Custom white balance

[MICKEY88]

You can set a custom wb but if you shoot raw the conversion software probably does decent job of getting close to the temprature you wanted but it will not be exact unless you are using your camera companies software. The only way to get it exact in any other software is to take a picture of a reference card and use that to set a custom white balance, then apply that conversion to all your shots in that lighting.

I've used some 3rd party software that has profiles for specific cameras,

wouldn't close still be better, since you'd have less adjusting to do..??

 

[Anewman]

I've used some 3rd party software that has profiles for specific cameras,

wouldn't close still be better, since you'd have less adjusting to do..??

Some do have profiles, but if those profiles are not made by CANON, NIKON, etc... they will be just as close as Adobe/c1/bibble/breeze/etc...

If you take a picture of a reference card you don't have to settle for "close", isn't that what you are debating... Shouldn't we try for the best?

You use it(reference card image) to adjust one image, apply it to all other images. Done in about 10 seconds. How long does it take so set a custom wb in camera?

 

[MICKEY88]

Some do have profiles, but if those profiles are not made by CANON, NIKON, etc... they will be just as close as Adobe/c1/bibble/breeze/etc...

If you take a picture of a reference card you don't have to settle for "close", isn't that what you are debating... Shouldn't we try for the best?

You use it(reference card image) to adjust one image, apply it to all other images. Done in about 10 seconds. How long does it take so set a custom wb in camera?

a few seconds, at least with minolta cameras, you simply go into your custom white balance setting and shoot a pic of a white piece of paper, under the same light as your subject, just like tv crews do on location.

thanks ,I've been recommending custom white balance all along, I just mentioned the software since you said they are all different and wouldn't be accurate...to each his own, but yes I always try to get the best shot I can to minimize my work on the pc..

 

[Anewman]

thanks ,I've been recommending custom white balance all along,

Me too, but IMO the best way to do it is during processing.

If shooting RAW that would take place on a computer as apposed to in-camera for jpegs.

 

[MICKEY88]

Me too, but IMO the best way to do it is during processing.

If shooting RAW that would take place on a computer as apposed to in-camera for jpegs.

SHARONLOWE

Getting back to the original question, I use auto WB alot but will set a custom one/use another when it really matters, and I only shoot raw. I set custom when I am doing portraits since it allows me to get the most accurate skin tones, rather than having to "guess" post. I also set a WB (tungsten) when I am doing night photography so that I can avoid those orange tones.

Why does it matter - if the camera is shooting to a specific white balance, it can affect how it meters off the light in the scene so with your correct WB, you will get a better exposure. Remember, the meter is shooting for a neutral gray so if it is guessing what is neutral, the exposure can be wrong. Yes, you can typically fix it afterwards but I prefer to get things correct the first time around.

In most cases, I use an ExpoDisk (http://www.expoimaging.net/) for setting the white balance - attaches to the lens and records through it so you don't have to walk out into the water to get a good reading. If I don't have my ExpoDisk for some reason, I shoot a gray card and then use that to fix a neutral tone afterwards.

this would leave me to believe that setting custom white balance does matter even when shooting raw..

 

[Anewman]

this would leave me to believe that setting custom white balance does matter even when shooting raw..

If it were accurate, which I am really not sure if it is since I shoot manual and the exposure settings do not change regardless of wb setting.

But I might take out a tripod and test this over the weekend under controlled lighting in auto.


My guess would be that wb setting does not affect metering/exposure, but again I have nothing more than a guess to offer.

 

[Code]

If it were accurate, which I am really not sure if it is since I shoot manual and the exposure settings do not change regardless of wb setting.

This made me curious so I just tested my Oly 510 on a tripod, the white balance setting had no effect on metering.

 

[MICKEY88]

If it were accurate, which I am really not sure if it is since I shoot manual and the exposure settings do not change regardless of wb setting.

But I might take out a tripod and test this over the weekend under controlled lighting in auto.


My guess would be that wb setting does not affect metering/exposure, but again I have nothing more than a guess to offer.

if you are shooting manual, your settings won't change, no matter what you do they should stay right where you set them..

 

[Anewman]

if you are shooting manual, your settings won't change, no matter what you do they should stay right where you set them..

That is why I said I would test "under controlled lighting in auto."

 

[Anewman]

This made me curious so I just tested my Oly 510 on a tripod, the white balance setting had no effect on metering.

Thanks for the input.

