Color Problem with 5D Mark 3

[Dusty87]

Hello!

New member here, so bear with me.

I am a portrait photographer, and recently upgraded from a 5D Mark 2 to a 5D Mark 3.. Despite advice from a friend, I took the Mark 3 to a shoot without practicing first. As as I shot, I was looking at the LCD playback screen, and thought they all looked wonderful. But once I got home, I quickly realized that I have a problem. I was not quite prepared for the drastic difference in color between the 2 and the 3. When I shot with my Mark 2, I never had an issue with color... and if I did, it was user error. But the color is awful in the images that I made with the new Mark 3.

I have Googled until my fingers were numb, so I joined the forum just so I could ask... Is there any way to correct this IN-CAMERA?!?! (And if not, what is the easiest way to correct the problem for any & all future RAW files that I shoot?)

I have tried changing picture styles. I have tried changing the Kelvin settings.. No matter what I do, the color looks "off". Please help me!!

I have attached some links to examples from the shoot. And while I'm well aware that there are probably "other" technical problems with the images, I ask that you only look at the image color(s) as the problem. (For what it's worth.. I know the location is not the issue, because I shot in the very same location with my Mark 2, and the colors were lovely. But in the photos below, as you'll see, there's an over-abundance of green.)

https://ibb.co/eYyNGk
https://ibb.co/hN6W95

Image details.. 6850 Kelvin (which, btw, is not what it said in-camera as I was shooting) with +5 magenta 
And yes, I shot these in RAW.


Thanks for any and all advice/tips/suggestions you might have!

Best,

-Dusty

[Dusty87]

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

I think you are drawing conclusions from flawed data.  If it was mostly sunshine, then your light source temperature was changing from one shot to the next.  You should try the test again under more consistent light conditions.

I guess I'm not understanding.. The sun never went behind a cloud, or came out from behind a cloud, during the 10 minutes it took me to do these shots. Yes, it was a little cloudy... but not so much that it would impact lighting, I wouldn't think?? And like I said, we were behind a building. The front of the building faces the sun, so we were sheltered from the sun, as the sun was setting.

Your WB setting seems to be mostly error, and the ExpoDisk is yielding flawed results.  As I noted above, you are sampling one light source [ light reflected from the wall ], and shooting with another light source [ direct sunlight ].  To top it off, your light source varies from one shot to the next, because of the variable cloud cover.  

Why do you think my WB setting seems to be mostly error? What could be causing that?

You might be able to use the ExpoDisk as a grey card at these shooting distances.  You just won't be able to use the image as custom WB image.  You will have to sample the ED in post, and use it as a WB reference.

So instead of holding it over the lens and snapping a shot from the model's position, you're saying I could possibly use it as a reference point for the model to hold, and then correct WB in post? I'll have to try that!

---

[Dusty87]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"Even with all those factors, the differences in color are super obvious to me"

You are making this far more difficult than it is. Just do as Tim and I have tried to guide you.  All will be well.  You do need to bone up on basic photography.  The grey card is a great idea.  No other fancy gadgets required.

---

Its almost like swapping from sweet tea to unsweet tea... The change in taste is drastic... You know it's probably better for you, but it still takes some getting used to.

I'm just trying to find an "artificial sweetener" to make it somewhat more tolerable to me.


I am ordering a grey card tonight. However, I am very skeptical. Especially since I doubt the practicality of using it during shoots with children, or indoor events.. But I will try!

[ebiggs1]

"I doubt the practicality of using it during shoots ..."

You are still missing some of the big point about it.  The grey scale card is, also, a learning tool.  Hopefully you will not need it after the learning curve is over.  However, if you find yourself in a situation where you think you might need it, you still have it.

For instance setting the color balance over 7000 is going to drastically change the photo.  Unless it is a pretty cloudy day. Still not good.  It is not a good trial or test.  If you want a good testing situation do it in broad daylight and set the K temp to 5200.

Shooting raw, which you absolutely need to be doing, there is no WB or color balance.  That is set in post.  Use DPP4 or LR or PSE to do that.

