I have a Nikon camera and an iBook, but I've run across the same trouble myself before- I think it maybe something in how the LCD presents the pictures as opposed to how they appear on the monitor.
Part of the problem in my case was that it was a relatively poorly lit space (big inside hall), so the flash didn't illuminate like it should. Could that have been your problem, as well?
Sorry to be so untechnical.
These were taken outdoors in wonderful late-day light, which is why I'm so depressed that the colors aren't showing up. I'm hoping that there's just some colorspace mismatch, and not that I'll never get to see them full size with the proper color...
Would it help to try the hue and saturation adjustments in photoshop or some comparable program?
Yes, I would try that with a couple of pictures. Worst case scenario is that you have to do some batch processing on the photos. Another interesting issue is how colors in paitings are seen in different lights. I cannot remember where I saw the article, but it was along the lines that paintings look different under flourescent light than daylight than regular bulbs etc.
Labs is onto something. Try bumping your saturation, contrast, and brightness each up a bit (like 10 points each).
You're photo program should tell you the exposure settings. What were they?
6: I'm sure his camera doesn't have fine enough resolution.
Here's the EXIF data for one picture. I don't think the exposure is off, since the pictures look right on the camera's LCD. I'll try the color settings, though I'd rather understand why they would need so much work after the fact.
FocalLength - 7.81 mm
Definitely too big to resolve Labs' wang.
I know very little about digital photography, but I second Chopper's recommendation on the saturation, contrast, and brightness.
Also maybe check it on another monitor; laptops can be finicky.
what did you have the camera set on? were you manually setting the aperture and shutter speed or were you doing the ol' point-and-click function? if it's the latter and they still look bad, i would say it's probably your monitor, as i know that that is a very good camera (i have a similar canon model with fewer mpixels and a lot of my pictures turn out with very brilliant colors).
also, i know you aren't using a mac, but if you were, iPhoto has an "enhance" function that just automatically makes everything brighter and better (it's truly remarkable how it works, usually better than my fiddling with the exposure and saturation). surely photo programs designed for the novice user for the pc would have something like that, i would think.
Sorry - got distracted. Here's my talking-out-my-ass theory: The shots are overexposed. I've forgotten the speed/focal length/shutter speed/film speed formula, but the F-stop in the stats you've provided seems too wide - f5- for bright sunlight; when I shot film I went for f8 or f11 at 1/250 shutter speed - f16 for landscapes. f5.6 is good for flash photos at 1/60 or fuzzing out the depth of field. Sorry. I'll stop now.
I think what happened is the film speed went haywire - the specs say it was set on "auto" - and that threw everything else off. It probably should be set at ISO100 or 200 for sunlight.
I could be wrong, of course. I'm just an ex-hack reporter/photographer.
Beautiful. I love That Part of the country.
I just posted an update, Andy. They might be a bit overexposed but the aperture was picked by the camera, and I have it set on ISO 50, which should really be ok for sunlight. Yesterday, I was just tying to get as many pictures as I could. I'll go out again soon, and futz with the settings to see what really works. Thanks for the tips.
No problemo. I think ISO 50 is a bit fast; you might stick with 100 (this digital stuff is also quirky).
I do know that those damn tiny displays are not to be trusted. A lot of it is a size/compression issue. Look at this overexposed shot and compare it to the Google thumbnail at the top.
Dammit. Click on "Footbridge (overexposed)" to see the full effect.
Yeah, I see what you mean. In this case, it's my laptop display that can't be trusted, which is too bad, since it makes editing nearly impossible.
Can't you get a flat screen monitor? They're pretty cheap these days.
You mean as an external? If I really want to edit, I'll just hook up the CRT; just inconvenient.
Fair point; I didn't see the update.
i really think ISO 100 or 200 is better for sunlight - i've always come out with fantastic pictures from sunlight on that setting. if i weren't more lazy, i'd post some or something.
.JPG&imgrefurl=http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~iyerav/Images/012%2520Shades%2520State%2520Park/&h=1200&w=1600&sz=391&tbnid=-xhaUFfKkAgJ:&tbnh=112&tbnw=150&hl=en&start=3&prev=/images%3Fq%3Doverexposed%2Bpicture%26hl%3Den%26hs%3DYe5%26lr%3D%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DN){kind=link}