 

[MICKEY88]

this article I just found makes the point for adjusting white balance even when shooting raw...and does mention it affecting exposure...


http://www.ppmag.com/web-exclusives/2007/11/white-balance-the-secret-weapo-1.html

 

[MICKEY88]

this article makes the point for trying to get the best shot possible in camera, to allow for the best raw data for processing..


http://www.oreillynet.com/digitalmedia/blog/2007/06/white_balance_and_the_raw_land.html

That said, it’s best practice not to presume on the kindness of RAW. You should expose each image in-camera as accurately as possible. This avoids potential problems and gives you more options when you do post-process the RAW.

on the flip side it also makes the case for leaving white balance on auto,,,
so sit back and watch me debate with myself...LOL

So the best practice is to leave White Balance set to Automatic. This means that your camera will make some attempt to measure the light temperature, and associate this reading with the image. But associating a White Balance measurement with a RAW image doesn’t actually change the image data itself because the White Balance data is simply set in a tagged text file associated with the RAW file. You can change the White Balance to any Kelvin number you think is appropriate when you convert the image in post-processing. You can do this using a slider, and visually inspect the impact of the change on your photo.

 

[Groucho]

I check my settings frequently at wdw,it's a habit
now I'm really confused, that train of thought would lead me to believe it's better to have a basic P&S with no camera settings..

why buy an advanced dslr if you don't intend to use it to it's full capacity..

on one hand I hear it's better to shoot raw, so you can have more control over your final product, on the other I'm being told I do unneccessary work in using the functions and control that my camera allows me..????

Why buy an advanced DSLR and shoot JPG? That's certainly not using it to its full capacity. Changing white balance is hardly an advanced DSLR function, most any $100 point-n-shoot can do it, that's basic functionality. What's advanced is the ability to shoot in a mode that doesn't require you to do it.

WB is not exposure. Exposure should be gotten right when the shutter opens - nobody is saying otherwise. If there's any question, you should bracket. You do not need to worry about white balance if you shoot RAW - there is zero (maybe 0.000001 if you feel that it will affect your metering) penalty for picking the wrong white balance. You can if you really want, but you don't have to. Why make things harder on yourself? It's not a badge of honor to have to manually switch white balance every time you move into another lighting situation.

Anyway, let's remember that this is a Disney park board, and everything IMHO is filtered through the idea of photography at a Disney park - where you're moving in and out of artificial light areas, you're shooting colored lights, fireworks, maybe trying some on-ride photos - all situations that can call for different WB settings, and good luck to the fellow who wants to whip out a gray card on Pirates of the Caribbean.

(Not that I'm against that, I do have an 18% gray microfiber cloth with me whenever I use the camera, just in case. But by and large, I don't concern myself with it.)

 

[MICKEY88]

Why buy an advanced DSLR and shoot JPG? That's certainly not using it to its full capacity. Changing white balance is hardly an advanced DSLR function, most any $100 point-n-shoot can do it, that's basic functionality. What's advanced is the ability to shoot in a mode that doesn't require you to do it.

WB is not exposure. Exposure should be gotten right when the shutter opens - nobody is saying otherwise. If there's any question, you should bracket. You do not need to worry about white balance if you shoot RAW - there is zero (maybe 0.000001 if you feel that it will affect your metering) penalty for picking the wrong white balance. You can if you really want, but you don't have to. Why make things harder on yourself? It's not a badge of honor to have to manually switch white balance every time you move into another lighting situation.

Anyway, let's remember that this is a Disney park board, and everything IMHO is filtered through the idea of photography at a Disney park - where you're moving in and out of artificial light areas, you're shooting colored lights, fireworks, maybe trying some on-ride photos - all situations that can call for different WB settings, and good luck to the fellow who wants to whip out a gray card on Pirates of the Caribbean.

(Not that I'm against that, I do have an 18% gray microfiber cloth with me whenever I use the camera, just in case. But by and large, I don't concern myself with it.)

no badge of honor in having to set white balance when processing raw files either, I don't consider it making things harder on myself, it's just a routine part of my photography,

I respectfully disagree on the thought of everything being filtered thru the idea of photography at a Disney park ,

I see threads on marching bands,sports,portraits, weddings, many things non disney, I believe this thread was a non disney situation ,

the op clearly asked how to set white balance because they didn't want to shoot raw, so why am I wrong for tryingto help them do what they want, as opposed to trying to convince them to do that which they don't want to do..