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
sima


Joined: 09 Sep 2007
Posts: 322

Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 6:34 am     Reply with quote

Slide time and filters for correction are history, today my usual way is Raw + auto wb, for most situations, but for studio work good way is to set color balance in Kelvins.
yaromir


Joined: 11 May 2006
Posts: 1117
Location: Chicago

Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 6:51 am     Reply with quote

sima wrote:
Slide time and filters for correction are history, today my usual way is Raw + auto wb, for most situations, but for studio work good way is to set color balance in Kelvins.


I NEVER use auto WB, for me this the worst way.
After session if I want to correct color there is possibility that every single picture could have different WB because it was on auto.
It's a nightmare!
fraiseap


Joined: 10 Oct 2008
Posts: 574
Location: Birmingham UK

Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 6:51 am     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!


Forgive my ignorance but I didn't think setting WB on the camera made any difference to the RAW file.
kenny123


Joined: 13 Aug 2005
Posts: 3641
Location: Masterton, New Zealand

Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 6:55 am     Reply with quote

fraiseap wrote:
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!


Forgive my ignorance but I didn't think setting WB on the camera made any difference to the RAW file.


Quite simply, if you can nail WB and exposure, you have less to fart about with in post production, regards, Ken
kenny123


Joined: 13 Aug 2005
Posts: 3641
Location: Masterton, New Zealand

Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 6:57 am     Reply with quote

sima wrote:
Slide time and filters for correction are history, today my usual way is Raw + auto wb, for most situations, but for studio work good way is to set color balance in Kelvins.



Auto anything is asking for problems.Ken
AmeeC


Joined: 22 Mar 2005
Posts: 385

Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 7:35 am     Reply with quote

In an answer to the OP... I ususally use an expodisc, but it does not always work (depends on the lighting). In which case, sometimes I use auto or sometimes I set it manually.

As for RAW vs jpg... Most of what I shoot is for myself, as you can see from the size of my gallery. I shoot in jpg, because of the file size, mainly. I have tried to use RAW multiple times, and it was so large and hard to work with. Maybe I just don't get it. However, Karin has a good idea to shoot in RAW + jog fine, so I will at least have a lossless copy. I guess I need to go buy more cards, LOL.
karapas


Joined: 12 Feb 2008
Posts: 92
Location: Thessaloniki, Greece

Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 8:50 am     Reply with quote

During day shots I leave my Canon to take the decision on its Auto balance session, and during night shots I keep shooting with my Canon to Auto color balance but I change the final print on Photoshop choosing the Auto balance on the Bridge programm.

That works.

In general Canon make the rights decisions for day shots but turns everything yellow during night shots. That's why I use Bridge auto correction for night shots.

Of course I can do all these corrections with Bridge because I shoot ONLY in RAW Canon format.
luceluceluce


Joined: 10 Dec 2008
Posts: 1545
Location: mostly

Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 9:38 am     Reply with quote

Sometimes I'll put my wb on sunny when it's cloudy and vice versa. I enjoy these little mind games with my camera, and it can affect the contrast.

I dont know what i would do without the RAW windows!!! blimey... it's automatic now... color temp, exposure.... and it was so easy to pick up.

although i cant get that fringing fix window to do bugger all about fringing...
x
alistaircotton


Joined: 12 Sep 2005
Posts: 745
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 9:41 am     Reply with quote

For studio, I just use a memorised Custom WB from the cameras memory. Like other posts, it's quite a simple process to do this using a grey card.

As it turns out, my Elinchroms are bang on 5 500k.

For shooting early morning or evening, you can check out the "Claypaws" WB option decribed on DP Review here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1020&message=28006509

Auto WB or running a WB with a grey card in the morning or evening light will try to neutralise the wonderful warm colour. So "Claypaws" has offered an interesting alternative.

