Welcome, Anonymous (Profile, Private Messages)
Having trouble signing into the forums? Please [ logout ] and log back in.  Log inLog in 
SEARCH:     » Advanced Search

Shutterstock Photographer Forum Forum Index : Anything Goes. :
White Balance, How do You set it?
 Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic    Reply to topic
Author Message
yaromir


Joined: 11 May 2006
Posts: 1117
Location: Chicago
Post Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 6:56 pm     Reply with quote

wholeoh wrote:
dumb question here... when shooting an isolated object, shooting RAW helps how?


Let's say you have 200 images, you select your background as a white in first picture in RAW processor and software corrects instantly for you all 200 .
Shooting RAW always helps :)
jeffbanke


Joined: 18 Dec 2005
Posts: 7225
Location: www.xlr8photo.com
Post Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 7:06 pm     Reply with quote

yaromir wrote:
wholeoh wrote:
dumb question here... when shooting an isolated object, shooting RAW helps how?


Let's say you have 200 images, you select your background as a white in first picture in RAW processor and software corrects instantly for you all 200 .
Shooting RAW always helps :)


Agree!
In addition, not all strobes are equal, some have a UV coating, some do not, some older diffusers on the front of softboxes yellow with age, so one cannot be one hundred percent sure of the WB from strobes unless they check the bulbs to make sure they are all the same type (UV or not), and have new softbox diffusers.
Hence unless you are willing to process every image individually, using the RAW processor and bridge is the only time/cost effective way to go!
Plus it gives one the creative ability as I demonstrated on the previous page.
mikeledray


Joined: 14 Nov 2004
Posts: 9237
Location: Southern California
Post Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 7:18 pm     Reply with quote

jeffbanke wrote:
Mike,
Give up shooting JPG, set the camera on 5600K (one less thing to think about in the heat of the moment) shoot RAW and fix everthing in the RAW processor when you have the comfort of a Southern Comfort and your arm chair to think about what temperature you want the image to be!

Here is an example of what I mean
As shot


As I wanted it


Now that is a radical teperature shift impossible with JPG's, OK so I added a moon for greater realism:)

Oh, BTW, thanks for the op to pimp once again mon ami!


I really like these my friend.
I am sllllloooowwwlllyyyy thinking of perhaps trying RAW one of these days soon.
do you think ps7 has Raw processing capabilitys?

I really dont want to start with Raw, first of all my computer probably wont handel it, second I spend enough time with what im doing now, third I dont want to learn a new program, 4th I really dont want to mess with it, for stock I just want to take the pics, get them right in the camera and submit and sell them

but I like your shots
karimala


Joined: 04 Sep 2005
Posts: 2117
Location: Sacramento, CA
Post Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 11:12 pm     Reply with quote

PS7 doesn't have RAW capabilities. I believe they were introduced with version CS2.

I don't "use" RAW either, Mike. I still haven't found the benefits of processing RAW compared to JPEG, because I always end up tweaking each shot individually anyway, and I like the pinpointed control and plugins in PS better. The only time I really use it is if I happen to totally screw up my white balance, like in this shot (which I actually happen to like as is...LOL).



However, I do shoot in RAW just in case the light bulb in my head goes off and I finally understand the hype about RAW (or take the time to really learn Lightroom). I figure it's good to have a lossless backup in case the original JPEG ever gets corrupted, if nothing else.
jeffbanke


Joined: 18 Dec 2005
Posts: 7225
Location: www.xlr8photo.com
Post Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 11:34 pm     Reply with quote

karimala wrote:
PS7 doesn't have RAW capabilities. I believe they were introduced with version CS2.

I figure it's good to have a lossless backup in case the original JPEG ever gets corrupted, if nothing else.


Actually Mike I believe there was a RAW processor that one could use with Adobe 7, but I will check when I get home and see if I can find it for you, just in case you change your mind.

1. Digital negative to go back to.

2. Raw processing is non destructive allowing multiple versions of same image to be created without any loss in quality, such as mine before,
2a. Allows seudo HDR's from a single image, such as the one below

3. Allows batch processing of similar images (I use it all the time)

4. Ability to overexpose by as much as 1 full stop and still be able to pull iy back to "fix" blown highlight areas. This has the effect of crushing noise in the black/dark areas, thereby effectively reducing signal to noise ratio.

