khorinek

Thanks, I use a lens hood as well. Maybe I'll go without a filter and see what I get. I do see better tones with my 70-200, not sure why this is. I shoot both lenses the same way and both are f/4. It could be a matter of person preference too.

RRS Loc: Not sure

The skin colors do look good in the shot you provided. Best of luck and if you find out what makes the difference to you please let the folks on this forum know. Again, Happy New Year.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

You can save all camera settings to a card before doing any reset if you ever need to reset to factory settings. You sound like you prefer to shoot jpegs right out of the camera with minimal post processing. You can adjust the Picture Style settings or create a custom picture style I believe. The Color Checker Passport is a great tool but only if you are shooting RAW and post processing. Joe Brady has videos on YouTube about metering and using it that you might find useful.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

It sounds like you are overexposing skin tones a little if they are getting blown out. Your solution should work just fine. Haydon's suggestion to use a color check passport is an excellent one - for both exposure and color accuracy.

There is a misguided notion that a camera can consistently produce perfection if you "get it right in the camera" - this has NEVER been the case. Back in the day, fashion photographers would have a filter pack consisting of a stack of CC filters to adjust the color to match a color test image. It was common practice to purchase an entire run of an emulsion test it, come up with a filter combination, then put the entire case of film in the freezer to stabilize the color response.

And, once the film/camera thing was worked out, there was the makeup artist and lighting. Even if the MUA managed to correct flaws, and you got it as right as possible with the lighting and exposure, there was still an hour or more of work required with a retouching specialist to get the image ready for prime time.

The one thing that has changed is that the average photographer can make high-quality corrections and adjustments to any image, without the production crew that was required in the old days.

So today, as it was in the past with film, getting it right in the camera meant capturing enough tonal information to be able to make the image you want in post processing. Accepting this will help bring your photography to the next level.

My favorite example of what it means to get it right in the camera are the first two images. The first one is an example of GIRITC, and the second is only possible by applying solid post processing skills to "make" the image.

This will give you a taste of what an art director hands to a retoucher - to get the desired result. No way is an image right out of the camera ever be used for anything without addressing some of it's flaws. All images have flaws that can be addressed with retouching.

https://www.creativelive.com/class/art-business-high-end-retouching-pratik-naik/lessons/free-preview-annotating-for-the-retoucher

.

WessoJPEG Loc: Cincinnati, Ohio

khorinek

I used to shoot RAW and edit in Lightroom. What I found was, because I shoot 500-600 photos a week I didn't have time to do all the editing. So I try to get the images close in jpeg. I can do some small touchups in lightroom on a few photos but I don't have the time to edit 600 photos a week. Thanks for all the help, it's helped and given me some food for thought.
www.thespottedguy.com

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

I use the same Canon cameras as you mention in your post- I do quite a volume of professional portraiture with them, so of course, skin tomes is an important issue for me. I have no difficulties with theses bodies or any of the lenses.

Firstly, to properly troubleshoot or diagnose any issue I would like to see more images made with the camer in question- different lighting situations, indoors, out of doors, available light, flash and flash fill etc. You mentioned a working style or camera setup that you prefer- what are those factors? Did you alter the color saturation or select a "portrait" or other preset from the menu? Have you compared the results from various menu selections under controlled conditions?

I suspect you exposure may be off and the CPL filter is just providing neutral decency and somehow compensating for overexposure. A CPL filter is not advisable for portraits in that it can negate the good specular highlights that are needed. Are you mistaking specular highlights for washed out skin tones. In certain lightg conditions, skin times are not pancake makeup flat" there will be highlights that may seem washed out. If the exposure is correct, the will come down in post processing once you adjust the density. Diffuse highlight have more detail- specular highlights have less detail.

When you are working out of doors there can be many inconsistencies that the camera may not pick up from shot to shot so you have to be aware of what's happening and make compensations. There are color shifts from nearby reflective objects, changes in color temperature, and subject failure. The camera's metering system can read the entire scene and over expose the subject. The auto white balance may "see" areas of (green) foliage in the background and shift the skin tone to magenta. You may need to make certain that the camera is reading the reflectivity and color of the subject's skin- spot readings are better for portraits and people shots. Take the reading form a diffuse highlight and lock it in- then recompose and shoot.