To Mike though - if your monitor is colour calibrated you should really give RAW a crack to tweak what you want from the file in post (same as other posts suggested).



bw_glass.jpg
 Description:
. . . or just shoot black and white ;)
 Filesize:  12.78 KB
 Viewed:  403 Time(s)

bw_glass.jpg


dakotan


Joined: 15 Dec 2008
Posts: 74
Location: Once upon a time, or maybe twice, there was an unearthly paradise

Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 10:10 am     Reply with quote

I almost always set it to A mode, and than do all neccessery correction when converting from RAW. If it's a single set of photos just save the settings as a template.
peterwey


Joined: 24 Mar 2007
Posts: 693
Location: Switzerland

Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 10:33 am     Reply with quote

outdoor: its almost all auto-wb. most of the time i do carry a graycard but i rarely use it. only if auto-wb seems strage
indoor: graycard.
i tweak wb on almost all shots while postprocessing, but auto-wb/graycard give me a good start.
i always shoot raw. so all adjustments are save.
pete
straehle


Joined: 08 Jan 2007
Posts: 319
Location: Santa Barbara, CA

Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 11:27 am     Reply with quote

I always shoot raw. Memory is cheap and I use Lightroom to process, so there is really no penalty in my workflow for shooting raw rather than jpeg. When you shoot raw, there is WB information in the raw file that your processor uses to make its decisions, so wb does count when you shoot raw. I have found that auto WB is eratic as mentioned above and that any fixed WB setting is better than auto; at least if it's wrong, all images can be corrected with a few clicks in LR. I use the Color-Rite disc to take a calibration shot when conditions are strange and I have time and then set that as the custom WB in my Canon 20D. This works well most of the time. I found that ExpoDisc could give strange results some times. If I forget or the pictures don't look right the next option is using the custom WB in LR. At least if I am on a constant WB setting, I can then transfer that correction to all the other shots in that shoot with a couple of clicks.
rssfhs


Joined: 27 Nov 2005
Posts: 815
Location: Corvallis, Oregon, U.S.A.

Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 3:28 pm     Reply with quote

I shoot with my Canon 5d Mk II in RAW using the various in-camera white balance settings: daylight, cloudy, tungsten, etc. Then I tweak the temperature in PS to get the desired result. I sometimes cool things way down to give a special effect as in this photo:


http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-3273207-mount-fuji-with-the-sun-reflecting-in-a-blue-lake.html
karimala


Joined: 04 Sep 2005
Posts: 2117
Location: Sacramento, CA

Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 3:33 pm     Reply with quote

straehle wrote:
When you shoot raw, there is WB information in the raw file that your processor uses to make its decisions, so wb does count when you shoot raw.


This is exactly why I don't like processing in RAW, and choose instead to process in JPEG (remember, I do shoot in RAW + JPEG fine so I can have the negative). I've found time and time again that the WB (and often saturation levels) automatically changes when I open the image in a RAW converter, and can turn these odd hues of green or magenta. I don't want software that thinks for me, especially after I've taken the time to get the image right in camera.

straehle wrote:
I have found that auto WB is eratic as mentioned above and that any fixed WB setting is better than auto.


Me, too. Auto WB can produce some weird results in mixed lighting.
fraiseap


Joined: 10 Oct 2008
Posts: 574
Location: Birmingham UK

Post Posted: Fri May 15, 2009 3:42 pm     Reply with quote

rssfhs wrote:
I shoot with my Canon 5d Mk II in RAW using the various in-camera white balance settings: daylight, cloudy, tungsten, etc. Then I tweak the temperature in PS to get the desired result. I sometimes cool things way down to give a special effect as in this photo:


I am sorry guys, but I have checked and the cameras white balance does not affect the RAW file at all. The white balance data is saved in the EXIF data but the RAW file is exactly what it says - raw data with no sharpening or white balance adjustments. Here is a quote from Luminous Landscape

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-raw-files.shtml


— Raw files have not had white balance set. They are tagged with whatever the camera's setting was, (either that which was manually set or via auto-white-balance), but the actual data has not been changed. This allows one to set any colour temperature and white balance one wishes after the fact with no image degradation. It should be understood that once the file has been converted from the linear space and has had a gamma curve applied (such as in a JPG) white balance can no longer be properly done.

Adam
 
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 3 of 5 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

 


Shutterstock Forum for Submitters