5. Allows the photographer to forget about WB while shooting in a variety of conditions.

6. Allows composites to be made, such as the ones on your green screen thread to be made without losing the original nor taking another quality hit.

7. JPG was designed as an image transmission medium, NOT as an image processing medium, RAW, DNG, PSD are all newer, get updated regularly, improved, etc., JPG is 20 years old and is stagnant.

8. Red purplecyan fringing can be corrected

These are but a few of the advantages of shooting RAW, they are too many to list here, so I will not bore you since you have indicated that you don't want to go in that direction anyway, but since others might be interested why those of us who do shoot RAW are so adamant that it is not only the most logical but the best way to go.


http://69.90.174.252/photos/display_pic_with_logo/57044/57044,1217919098,6.jpg
mikeledray


Joined: 14 Nov 2004
Posts: 9237
Location: Southern California
Post Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 11:56 pm     Reply with quote

jeffbanke wrote:
karimala wrote:
PS7 doesn't have RAW capabilities. I believe they were introduced with version CS2.

I figure it's good to have a lossless backup in case the original JPEG ever gets corrupted, if nothing else.


Actually Mike I believe there was a RAW processor that one could use with Adobe 7, but I will check when I get home and see if I can find it for you, just in case you change your mind.

1. Digital negative to go back to.

2. Raw processing is non destructive allowing multiple versions of same image to be created without any loss in quality, such as mine before,
2a. Allows seudo HDR's from a single image, such as the one below

3. Allows batch processing of similar images (I use it all the time)

4. Ability to overexpose by as much as 1 full stop and still be able to pull iy back to "fix" blown highlight areas. This has the effect of crushing noise in the black/dark areas, thereby effectively reducing signal to noise ratio.

5. Allows the photographer to forget about WB while shooting in a variety of conditions.

6. Allows composites to be made, such as the ones on your green screen thread to be made without losing the original nor taking another quality hit.

7, JPG was designed as an image transmission medium, NOT as an image processing medium, RAW, DNG, PSD are all newer, get updated regularly, improved, etc., JPG is 20 years old and is stagnant.

These are but a few of the advantages of shooting RAW, they are too many to list here, so I will not bore you since you have indicated that you don't want to go in that direction anyway, but since others might be interested why those of us who do shoot RAW are so adamant that it is not only the most logical but the best way to go.


http://69.90.174.252/photos/display_pic_with_logo/57044/57044,1217919098,6.jpg


Thats a beautiful shot Jeff!

Ok you sold me
I guess I will have to get cs (which ever version is out now) and start using raw
thank you for helping me "see the light" so to speak

Hope your having fun
It sounds like you are

:)
jeffbanke


Joined: 18 Dec 2005
Posts: 7225
Location: www.xlr8photo.com
Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 12:00 am     Reply with quote

One more thing I just added is you can fix fringing problems in RAW, but I know you don't have any cheap lenses that have that problem :)! LOL

Latest version is CS4, or you could buy Nik NX2, which has some great tools also, I just find that it is not as fast or seemless as PSCS4
mikeledray


Joined: 14 Nov 2004
Posts: 9237
Location: Southern California
Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 12:09 am     Reply with quote

im going to have to buy a new computer first, then a new ps cs4 program
my computer is wearing out basicly and I am quite sure its not going to be able to handle more data especially the size of raw files

one day soon I hope

thanks again
jeffbanke


Joined: 18 Dec 2005
Posts: 7225
Location: www.xlr8photo.com
Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 12:37 am     Reply with quote

mikeledray wrote:
im going to have to buy a new computer first, then a new ps cs4 program
my computer is wearing out basicly and I am quite sure its not going to be able to handle more data especially the size of raw files

one day soon I hope

thanks again


Mike be sure to have a second or even a third hard drive installed.

You need one hard drive for the system and the programs, this can be quite a small hard, in fact the smaller the faster it will operate, don't need anything over about 60Gig in fact.

Second hard drive is for your images, bigger the better here, 750 Gig to 1 Terabyte will last a couple of years for anormal person, but you might eat it up faster :)

Third hard drive can be a smaller one again, (250Gig) and should be set as the "Scratch" drive for Photoshop. This is the drive Photoshop writes to while you are processing images, and is temporary until you do you final save. Photoshop very severly recommend this but no-one ever reads their manual, so most don't do it until photoshop writes over something in the system software and their computer crashes, and yes I am speaking from experience!

