) and on artificial fabrics with (perhaps)
>> brighteners added to convert near-UV into visible light. Now all
>> cameras of the same model should respond in the same way, but of
>> course they aren't checked at the factory for this out-of-band
>> wavelength response. Different makes and different models will
>> respond differently.
>>
>> Perhaps this far-end spectral response is contributing towards the
>> colour issues you are seeing?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> David
>>
> It has been suggested that I have used the Auto mode for Shooting -
> well as far as the While Balance is concerned I have. I never use the
> Main Auto as that stops me getting at the functions and I am stuck
> with point and shoot as is the case with most other cameras.
>
> I phoned the local Canon (Perth) office and waited 20 minutes for a
> connection - then I took time off and went to see them. I moaned a
> little when they said that it would be in until after Christmas and
> the counter lady eventually took it in to the service department.
>
> When she returned the comment was that I had set the camera to user
> White Balance and not set it. Quite what that means is not clear. I
> had taken some white paper out to set the WB and the colours were then
> mostly washed out all together.


Depends on if you had set on "auto" or on "P" mode...having mode on "AUTO"
means that you can't change NOTHING AT ALL except size of photo, while
setting on "P" means that camera does shoot with point-and-shoot, but you
can alter ALL settings (and forget to put them back to auto also!!!).
So, if you had it on P, that was your fault...but if you had it on
AUTO...that's camera's fault.
And...like i said...sometimes camera refuses to set WB correctly, so you
must release and repress shutter button...
In any case finally you come up with bad photos...unfortunately...
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 11:46:02 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 16:56:40 +0100, "SleeperMan"
<SleeperMan@too.sleepy> wrote:



>> It has been suggested that I have used the Auto mode for Shooting -
>> well as far as the While Balance is concerned I have. I never use the
>> Main Auto as that stops me getting at the functions and I am stuck
>> with point and shoot as is the case with most other cameras.
>>
>> I phoned the local Canon (Perth) office and waited 20 minutes for a
>> connection - then I took time off and went to see them. I moaned a
>> little when they said that it would be in until after Christmas and
>> the counter lady eventually took it in to the service department.
>>
>> When she returned the comment was that I had set the camera to user
>> White Balance and not set it. Quite what that means is not clear. I
>> had taken some white paper out to set the WB and the colours were then
>> mostly washed out all together.
>
>
>Depends on if you had set on "auto" or on "P" mode...having mode on "AUTO"
>means that you can't change NOTHING AT ALL except size of photo, while
>setting on "P" means that camera does shoot with point-and-shoot, but you
>can alter ALL settings (and forget to put them back to auto also!!!).
>So, if you had it on P, that was your fault...but if you had it on
>AUTO...that's camera's fault.
>And...like i said...sometimes camera refuses to set WB correctly, so you
>must release and repress shutter button...
>In any case finally you come up with bad photos...unfortunately...
>
>
I did not mean to produce good photo's - it was just a test to see why
the colour was so different in the viewer to what my right eye was
telling me.
I have placed the canon.jpg on the internet at
http://www.members.iinet.net.au/~borge/canon.jpg to enable more
knowledgeable people than I to view the exif, View with Irfan View and
go for Information/exif.

The stuff I am normally into and hence the S1 and 2100UZ is to be seen
on http://www.members.iinet.net.au/~borge/IMG_0768.JPG. This is
straight out of the camera and therefore about 1.5Mb. That is my idea
of a reasonable photo to start up Photoshop.

B.Pedersen Latitude -31,48.21 Longitude115,47.40 Time=GMT+8.00
If you are curious look here http://www.mapquest.com/maps/latlong.adp
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 9:03:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

nesredep egrob wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 16:56:40 +0100, "SleeperMan"
> <SleeperMan@too.sleepy> wrote:
>
>
>
>>> It has been suggested that I have used the Auto mode for Shooting -
>>> well as far as the While Balance is concerned I have. I never use
>>> the Main Auto as that stops me getting at the functions and I am
>>> stuck with point and shoot as is the case with most other cameras.
>>>
>>> I phoned the local Canon (Perth) office and waited 20 minutes for a
>>> connection - then I took time off and went to see them. I moaned a
>>> little when they said that it would be in until after Christmas and
>>> the counter lady eventually took it in to the service department.
>>>
>>> When she returned the comment was that I had set the camera to user
>>> White Balance and not set it. Quite what that means is not clear. I
>>> had taken some white paper out to set the WB and the colours were
>>> then mostly washed out all together.
>>
>>
>> Depends on if you had set on "auto" or on "P" mode...having mode on
>> "AUTO" means that you can't change NOTHING AT ALL except size of
>> photo, while setting on "P" means that camera does shoot with
>> point-and-shoot, but you can alter ALL settings (and forget to put
>> them back to auto also!!!).
>> So, if you had it on P, that was your fault...but if you had it on
>> AUTO...that's camera's fault.
>> And...like i said...sometimes camera refuses to set WB correctly, so
>> you must release and repress shutter button...
>> In any case finally you come up with bad photos...unfortunately...
>>
>>
> I did not mean to produce good photo's - it was just a test to see why
> the colour was so different in the viewer to what my right eye was
> telling me.
> I have placed the canon.jpg on the internet at
> http://www.members.iinet.net.au/~borge/canon.jpg to enable more
> knowledgeable people than I to view the exif, View with Irfan View and
> go for Information/exif.
>
> The stuff I am normally into and hence the S1 and 2100UZ is to be seen
> on http://www.members.iinet.net.au/~borge/IMG_0768.JPG. This is
> straight out of the camera and therefore about 1.5Mb. That is my idea
> of a reasonable photo to start up Photoshop.
>
Maybe one of solutions is to find ideal manual white balance setting...
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 11:29:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 18:03:38 +0100, "SleeperMan"
<SleeperMan@too.sleepy> wrote:

