Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > white balance

Reply
Thread Tools

white balance

 
 
bernard.bergeron@gmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-23-2006
Could someone explain to me:
- why should white balance adjustment be done by the camera and not by
a software after the photo is taken. Do the captors behave differently
depending on the detected color temperature, or is it purely a
post-treatement?
- how the white balance captors work and how you can "help" them to get
the good measure.

Thx
(a D200/18-200 owner)

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
John McWilliams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-23-2006
On 6/23/06 11:52 AM, http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) posted the following:
> Could someone explain to me:
> - why should white balance adjustment be done by the camera and not by
> a software after the photo is taken. Do the captors behave differently
> depending on the detected color temperature, or is it purely a
> post-treatement?
> - how the white balance captors work and how you can "help" them to get
> the good measure.
>

I prefer to set white balance on the camera, or leave it on auto, which
means the camera is setting it, whether I am shooting RAW or JPEG. If
shooting in RAW, you can post process to any color temp you want, with
no adverse effects. If shooting JPEG, you don't have near the latitude
to make adjustments, so it's more important to get it right in the first
place. It's always better to get it all correct in the first place,
before someone jumps all over that.

--
john mcwilliams
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Pat
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-23-2006

John McWilliams wrote:
> On 6/23/06 11:52 AM, (E-Mail Removed) posted the following:
> > Could someone explain to me:
> > - why should white balance adjustment be done by the camera and not by
> > a software after the photo is taken. Do the captors behave differently
> > depending on the detected color temperature, or is it purely a
> > post-treatement?
> > - how the white balance captors work and how you can "help" them to get
> > the good measure.
> >

> I prefer to set white balance on the camera, or leave it on auto, which
> means the camera is setting it, whether I am shooting RAW or JPEG. If
> shooting in RAW, you can post process to any color temp you want, with
> no adverse effects. If shooting JPEG, you don't have near the latitude
> to make adjustments, so it's more important to get it right in the first
> place. It's always better to get it all correct in the first place,
> before someone jumps all over that.
>
> --
> john mcwilliams


Agreed. Think of it this way. You can get a good white balance before
you start shooting, do it right once, and not worry about it. Or you
can make lots and lots of corrections later. It depends on how much
time you want use playing with pictures.

Pat.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Joe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-23-2006
Shooting RAW, it doesn't matter, as white balance is easily adjusted during
post production with no degradation in image quality.


<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
> Could someone explain to me:
> - why should white balance adjustment be done by the camera and not by
> a software after the photo is taken. Do the captors behave differently
> depending on the detected color temperature, or is it purely a
> post-treatement?
> - how the white balance captors work and how you can "help" them to get
> the good measure.
>
> Thx
> (a D200/18-200 owner)
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
All Things Mopar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-23-2006
Today, with great enthusiasm and quite emphatically, John
McWilliams laid this on an unsuspecting readership ...

> On 6/23/06 11:52 AM, (E-Mail Removed) posted the
> following:
>> Could someone explain to me:
>> - why should white balance adjustment be done by the camera
>> and not by a software after the photo is taken. Do the
>> captors behave differently depending on the detected color
>> temperature, or is it purely a post-treatement? - how the
>> white balance captors work and how you can "help" them to get
>> the good measure.
>>

> I prefer to set white balance on the camera, or leave it on
> auto, which means the camera is setting it, whether I am
> shooting RAW or JPEG. If shooting in RAW, you can post process
> to any color temp you want, with no adverse effects. If
> shooting JPEG, you don't have near the latitude to make
> adjustments, so it's more important to get it right in the
> first place. It's always better to get it all correct in the
> first place, before someone jumps all over that.
>

I think that both pre- and post-image WB adjustments are often
needed. For example, I often start shooting car pictures in late
afternoon and on into dusk. During that time, the color
temperature is steadily dropping into the yellow-red range and if
no pre-shooting adjustment is made, the pictures are irrevocably
way to red-orange, unless you're using RAW, which I do not.

There's several car shows coming up this month and in July, then
the Woodward Dream Cruise in August. I plan to set my Rebel XT to
WB-bracket and let it take 3 images for each shot. One will be
way, way to "amber" and as the sun goes down, the too-blue images
will start to come in. But, the sun drops so fast in July and
August and there are hundreds of cars to shoot, it just isn't
possible to try to do this analytically.

--
ATM, aka Jerry

"You made your bed, now lie in it!" - Things your Mom always said
 
Reply With Quote
 
All Things Mopar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-23-2006
Today, with great enthusiasm and quite emphatically, Pat laid
this on an unsuspecting readership ...

>> I prefer to set white balance on the camera, or leave it on
>> auto, which means the camera is setting it, whether I am
>> shooting RAW or JPEG. If shooting in RAW, you can post
>> process to any color temp you want, with no adverse effects.
>> If shooting JPEG, you don't have near the latitude to make
>> adjustments, so it's more important to get it right in the
>> first place. It's always better to get it all correct in the
>> first place, before someone jumps all over that.