[eduardohferraz]

Hello Dusty,

I'm writing you just to say that you are not alone: I have the same problem you've described with my Canon 5d Mark iii. It is probably hard for other people who has Mark 3's that are working perfectly to believe this is a camera issue. But it is! I own 3 other canon dslr camera models and the mark3 is the only one with this problem. It's a nightmare. And, unfortunately I haven't found a solution...

[ebiggs1]

You may have the problem but that doesn't mean it is the camera.  Maybe it is but let's see first.  Can you u/l a sample?  

[kacprek]

Hi ebiggs1, you seem do not belive in color issue 5D Mark 3.
I have using that canon camera about 1 year and struggling with that color problem very long time.

Maybe eduardohferraz can tell more what kind of problem it is.

I don't know if it is all models of 5d mk3 camera issue or only some.

I will try to give some exemples in raw files later todays afternoon and explain what is all about.

The main problem is that the photos are poor in colors and despite of the fact that histogram is fine the images seems to look too dark.

I'm surprised that only here in this forum I could find a person who were describe such a problem with 5D mark III.

[kacprek]

Can you describe eduardohferraz your problem with Canon 5D mark iii more acurate please?

[kacprek]

So here there are two photos. Both are taken with Canon 5D mark 3. First one of them is not from
my camera, but from other Photographer. As you can see there is a huge difference in color
saturation between both of photos. Can someone tell me why? I know my photo was taken in other
light condition, a bit diffrent camera exposure setings, but why so huge differences. My colors
are washed out somewhere.

These are RAW files processed with capture one to jpg files.
Photographer: not my photo

Exif data:

Model Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Shutter Speed 1/4000 s
F-Number f/2
ISO ISO 100
Exposure Bias Value -0.33 eV
Metering Mode Pattern
Flash Off, Did not fire
Focal Length 50 mm
Lens Model Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM

My photoshoot: my photo

Model Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Shutter Speed 1/400 s
F-Number f/2.8
ISO ISO 100
Exposure Bias Value 0.00 eV
Metering Mode Pattern
Flash Off, Did not fire
Focal Length 50 mm
Lens Model 50mm F1.4 DG HSM Art (Canon EF)

There was also on the left side of the model white light reflecting surface.

At the end my photo retouched a bit more with capture one. You can see the colors are back but
I'm not satisfied fully with that.

more processed photo

All the best

[ebiggs1]

First there is absolutely no way to compare these two shots.  How's this for starters?  Two photographers with unknown experience. Two different lenses. Two different post processing and unknown experience of the persons doing the edits.

Both shots look fine to me.  Perhaps I would have done some slightly different tweaks but they are OK.

You need to know, you can not view a Raw file.  It has to be converted into something else.  A tiff or probably more likely a jpg. The conversion software doesn't know how to do this so it relies on the tag file, metadata, embedded in the Raw file.  In other words it reads your camera settings and that is the starting point.  The Raw file itself is left unchanged form what the sensor saw.  The color saturation can be whatever the user wants.

[kacprek]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

Two different post processing and unknown experience of the persons doing the edits.

---

The post processing is in both cases is the same. I have both oiginal raw files and just exported those images to jpg format. The is no reason to so different conversion of the Raw file. I can upload for you original raws on pm if you wish. You can see even in any viewer the difference in color saturation.

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

 Both shots look fine to me.  Perhaps I would have done some slightly different tweaks but they are OK.

---

For me not, because the firs photo has better start point to post processing. I do not need to waste time for tweaking color saturation, fiddling with sliders etc.

So I need to know why there is the difference.

Is that lighting condition at the moment the photo was taken?

Is it the other settings in camera maybe?

Because I'm shooting for one year with that camera, and I'm not satisfied with what I get from it, and I need some help.

After every photo session, there is always nightmare to me getting right colors in my photos. 

So when I found the other raws files of other photographers and the same camera model as mine and I did comparation and I found there is something wrong with my raws.