>nesredep egrob wrote:
>> On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 16:56:40 +0100, "SleeperMan"
>> <SleeperMan@too.sleepy> wrote:
>>
>>
>>


>>> I did not mean to produce good photo's - it was just a test to see why
>> the colour was so different in the viewer to what my right eye was
>> telling me.
>> I have placed the canon.jpg on the internet at
>> http://www.members.iinet.net.au/~borge/canon.jpg to enable more
>> knowledgeable people than I to view the exif, View with Irfan View and
>> go for Information/exif.
>>
>> The stuff I am normally into and hence the S1 and 2100UZ is to be seen
>> on http://www.members.iinet.net.au/~borge/IMG_0768.JPG. This is
>> straight out of the camera and therefore about 1.5Mb. That is my idea
>> of a reasonable photo to start up Photoshop.
>>
>Maybe one of solutions is to find ideal manual white balance setting...
>
Did not think of that - I shall give it a try before I tackle Canon
again - but for all who followed this, I suggest that if they are
about to buy a Canon then to look for some item with a red hue.

Point the camera at that and see if the red percieved by the camera as
displayed in the viewfinder is similar to that seen by the eye which
is not used for the viewfinder.

If you go to my Canon service centre you get someone taking a picture
of some red paper and declaring that the camera DOES see red.
Well so does the customer as well when he gets home and sees that the
hue recorded by the camera is nowhere near that of the original.

So much for Canon quality.

B.Pedersen Latitude -31,48.21 Longitude115,47.40 Time=GMT+8.00
If you are curious look here http://www.mapquest.com/maps/latlong.adp
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 11:29:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

nesredep egrob wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 18:03:38 +0100, "SleeperMan"
> <SleeperMan@too.sleepy> wrote:
>
>
>>nesredep egrob wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 16:56:40 +0100, "SleeperMan"
>>><SleeperMan@too.sleepy> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>>>I did not mean to produce good photo's - it was just a test to see why
>>>
>>>the colour was so different in the viewer to what my right eye was
>>>telling me.
>>>I have placed the canon.jpg on the internet at
>>>http://www.members.iinet.net.au/~borge/canon.jpg to enable more
>>>knowledgeable people than I to view the exif, View with Irfan View and
>>>go for Information/exif.
>>>
>>>The stuff I am normally into and hence the S1 and 2100UZ is to be seen
>>>on http://www.members.iinet.net.au/~borge/IMG_0768.JPG. This is
>>>straight out of the camera and therefore about 1.5Mb. That is my idea
>>>of a reasonable photo to start up Photoshop.
>>>
>>
>>Maybe one of solutions is to find ideal manual white balance setting...
>>
>
> Did not think of that - I shall give it a try before I tackle Canon
> again - but for all who followed this, I suggest that if they are
> about to buy a Canon then to look for some item with a red hue.
>
> Point the camera at that and see if the red percieved by the camera as
> displayed in the viewfinder is similar to that seen by the eye which
> is not used for the viewfinder.
>
> If you go to my Canon service centre you get someone taking a picture
> of some red paper and declaring that the camera DOES see red.
> Well so does the customer as well when he gets home and sees that the
> hue recorded by the camera is nowhere near that of the original.
>
> So much for Canon quality.
>
> B.Pedersen Latitude -31,48.21 Longitude115,47.40 Time=GMT+8.00
> If you are curious look here http://www.mapquest.com/maps/latlong.adp
IMHO You want the best camera? With the best resoltution? With the
best color rendering?

Then (IMHO) the first thing to buy is a truck to keep the digital
laboratory in.

There were postings about a Terapixel and Gigapixel camera

Forget the S1 IS and the FZ20 FZ10 or FZ15

Just go for a terapxel or Gigapixel unit and make sure you have deep (as
in really deep) pockets to keep it in and, of course, the money to pay
for staff wages to work it all.

On the other hand... there is the S1 IS and its ilk

Aerticeus
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 8:00:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>IMHO You want the best camera? With the best resoltution? With the
>best color rendering?
>
>Then (IMHO) the first thing to buy is a truck to keep the digital
>laboratory in.
>
>There were postings about a Terapixel and Gigapixel camera
>
>Forget the S1 IS and the FZ20 FZ10 or FZ15
>
>Just go for a terapxel or Gigapixel unit and make sure you have deep (as
>in really deep) pockets to keep it in and, of course, the money to pay
>for staff wages to work it all.
>
>On the other hand... there is the S1 IS and its ilk
>
>Aerticeus

I wonder if you bothered to download the Flowers.exe from
http://www.members.iinet.net.au/~borge/Flowers.exe - If you did, you
must have seen that Olympus and Pentax managed to get near to the
optimum whereas Canon is way off. In fact so bad that I see one
picture in the viewfinder and another using direct view.

If two manufacturers can manage to get that close and the third is way
off there is a reason to write a proper hard hitting letter to the
Managing Director of such company. It is noticed that they don't even
bother to have an email address for complaints.

It is a bit like the start of colour TV in UK. They were busy rolling
the sets out of the factory and all sets were to be adjusted on
delivery. I still have 2 of the White Balance Standard as recommended
by the BBC sitting about somewhere in the house. The standard for a
british set on PAL was 6500 degrees Kelwin.

Now if anyone is on NTSC they will be thinking it normal to see
colours well off true. They are amazed when they see PAL properly set
up as the system anihilates the phase errors suffered by NTSC.

I only request such standards as I could have produced setting up a
colour TV starting off the assembly line.

B.Pedersen Latitude -31,48.21 Longitude115,47.40 Time=GMT+8.00
If you are curious look here http://www.mapquest.com/maps/latlong.adp
!