White balance settings

[Michele]

I've always just kept the white balance set to AWB on my Canon digital rebel, but was always finding my non-flash pictures very yellowy. I finally got out the manual and began experimenting with other WB settings, but I am still confused on which settings to use with what. For instance, which setting should I use for outdoor low light situations? Think Spectro with my 50mm 1.8 lens. Or Fantasmic, with my 75-300? When will I be OK to use AWB? Indoors at night AWB stinks, I found the incandescent setting to be best there, does that sound right? Thanks for any advice.

 

[disphoto]

Do you shoot in RAW? If so, don't worry about the white balance. I shoot in RAW and use AWB. Then I correct the color, if off in Canon's Digital Photo Professional. One click and it is done. Plus, if I have several photos of the same setting, I copy and past the change, simple and easy.

 

[ukcatfan]

When using RAW, you can also take a shot of a white or neutral gray card every time you change lighting situations. Then you use it as a reference for each group.

Kevin

 

[Michele]

No I don't shoot RAW. Any suggestions for jpeg?

 

[ukcatfan]

Do I don't shoot RAW. Any suggestions for jpeg?

I am not familiar with your camera, but it likely has a custom WB option. You again use the white or gray card to set the custom WB.

Any reason that you do not shoot RAW? Does your camera offer RAW+JPG? That option lets you just use the JPG unless there is a problem and you can fall back on the RAW file.

Kevin

 

[disphoto]

Try doing RAW+JPG for a while, until you feel comfortable in RAW. The Canon program is on the disk that came with the camera, and the updates are free. It is an excellent RAW converter. RAW just offers so many more options for editing, WB being one of the most useful.

 

[handicap18]

White Balance was one of the bigger reasons I switched to shooting in RAW. One time I took 6 pictures of my DD. Each one in a different white balance setting using JPEG. Finally got the right one. With RAW I can take 1 picture then change it later.

I almost always left my setting in AWB when I was shooting JPEG. Only when I really definately knew that I needed to change it for specific shots did I change it. More than a few times I forgot to change it back. DOH!

I shot Spectro and Fantasmic a few weeks ago using AWB and the lighting came out fine. I don't have to adjust the WB in PP. More often than not AWB will do fine. The most I have to adjust it is with low light no flash subjects, especially when most of the light I do have is with light bulbs. I think that is what Tungsten or Incandescent (depending on your camera make) is.

 

[Michele]

I guess mostly $ is the reason for not shooting RAW. Need to invest in bigger memory cards, currently I have 3 512s. (Not enough for a week at Disney even in jpeg) Computerwise, just bought an iMac, but I'm only using iPhoto for post processing, saving up for Aperture.

Besides $, it's the investment of time to learn how to post process. And that is hard to come by as well.

Oh, and the camera itself, it is the original digital Rebel bought in 2004. Really need to upgrade that soon also.

Thanks for the help.

 

[disphoto]

iphoto opens RAW. Really, get your Canon disk, the software is free. Use it to adjust your WB, then convert to jpg for iphoto.

Memory Cards... it is Christmas... they are having some really good sales right now. Just watch the papers. Get a couple 2G cards and you should be set. Here is a 2GB card for $35

http://www.circuitcity.com/ssm/SanD...sem/rpsm/oid/117521/rpem/ccd/productDetail.do

 

[disphoto]

Here is a link for the Canon software. Post processing is very simple. One click to change WB, then batch process to convert to jpg.

http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=GetArticleAct&articleID=386&fromTips=1

 

[Groucho]

The quick answer is:
Auto for everything except indoors (when you're seeing yellowy photos) and outdoor at night (if you're getting brownish skies.) In those cases, try Tungsten.

Raw is preferable, especially because if you do set it to Tungsten then take a flash photo (or go back outside during the day, or whatever), you'll suddenly get bluish photos. With Raw, you don't even have to think about it.

Memory cards should be cheap. Heck, I've recently bought a couple 4 gb SD cards for $20 each, a 2 gb SD for $6, and a 4 gb Memory Stick for $35. I would suspect that you could find a 2gb CF card for $20 without much difficulty. (Off the top of my head, I think your camera takes CF?)

 

[jann1033]

since cf cards usually are harder to get for cheap, i got a sd to cf converter and use that with 1/2 my cards, i can't say i really notice a ton of difference as far as speed goes although they are slightly slower than the normal cf cards. but that way, i can almost always find cheap sd cards in a pinch( ie on vacation i needed some and cf the cheapest i could find was 70 for 4 gb but got sd cards for 1/2 that)

 

[Michele]

Thanks, I'll check into the memory cards. I guess I hadn't looked at them in a while, they are cheaper now. After Christmas maybe I can spend some time working in RAW and try iPhoto or the Canon disc to pp.

 

[MICKEY88]

since cf cards usually are harder to get for cheap, i got a sd to cf converter and use that with 1/2 my cards, i can't say i really notice a ton of difference as far as speed goes although they are slightly slower than the normal cf cards. but that way, i can almost always find cheap sd cards in a pinch( ie on vacation i needed some and cf the cheapest i could find was 70 for 4 gb but got sd cards for 1/2 that)

70 for a 4 gig card still isn't bad if you consider a 1 gig card cost over 100 a few years ago, or if youconsider the savings in film cost..LOL


if you look in the right places online you can find 8 gig cards for under 100

 

[KrazyPete]

I only use auto white balance when I don't have time to set it up correctly myself. If I'm moving around a lot and shooting under different light sources from frame to frame, or if I'm just in a hurry then I put it on AWB.

I shoot RAW and the closer I get it in the camera the less time I spend post processing. I find that even when the light is not changing, the color temperature AWB selects can vary based on changes in the scene. That will mean I have to set the WB in post for every single picture. If I set the WB correctly for the light I can fix it in post for one picture then apply the same setting to all the other pictures from that shoot.

My order of preference for setting WB:
Preset the WB in camera with a gray card or something like an ExpoDisk
Set the color temperature (K) manually by shooting test shots
Choose the closest WB preset (Sunny, Cloudy, Tungsten etc.)
Auto White Balance

 

[handicap18]

Before I started shooting RAW I too thought that there would be too much time in post processing and learning how to PP. I quickly learned that is pretty much a myth. The reality I found is that if I didn't have to do a lot of PP with my JPEG's then I don't have to do a lot of PP with my RAW files. Its really only 1 extra click. Rather than saving the JPEG's to the HDD, now its save the RAW file to the HDD, then convert (either through a batch or a save as) the RAW file to JPEG. After that its all the same.

I took around 3000 pictures on my last trip to WDW. Less than 100 of them definately need PP help with white balance. Then I have a bunch more that need straightening and/or cropping. The straightening and cropping would still need to be done if I only shot in JPEG and the WB one's would have been a lot harder or taken more work to fix in JPEG.

Don't take this as me saying that your crazy for only shooting JPEG. Shooting in JPEG is perfectly fine if thats what you want to do. I did it for a year and a half. Just giving my experience.

I certainly understand the $ issue with the media cards. They have come down a lot in price. Check out buy.com and newegg.com. I've had the most success with those two places for media cards. Right now buy.com has 2 2GB CF cards for $36 with free shipping or 1 4GB card for $33 w/free shipping.

Here is the page if your interested.