tyanea

Thanks guys, I appreciate your additional comments. It helps me better understand how things work and what to expect.
I clearly had a misunderstanding of what I was seeing on the LCD vs the RAW image in LR. I am definitely making a bit of a mental shift now and resetting my expectations so I don't get as frustrated when I load the RAW file.
I also read about the strobes in Alex Mustard's article.....found that to be very helpful information.
Thanks Again!

I think I may have the reason!

All of the above holds true but:

When you shoot an image in RAW, the camera will display a (typically) 8 bit JPEG on its LCD. This will even include the histogram information.

When you download it into LR, the image you are seeing is the original RAW file. This is why the images appear a bit "drab". Once you export into JPEG, some rendering takes place, and your colors are restored. The trick is to process your RAW images to resemble the JPEG versions!

It is not uncommon to shoot what seem like great images on the LCD screen, only to be disappointed with them when you import them as RAW files. It sounds like you know your way around Lightroom and the RAW pipeline-I think this will correct your concerns about your "Blues." That said, getting the white balance correct on capture will make the process easier.

For print, it depends on what/where you plan to print them. If you are printing at home, I would leave them in Prophoto RGB and use the soft proofing function together with an ICC profile for the printer/paper I plan to use. If I am going to send the images away for printing, I would find out how they want the image preparing. If it is for publication, they will want it in CMYK, which will mean a trip into Photoshop....The key with color spaces is to chose one that is appropriate for the purpose.

Adam

Adam....You Nailed it!!! Your words express my exact feelings after I upload my images. I should have questioned the camera LCD vs LR, but I just kept thinking I was missing something else. While I feel I still have a lot to learn in making quality Wide Angle images, I will admit it is nice to hear there is a reason for my madness.
I think I will stress less now about the LCD vs LR....Make sure I am happy with what I see underwater and know I can get it back with a few tweaks.
Now I need to focus on subject and composition....as well as continuing to improve my strobe lighting.

I really appreciate everyone's comments......I must admit I am happy to have a better understanding of what is happening.

Time to start brainstorming on where to go next......

Hello,

Ditto what the others have said - your photos look good and I think your blues look great. I also agree that there's nothing wrong with a bit of tweaking to make everything look just right.

I wanted to add one other thing just in case you hadn't thought about it - do you calibrate your monitor? That may affect what you're seeing on-screen. Per an earlier Wetpixel thread I picked up a ColorMunki (http://www.colormunki.com/) calibration tool and that made a difference in what I was seeing.

-Gina

Hi Gina - thanks for your comments. I appreciate the suggestion of the monitor calibrator. I do use the Sypder4Elite monitor calibrator.
Thanks Again

Hi Tyra,
I think you are really cutting your self short. These are exceptionally fine images considering they are raw files with no processing. Especially Canon files. In my world it's not a negative thing to process the file to get the most out of it. The effects of good processing will be subtle if done well and the image is made so well in the camera. What you may be seeing when you compare your images to others is the total effect of a combination of sharpening, slight midtone contrast adjustment (Clarity in LR) and other simple adjustments.
I will leave to the folks you referenced to discuss their images but I think you're doing a great job in camera.

Cheers,
Steve

One more note.....I totally agree with you on the post processing. I have no problems with doing a few tweaks to get the image that was in my mind.....just trying to figure out if there is a fundamental thing I am missing, or setting....etc... :-)

I really appreciate everyone's suggestions and kind comments. I am thinking, as I look at these images on the web vs. how they look in Lightroom that I might be starting to discover possibly part of my problem.

Adam - My white balance was set to Auto White Balance - I am going to read Alex's link you gave me....sounds like I should probably be doing something else there.

Ok..this might be a bit winded......but here goes....
When I compare how these images look on the web vs. Lightroom 4.1 - it is definitely a bit different. These images look "more blue" than they look to me in Lightroom (which as tired as I was yesterday I don't think I was paying close enough attention to notice this) My process to get these images into my post was as follows:
- I took my raw files and did an export to jpg from Lightroom so I could upload them into Flickr for the ability to put them in my post here.

As I look at the pictures today and compare them to Lightroom I can definitely see some differences. I looked at my export settings and it converted the raw files to sRGB, which is the correct format for the web......but the output is definitely a little different than the pure raw file. I use a Syder4Elite calibrator to try to keep my monitor in check...but I am realizing there are so many factors that impact how the image looks....it can be overwhelming.

Steve - I think you are probably correct in that most people do post processing to get that pop.....and is it unrealistic of me to think I can get that rich blue from a Canon raw file without some post processing?

What do most people convert their images to when all is said and done and ready for print?

Thanks again!! I really appreciate everyone's feedback.