photos washed out

[dcrowex]

Canon 7d, 70-300 IS lens

Been shooting baseball (kids) games for years but really struggling this year.  Usually shooting in morning or heat of day, yes, sun can be strong, or super bright behind the cloudy skies.  To make it worse, uniforms all white.  Seem just "ok" in the view finder but once i check on the computer, the grass doesnt even look green.  

Usually shooting AV, ISO 100, F5.6.  Speed is fast enough, no blur issues, but the pictures are awful.  Never had this problem, what can I do to fix this please?  I am spending way too much time having to edit to darken them up. 

Thank you, debbie

[ebiggs1]

"Sorry, but no. You've got it backwards."

     "An over exposed shot.  Isn't that what he said?  "Wsahed out""

If you overexpose for any part of the scene the entire scene will be overexposed.  Washed out in other words.  The camera doesn't know you want only a white wedding dress, for example, overexposed and leave the rest alone.

Of course PS does and that is where it needs to be.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1wrote:

"Sorry, but no. You've got it backwards."

     "An over exposed shot.  Isn't that what he said?  "Wsahed out""

If you overexpose for any part of the scene the entire scene will be overexposed.  Washed out in other words.  The camera doesn't know you want only a white wedding dress, for example, overexposed and leave the rest alone.

Of course PS does and that is where it needs to be.

---

If one part of the scene is overexposed, that tells you nothing about the rest of the scene. It depends entirely on the dynamic range of the scene. In flat lighting with little variation in the intensity of the colors in the scene, what you say is true. Otherwise it may not be.

Any photo editor that supports RAW mode should be able to bring up shadows and tone down unblown highlights. The capability is not unique to PS.

[TCampbell]

I'm also wondering if you've inadvertenly dialed up your exposure compensation and don't realize it.

In "Av" mode on the 7D, the front dial controls the f-stop but the rear dial controls exposure compensation (from -3 stops through +3 stops).  There's a "lock" switch which disables the feature so you don't accidentally dial in exposure compensatin (it disables the rear-dial in normal shooting mode if the lock switch is engaged).

If you post an image WITH all the shooting info (EXIF data) intact (don't let your software strip the data) then we can check the EXIF data and it will tell us if you had exposure compensation dialed in.

For this to be a metering issue the camera would have to be in spot-metering mode (the default is to be in "evaluative" metering mode where it samples metering all across the image frame) and you'd have to target something very dark (which would make the camera think it needs a longer exposure to capture the "dark" subject ... and that would result in everything being over-exposed).    While that's technically a possibility, it's just unlikely to do that by accident.  But it's actually pretty easy to dial in exposure compenstation by accident ... I suspect that's the more likely cause.

[ScottyP]

I don't see any way this is going anywhere without posting a sample shot. 

[ebiggs1]

I agree.

[amfoto1]

I don't understand what the dispute is here....

Cameras use a reflective metering system that can be heavily influenced by subject tonality and original poster stated that "uniforms are white". If, for example, spot metering off the player's uniform, or to a lesser degree if using other metering patterns, the camera SHOULD want to under-expose. Normally this would call for some + Exposure Compensation.

HOWEVER, as I noted this is just the opposite of what the original poster is seeing in their images. That suggests that either too much + Exposure Compensation is dialed in or some other exposure setting is incorrect. Or  they are actually seeing something else such as reflections that might be reduced with a circular polarizing filter... Or the image appears  wahed out due to lack of a lens hood and strong light striking the front of the lens (or possibly a filter that's on there)  although in this situation I'd also expect to see under, rather than over-exposure. 

It also could be that the images are actually fine, but the display of them on the original poster's computer monitor is washed out due to an overly bright, uncalibrated monitor.

We'll never really know for sure unless we see the original images and their respective EXIF data. If we had that to look at, we could probably narrow it down a lot more.

***********

Alan Myers
San Jose, Calif., USA
"Walk softly and carry a big lens."
GEAR: 5DII, 7DII (x2), 7D(x2) some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
FLICKR & ZENFOLIO 

[dcrowex]

Thanks for the wonderful and informative comments. I apologize for not responding or posting pictures. I have been traveling on business for a week and just back.  I will read thru all this and certainly get a few pictures posted as examples.  Just wanted to thank everyone for their time.

Debbie