johnske Loc: Townsville

I can't show you cos I'd need an original to work on - if you have a K5 you also have the PENTAX Digital Camera Utility 4 editing program, you can do a white balance and/or a fine tune Amber-Blue and Magenta-Green (as well as many other things inc. changing all the cameras base parameters you took the shot with) to correct this, it doesn't have to be a RAW photo either, everything in this program works on JPEGs also.

As to WHY I don't know but suggest the flash ... as mentioned by others

Tom H Loc: St. Louis, MO

A much higher percentage of the second photo is white. I suspect this gave the auto white balance a better target and therefore better results. See if that is true of other pictures where you have had this problem.

Tom Hudson

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

Check the (store original) box and upload again. It's best if we can see the EXIF to determine if the flash or something else was the problem.

jessiebeephotos

Just throwing it out there, I have yet to use any off-camera flash. But could it be the coloring of their shirts? White is a a great reflector and brightens a photo quite well. But what do I know? I'm just learning myself!! I take mostly nature photos(nature can't argue or blink its eyes!) and am just now diving into people and pet photography. Just had my first shoot with my sister and her fiance, and learned as I was going along. Got some great ones (very natural, nothing posed)but I know I can improve. I will put them up here for comments just as soon I make room on my computer!! Your 2nd photo looks quite a bit better than the 1st btw. Good luck!

Hal81 Loc: Bucks County, Pa.

I agree with the flash being the prolblem. The same thing happened to me. Last week I went to a group home for a birthday party they gave for one of the fifty year old resadents.He has the mind of an 8 year old. I didn't realize till I got home that two of my shots the 600 speed light didn't go off. When I checked the batterys two of them checked low. I replaced the whole four and now it fires every time. When I seen your photos I knew right away what it was.My two look the same. ^

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

I figure it's the flash as well.

Tom H Loc: St. Louis, MO

When you say it is the flash, are you saying it didn't flash on the 1st or 2nd picture? If you look at the reflections on the foreheads of the women and the children it appears to have flashed in the 1st one. For some reason, the reflection on the man's forehead appears to be reflecting some other light source, higher and to his right (our left). Note the color and lighting of the grass, foreground and background, in each picture. Did the flash effect the lighting on the grass? It is even all the way back on the 2nd picture.

I'm beginning to suspect a combination of problems. It might help us solve the mystery if we knew the settings for the White Balance. Was it set at Auto, Flash, overcast, sunny, etc.? Judging by the lack of strong shadows, I suspect it was an overcast day. Was it? Was the WB set the same in both pictures? Is their any reason it might have changed after the first shot? Was the camera set for totally auto exposure? If so, double check the exposure settings to be sure they really were the same.

I still suspect the WB read the second picture better because of the preponderance of white shirts as apposed to red shirts. But, that couldn't be whole story, could it?

It seems I have questions, but no answers. Sorry about that.

Tom Hudson

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

Yes. Too many questions that can't be answered without the metadata. I'd say that the first image had no flash and the second did flash. The first image probably had some type of cool picture style and the other image probably sensed the flash and automatically switched to the corect W/B for flash and is why it looks so much better. But this is a guess and waiting to see the metadata. I wish people that need help would use the store original box. They have not idea how much time this would save everyone that reads a thread like this.