Is this overexposure?

[Jeth]

Hi,
I have a bunch of pictures from Europe which did not turn out well. They were taken with a point-n-shoot digital camera (Olympus C-50). The colors of some of the buildings, trees, etc came out fine, but in almost all of them the sky is completely white. It was somewhat cloudy there, but not completely socked in. The photos my husband took with a film camera showed some blue in the sky, and you could make out the clouds. So why are all mine totally white? They just look really washed out. I was so dissapointed when I downloaded all these and they all looked like this one. Hundreds of them. So is this overexposure? Or is this related to white balance?

I also posted one from Athens which is particularly bad. I am so bummed. But, as you can see, the one from Santorini is much better. I had the camera on the same settings, what gives?

During the trip the flash in the camera died. When I sent it to Olympus for repair they said they fixed something like the "light sensor". Could this be related to my bad pictures? I have taken many other photos with this camera which turned out wonderful.

Thanks for any advice! I want to learn from this so it doesn't happen again on such a great photo op! (I know, I should've taken more care in checking out the pictures when I was there...)

[CLKunst]

Hi Jeth,

Perhaps it was your light meter which needed to be repaired? I suspect it is the same thing. At any rate the light meter is a sensor in your camera (digital or otherwise) which decides how to set your aperture and shutter speed for a particular circumstance when your settings are automatic. When your settings are manual there is usually still a display that shows you whether an image will over or under expose based on the brightest spot of light available to the camera. What you have is indeed over-exposure and it is definitely whack considering the range of lighting scenarios in your different images. Did they look like that in the preview on the screen when you were taking them? At least your husband had a film camera and it wasn't a total loss. Better luck next time.

Regards,

[SmartWombat]

Yes, it loks like overexposure.
If they had to fix the sensor, it could have been sensing not enough light.
If it thought there was less light than there really was, it would increase the exposure.

Wthout the EXIF information from the digital files, it's hard to know for sure.
Somehow when you were editing the pictures, the infromatoin about the exposure, and the camera settitngs was removed. That EXIF data can be very useful when looking at problems.

[Jeth]

Yes, it loks like overexposure.
If they had to fix the sensor, it could have been sensing not enough light.
If it thought there was less light than there really was, it would increase the exposure.

Wthout the EXIF information from the digital files, it's hard to know for sure.
Somehow when you were editing the pictures, the infromatoin about the exposure, and the camera settitngs was removed. That EXIF data can be very useful when looking at problems.

Thanks for the comments! I was afraid it was over-exposure. And it very well could be the light sensor was bad. It's wierd how some of them came out better than others, though.
I was taking so many pictures, I didn't preview each one on the screen like I should have. But I did look at them later in the evenings and I guess (I can't believe it) I didn't notice how bad it was then.

Here is the EXIF info from another over-exposed picture from Venice. I am still learning about photography, so can someone help me interpret what was set wrong here?

CAMERA: OLYMPUS OPTICAL CO.,LTD (X-2,C-50Z ) | DATE: 11/19/03 10:05 AM | RESOLUTION: 1920 x 2560 | ISO SETTING: 80 | EXPOSURE TIME: 1/60s | APERTURE: 2.8 | FOCAL LENGTH: 7.8mm

I have a new camera which is more pro-sumer and I'm looking foward to learning how to adjust all the settings to get awesome pictures. Thanks!!

edit: I have attached the pic the EXIF info came from. I like how it looks in the foreground, but then it's completely washed out as it gets farther away. Ugh.

[CLKunst]

Some might yet be saved. Not sure if you have Photoshop or not but most photo manipulation programs have highlights and contrast adjustments. Some quick fiddling in photoshop has yielded a little more detail for your web sized image. I recommend salvage of as many pictures as you can through photo correction software.

[dbutler]

And what can't be salvaged technically, crop or make into a painting. The memories are to precious to just shut away into a box or CD I'm sure. Good Luck!

[Jeth]

That's nice. I did try to "PhotoShop" (I have Paint Shop Pro) so many of them, it took hours and hours! But they still don't look right. They look really fake, like the whole thing is PhotoShopped and I just inserted myself in some other picture. I think mainly because the sky doesn't show up in most of them. Probably someone better at advanced photo editing could do a better job.

Take this one, for example. This is one of my most cherished memories, standing atop the Acropolis. Yet it's one of the worst photos. I'd love to frame this one, but my copy looks terrible. Perhaps someone more talented could see if they could fix it?

I attached the original (downsized) and my edited version. Not much better, huh?

[livin4lax09]

send the original file to my e-mail and I'll see what I can do for you. doschersportsshots@gmail.com

[jar_e]

Definately need some PS work, but as you've been shown, some are fixable.

Good luck and they look great minus the overexposure,

Jared

[Jeth]

Wow! I just learned about how to read a histogram, and for this picture it's almost off the chart! I thought at first it wasn't registering, but then I realized it's because there is just 1 line going up all the way against the right end! Man, all these pictures are WAY too bright! Darnit, I wish I would've looked at this thing as I was taking them. Oh well, live and learn, I guess. ;-)

Now let me see if these histogram adjustments make it look any better...

[gahspidy]

Jeth, from what i have seen of friends using digicams and using a point and shoot digicam for a while in the past, they seem to have a tendancy to blow out highlights and wash out skies. I have seen that reducing the EV a bit to -3 or even -6 can help keep the levels down. Also, check to make sure you did not have the EV set at a positive compensation.

[livin4lax09]

i worked on her image a bit, and got the following. Beth, if you don't want this posted, just let me know and I will take it down.

[Jeth]

Jeth, from what i have seen of friends using digicams and using a point and shoot digicam for a while in the past, they seem to have a tendancy to blow out highlights and wash out skies. I have seen that reducing the EV a bit to -3 or even -6 can help keep the levels down. Also, check to make sure you did not have the EV set at a positive compensation.

Ya, I have been experimenting with that on my new camera. I do tend to get nicer shots when I reduce it a bit. Thanks for the tip!