You need at least 4 Gigs of memory DDR2 or for a small gain in performance DDR3.
Better is to go 64 bit system software rather than 32 bit, and add 8 gigs memory, then you have something that would never slow you down.
Photoshow


Joined: 05 Nov 2004
Posts: 4893
Location: Somewhere between where I'm going and where I've been
Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 1:21 am     Reply with quote

karimala wrote:
PS7 doesn't have RAW capabilities. I believe they were introduced with version CS2.

I don't "use" RAW either, Mike. I still haven't found the benefits of processing RAW compared to JPEG, because I always end up tweaking each shot individually anyway, and I like the pinpointed control and plugins in PS better. The only time I really use it is if I happen to totally screw up my white balance, like in this shot (which I actually happen to like as is...LOL).



However, I do shoot in RAW just in case the light bulb in my head goes off and I finally understand the hype about RAW (or take the time to really learn Lightroom). I figure it's good to have a lossless backup in case the original JPEG ever gets corrupted, if nothing else.


For those who don't get the benefits of RAW simply answer me this.

If you were shooting film, would you send it out to be printed and then throw away the negatives when the prints came back?

No?

Well in essence that is what you do when you shoot JPG only.

A 12mp Raw file will average 17MB pre file.
A 12mp JPG Fine will average 1-3MP depending on the scene. An isolated image with a large expanse of white (non-data) will be smaller.

So the only way to reduce the native (negitive) size of a 17mp file to 5mp is to take in excess of 66% of the pixels in that image and throw them away FOREVER.

On average JPG compression throws away two of every 3 similar pixels from an image then takes the remaining pixel and squashes (degrades) it to fill the empty space of the two pixels that were thrown out.

In my book that is a file degradation that I am not willing to accept. I always shoot RAW + JPG Fine and on rare occasion will use the JPG version for final output but it is rare. Mostly I use the JPG as a preview and something I can quickly downsize for a client to have a preview gallery.
karimala


Joined: 04 Sep 2005
Posts: 2117
Location: Sacramento, CA
Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 1:48 am     Reply with quote

Photoshow wrote:
I always shoot RAW + JPG Fine.


Me, too. :-) I just choose not to work on the RAW file at the moment. Personal preference.
kenny123


Joined: 13 Aug 2005
Posts: 3642
Location: Masterton, New Zealand
Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 2:06 am     Reply with quote

You are still able to download FREE!- Pixmantec Rawshooter 2006 with complete tutorial. regards, Ken
Photoshow


Joined: 05 Nov 2004
Posts: 4893
Location: Somewhere between where I'm going and where I've been
Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 3:53 am     Reply with quote

kenny123 wrote:
You are still able to download FREE!- Pixmantec Rawshooter 2006 with complete tutorial. regards, Ken


They were bought out by Adobe and their engine incorporated in to ARC but have they kept up with cameras in Rawshooter? I thought all development of Rawshooter stopped after the Adobe acqusition. Can Rawshooter handle raw files for cameras released in 2007-2009?
Photoshow


Joined: 05 Nov 2004
Posts: 4893
Location: Somewhere between where I'm going and where I've been
Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 3:54 am     Reply with quote

karimala wrote:
Photoshow wrote:
I always shoot RAW + JPG Fine.


Me, too. :-) I just choose not to work on the RAW file at the moment. Personal preference.


That is GOOD at least you have it should you ever decide you need it, and you will :-)
kenny123


Joined: 13 Aug 2005
Posts: 3642
Location: Masterton, New Zealand
Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 6:09 am     Reply with quote

Photoshow wrote:
kenny123 wrote:
You are still able to download FREE!- Pixmantec Rawshooter 2006 with complete tutorial. regards, Ken


They were bought out by Adobe and their engine incorporated in to ARC but have they kept up with cameras in Rawshooter? I thought all development of Rawshooter stopped after the Adobe acqusition. Can Rawshooter handle raw files for cameras released in 2007-2009?


I don't know, but it worked with my D50( I tried it once, and went back to jpeg) regards, Ken
 
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 5 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

 

Submit Referer Program Tell a Friend! Privacy Policy Terms of Service Contact Us



Shutterstock Forum for Submitters