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

[kacprek]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

This is how I might have treated this shot.

---

Thanks for this try. I thing the color are now very nice but althought it seem to me the mood of the photo have gone somewhere, but colors aren't oversaturated at least.

I found some interesting forum topic about 5D mark III. The person have got some problem with this camera too as me now

5D mk III awful results

I'm just struggling with almost the same problems. 

I'm very curious, maybe just this camera is harder to learn how to shoot properly and post process after 🙂

[Waddizzle]

Are you using any sort of lens filters?  I have found that i get the best results using just a clear filter.  I have stopped using ND filters when shooting stills altogether.  If I want a very shallow DOF on a bright sunny day, I cheat.  Photoshop can do a very good job of blurring the background, if you use multiple background layers.

[kacprek]

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

Are you using any sort of lens filters?  I have found that i get the best results using just a clear filter.  I have stopped using ND filters when shooting stills altogether.  If I want a very shallow DOF on a bright sunny day, I cheat.  Photoshop can do a very good job of blurring the background, if you use multiple background layers.

---

I don't but I've been thinking about that. I think that if I will use one it should be high quality filters.

[ebiggs1]

"I'm very curious, maybe just this camera is harder to learn how to shoot properly and post process after"

I 100% totally disagree with that.  I did use a layer/mask in the shot of the girl with the yellow dress but that was because the BG wasn't right, to me anyway.

I have shot tons of photos with all the 5 (I, II, II, IV) series camera except the 5Ds.  They make beautiful photographs.  You need to get LR/PS and spend some quality time learning it.  Keep this in mind, no camera is 100% perfect but PS is.  Stop messing around with amateur editing software if you want professional results.

[TCampbell]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"I'm very curious, maybe just this camera is harder to learn how to shoot properly and post process after"

I 100% totally disagree with that.  I did use a layer/mask in the shot of the girl with the yellow dress but that was because the BG wasn't right, to me anyway.

I have shot tons of photos with all the 5 (I, II, II, IV) series camera except the 5Ds.  They make beautiful photographs.  You need to get LR/PS and spend some quality time learning it.  Keep this in mind, no camera is 100% perfect but PS is.  Stop messing around with amateur editing software if you want professional results.

---

I’m with Ernie ... with the caveat that I’ve owned a 5D II, III, and IV (I still own the III & IV).  The III is more “technical” than the II was.  It has several features that are more advanced than the II had (most noteably ... the focus system.)

But for purposes of this discussion (color accuracy), the camera really is the same as all others.  It is no more difficult.

Shooting in RAW means you have more post-shoot adjustment latitude options because a RAW file should not make any change that is “destructive” to original data.  Canon is pretty good about this. 

When you shoot RAW, the camera wont apply any change that results in a loss of original data.  You can set your white balance choice and it will “record” the choice to the meta-data file... but it will not “apply” that choice to the RAW data.  When you shoot RAW, you’re basically saying “I want to control everything”.  There’s a little more work to do (but this should be true of any camera when shooting RAW ... the 5D III is not special in this regard) but you have far more control over the end result.

[ebiggs1]

"Shooting in RAW means you have more post-shoot adjustment latitude options because a RAW file should not make any change that is “destructive” to original data."

And, that statement sums up the whole story.  That is exactly why we shoot Raw.

And, this one ain't bad either.................

"You can set your white balance choice and it will “record” the choice to the meta-data file... but it will not “apply” that choice to the RAW data."

[kacprek]

---

@TCampbell wrote:

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"I'm very curious, maybe just this camera is harder to learn how to shoot properly and post process after"

I 100% totally disagree with that.  I did use a layer/mask in the shot of the girl with the yellow dress but that was because the BG wasn't right, to me anyway.

I have shot tons of photos with all the 5 (I, II, II, IV) series camera except the 5Ds.  They make beautiful photographs.  You need to get LR/PS and spend some quality time learning it.  Keep this in mind, no camera is 100% perfect but PS is.  Stop messing around with amateur editing software if you want professional results.

---

I’m with Ernie ... with the caveat that I’ve owned a 5D II, III, and IV (I still own the III & IV).  The III is more “technical” than the II was.  It has several features that are more advanced than the II had (most noteably ... the focus system.)

But for purposes of this discussion (color accuracy), the camera really is the same as all others.  It is no more difficult.

Shooting in RAW means you have more post-shoot adjustment latitude options because a RAW file should not make any change that is “destructive” to original data.  Canon is pretty good about this. 

When you shoot RAW, the camera wont apply any change that results in a loss of original data.  You can set your white balance choice and it will “record” the choice to the meta-data file... but it will not “apply” that choice to the RAW data.  When you shoot RAW, you’re basically saying “I want to control everything”.  There’s a little more work to do (but this should be true of any camera when shooting RAW ... the 5D III is not special in this regard) but you have far more control over the end result.

---

Hi TCamblel

I'm very apreciate your advice but I have a fundamental question.

Can you proof it with the stunning out door ladies model portrats photos. Did you tried shoot that particulary with 5D mark III and can you show me it. Because I do portraits  for 3 years with canon cameras first with 5D classic after that mark II and now mark III. Only with canon 5D classic I have no problems with post processing. With mark II was a bit harder and with mark III it's just a nightmare.

I'm just trying to find the reason of this. Is it my fault or somethnig else. Or I need to buy another camera. Or I will do learn how to get rid of my problems. I'm working really very hard on this, because I am a stubborn man and I want to achieve my goal. I believe that there is no option that canon camera can't do perfect photos for that level of price.

All the best

[ebiggs1]

I have basically saying this all through this entire thread. "You need to get LR/PS and spend some quality time learning it.  Keep this in mind, no camera is 100% perfect but PS is.  Stop messing around with amateur editing software if you want professional results."

If you want top professional photos this is the way you get them.

[kacprek]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"When using the picker to set white balance, it's important to find something that is meant to be "neutral" in real life."

Maybe this will help and make it more clear.

In PS select the curves adjustment layer. Use the color picker and if it hovers over a spot in your photo that puts a dot right in the center of the curve, it is neutral gray. Almost all photos will have something like this or something very close.  With experience and time you will be able to just see these places and the selection will become easy. After you do this edit, you can do the others to make it a great photograph.

---

Thank you this is a really good advice that I needed. That means that in this case the point has 50% grays and if the values are 100% equal that mieans neutral gray. I'm right?

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"Shooting in RAW means you have more post-shoot adjustment latitude options because a RAW file should not make any change that is “destructive” to original data."

And, that statement sums up the whole story.  That is exactly why we shoot Raw.

And, this one ain't bad either.................

"You can set your white balance choice and it will “record” the choice to the meta-data file... but it will not “apply” that choice to the RAW data."

---

I'm not sure that last statement is quite true. While the color balance setting will not affect your freedom to select another value in post, it will be taken into consideration in setting the exposure. Then if you do change it later, you'll have to crank up the brightness to compensate. If the required correction is great enough, it's almost certain to have an effect on the quality of the resulting image. So there should be a benefit to getting it right the first time.