Back in May, I had posted an
Unedited "Nikon" E-mail, which provided a new photographer some pointers. This time, I talk about color calibration and some lighting conditions.
1. Color CalibrationGetting in to color calibration is a whole other mess. You can't just compare it with what you see on the back of your camera's LCD. If you really want to get into the proper way of calibration (which is very expensive), keep in mind you'll need to to calibrate everything down the line, from your camera RAW output image file to your LCD monitor to other people's LCD monitor to your printer to Kodak's printer
service, etc.
What you see on your screen, once you touch it up perfectly, might not be what other people see on their screens at home. So my personal rule of thumb is that if it is for the web, color calibration isn't that important. (Even if you are perfect, other's people's monitors
probably aren't.) If you are printing it yourself, then you have to deal with other problems. You have display profiles and printer color
profiles, etc. It's complicated. I don't know how to do it all.
There are external USB color calibrators for your monitor ($70+, maybe) if you're interested. It takes the ambient light and adjusts
accordingly, but then, of course, the color of your photo is affected by how the screen or print is lit. (That's why real photo galleries
are very meticulous about controlling lighting and positioning, among other things.)
Doing it by eye might be okay, but it's no where near what it actually should be. Apple has a built in calibrator you can use by eye. You can adjust the colors and the levels of contrast, etc. I don't know about Windows. (You can't simply download color profiles because each
monitor is physically different and your individual room lighting conditions have other needs.)
These are at the low end of things:
http://spyder.datacolor.com/index_us.phphttp://pantone.com/pages/pantone/pantone.aspx?ca=2 (the Huey)
2. Poor Lighting ConditionsProblems with the situation you described is very common, when the sky is overexposed and the subject is underexposed. Shooting on a
cloudy day is actually preferred because everything is lit evenly (for the most part). Sun actually messes things up. Clouds actually act as a natural light box.
http://www.cheapshooter.com/2007/07/26/do-it-yourself-pvc-light-box/The easiest way to counter your problem is to shoot at different times of day or on different days entirely. (Photography is about waiting
for the right moment, and not showing up at a place and expecting things to be perfect for you. But I understand.) Otherwise, there are
processes called tone mapping or HDR that you can look into. Basically (with a tripod), take multiple shots at different exposures. You can then merge them together in post-processing and manually adjust the the level of shadow and highlights you want. Because you have multiple exposures, you have more detail over the range. (In Lightroom, you can adjust the highlights and shadows of your photo otherwise. If an image is whited-out, you have lost detail at the high end, and if an image is too dark, you have lost detail at the low end. Use your histogram to help you judge. You can recover some of the detail in post, but if it's blown-out, there is no information for you to recover. Very helpful to know and use:
http://www.nikonians.org/html/resources/guides/digital/histogram_101/Another option you have are polarizers. They are considerably expensive for such a small piece of glass. For example,
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/camera-lens-filters.htmP.S. I'd advise against shooting in "Green" Mode (aka Automatic) because then you wouldn't get a feel for the mechanics of photography. Plus, once you're good enough, you wouldn't want to shoot green anymore. Otherwise, you're basically buying a DSLR for the bigger sensor (which does deliver sharper images with more detail), but you're still treating it as a point-and-shoot camera.
P.P.S. You don't want to be using flash ever unless you have a reason to. I see plenty of people with their smaller cameras having the flash turned on trying to take a photo of, say, the full moon. The light from the flash sure as hell isn't going to reach the moon. Light from a flash also has a maximum "focal length" distance that they can reach. Light photography (strobist) is a totally different way of shooting. I really only use flash if it is an emergency or if I'm using it as a fill light to bring out the subject. My personal tip is use flash when you think you don't need it, and don't use it when you think you do. For example, a flash late summer afternoon at the park can help bring out the face of a subject, and flashing when you are shooting fireworks just isn't going to cut it. Do you see what I mean?