Unless there is excessive- I meand crazy excessive UV present, skin tones should not be affected and if they were, they would tend to be blue or cyan- not washed out. Sometimes certain kinds of makeup has UV brighteners that fluoresces under light with a high UV content, however, this is rare and usually not problematic in digital photography- used to be more prevalent with color films. Again, any of this UV business would affect color rather than density.

Another factor is the angle of incidence- the direction from which the light is striking the subject in relation tot he camera position. Certain angles between 90 and 135 degrees can intensify specular highlights, even in shade or on an overcast day.

Filters should not be necessary to acheive good density (brightness or darkness) or color balance under most normal conditions. A lens shade is important to prevent flare, however, flare affects contrast and can affect color in certain cases, however, the photo you attached, does not t seem to have diminished contrast or signs of flare.

Another consideration is that each subject has different skin tones, and various types of skin textures and reflective properties. There are different pigmentations and degrees of dryness or oiliness all of which influence skin color and tone.

Especially in a group portrait or candid shot, forget about straight out of the camer perfect or uniform skin tones- even if the exposure is tack on! I have been at this for a very long time- color negative and transparency and digital with all kinds of cameras. If you are going for perfectly accurate or uniform skin tones, you are gonna have to fine tune things in post processing. Most photographers prefer a warmer tone in portraits, however, that is up to you and a matter of taste and the mood you would like to retain in your shots.

My suggestion is to record your current menu settings and then set you camera in a more neutral manner and run a series of tests under controlled conditions. Check your data and histogram to verify exposure accuracy. Bracket you exposure and record the results. Consider all the aforementioned lighting issues. Sometimes all of those preset customization kinds of settings conspire to create difficult issues to solve. It's like a cat chasing its tail- lots of energy but no accomplishment! It's better to start from scratch and then re-calibrate

Color test targets and othere calibration tool are good for standardizing certain aspect of the process, however, you still need to test with actual subjects to incorporate all of the othere factors in your tests. Once you stabilize you exposure and can produce clean files, your post process should me minimal. If you decide to run some of theses tests, post your results for further suggestions.

Happy 2019. I hope this helps.

khorinek

I use standard picture style with a +5 sharpness, +2 contrast and +2 saturation. I experimented with adjusting WB Correction but found I didn't know what I was doing. I will say, when I use flash, my photos look ok. I've always felt like the Mark III would underexpose on average and the Mark IV tends to overexpose on average. Overall, the Mark IV is a good camera. This issue with washed out skin tones has me looking and contemplating the new EOS R Mirrorless body.......

Scruples Loc: Brooklyn, New York

I have recently upgraded from a Canon EOS Rebel 2000 and then onto a Canon 5D Mark II. I have not noticed this issue of ruined skin tones with my 5D Mark IV now that I am using it. I can suggest using different lighting or apertures. It is quite possible that your flash needs to be softened by changing the settings. Perhaps bracketing your photos may help. Finally, I must say that I am spoiled by Kodak Portra Film. It was the best for my Rebel 2000.

aflundi Loc: Albuquerque, NM

It sounds to me like you may need to play with the JPEG engine Picture Style. You may have chosen a style or style option that flattens out the highlights.

marki3rd Loc: Columbus, Indiana

It is trolls like you that have kept me away from this forum most of the time for the last couple of years.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

Apparently you are not able to understand that RRS is asking questions in order to narrow down what might be the cause. You, on the other hand, have offered nothing but whining and bitching to someone who is genuinely trying to help the OP. Sorry you can't see the common sense in his questions.

Dennis

MikeT9

Have you looked at the white balance setting. I’ve always found setting the white balance to auto works very well. However, now that Canon have brought out Ambience priority they do recommend you select this if you are trying to match the auto white balance of older Canon models.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

http://ljhollowayphotography.com

She uses the same 2 cameras you are using. I don’t believe that the R is going to solve your issues

khorinek

Those are nice photos. I may be my own worst critic.