>
> Agreed. Think of it this way. You can get a good white
> balance before you start shooting, do it right once, and not
> worry about it. Or you can make lots and lots of corrections
> later. It depends on how much time you want use playing with
> pictures.


This is very good advice, if one can count on lighting to stay
constant for the entire "shoot". Besides setting sun situations I
talk about separately, it often happens that the sun is going
behind large cloud banks part of the time and shining brightly at
other times, while it is in-between much of the time. Other than
RAW, I know of no guaranteed way to get WB, or more correctly to my
way of thinking about photography, color balance correct as you
walk around for several hours shooting hundreds of images.

--
ATM, aka Jerry

"You made your bed, now lie in it!" - Things your Mom always said
 
Reply With Quote
 
bernard.bergeron@gmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-23-2006
Thanks for all the answers.
I do understand the advantage of using the RAW format to correct the WB
afterwards, but how does the camera initially decide what color or
white will be the real white?

All Things Mopar wrote:
> Today, with great enthusiasm and quite emphatically, Pat laid
> this on an unsuspecting readership ...
>
> >> I prefer to set white balance on the camera, or leave it on
> >> auto, which means the camera is setting it, whether I am
> >> shooting RAW or JPEG. If shooting in RAW, you can post
> >> process to any color temp you want, with no adverse effects.
> >> If shooting JPEG, you don't have near the latitude to make
> >> adjustments, so it's more important to get it right in the
> >> first place. It's always better to get it all correct in the
> >> first place, before someone jumps all over that.

> >
> > Agreed. Think of it this way. You can get a good white
> > balance before you start shooting, do it right once, and not
> > worry about it. Or you can make lots and lots of corrections
> > later. It depends on how much time you want use playing with
> > pictures.

>
> This is very good advice, if one can count on lighting to stay
> constant for the entire "shoot". Besides setting sun situations I
> talk about separately, it often happens that the sun is going
> behind large cloud banks part of the time and shining brightly at
> other times, while it is in-between much of the time. Other than
> RAW, I know of no guaranteed way to get WB, or more correctly to my
> way of thinking about photography, color balance correct as you
> walk around for several hours shooting hundreds of images.
>
> --
> ATM, aka Jerry
>
> "You made your bed, now lie in it!" - Things your Mom always said


 
Reply With Quote
 
All Things Mopar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-23-2006
Today, with great enthusiasm and quite emphatically,
(E-Mail Removed) laid this on an unsuspecting
readership ...

> Thanks for all the answers.
> I do understand the advantage of using the RAW format to
> correct the WB afterwards, but how does the camera initially
> decide what color or white will be the real white?


Wish I could tell ya, but I haven't had the time since buying my
Rebel 6 months ago to learn RAW.

> All Things Mopar wrote:
>> Today, with great enthusiasm and quite emphatically, Pat laid
>> this on an unsuspecting readership ...
>>
>> >> I prefer to set white balance on the camera, or leave it
>> >> on auto, which means the camera is setting it, whether I
>> >> am shooting RAW or JPEG. If shooting in RAW, you can post
>> >> process to any color temp you want, with no adverse
>> >> effects. If shooting JPEG, you don't have near the
>> >> latitude to make adjustments, so it's more important to
>> >> get it right in the first place. It's always better to get
>> >> it all correct in the first place, before someone jumps
>> >> all over that.
>> >
>> > Agreed. Think of it this way. You can get a good white
>> > balance before you start shooting, do it right once, and
>> > not worry about it. Or you can make lots and lots of
>> > corrections later. It depends on how much time you want
>> > use playing with pictures.

>>
>> This is very good advice, if one can count on lighting to
>> stay constant for the entire "shoot". Besides setting sun
>> situations I talk about separately, it often happens that the
>> sun is going behind large cloud banks part of the time and
>> shining brightly at other times, while it is in-between much
>> of the time. Other than RAW, I know of no guaranteed way to
>> get WB, or more correctly to my way of thinking about
>> photography, color balance correct as you walk around for
>> several hours shooting hundreds of images.
>>
>> --
>> ATM, aka Jerry
>>
>> "You made your bed, now lie in it!" - Things your Mom always
>> said

>
>




--
ATM, aka Jerry

"You made your bed, now lie in it!" - Things your Mom always said
 
Reply With Quote
 
Andrew Crabtree
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-23-2006
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
> Could someone explain to me:
> - why should white balance adjustment be done by the camera and not by

Bernard - since you mention owning a D200 I am going to go a step furthur
here and suggest that for certain situations white balance should be done in
front of the lens.

Don't believe me? Do this simple test. Take a close up shot of a person's
face indoors using nothing but tungsten lights. Set the cameras white
balance to either auto or tungsten/incandescent. Then pull up an RGB
histogram of the image and see how many problems you can spot. Hint - only
the green channel will be good.

It is something of a pain, and certainly isn't that useful for candid shots
or rapidly changing conditions, but I always carry around a cokin adapter
with yellow and blue filters, and then also a set of filters for my flash
unit.

Generally speaking I leave the D200 on auto and then make adjusted on groups
of images via ACR.

Regards,
Andrew


 
Reply With Quote
 
Scott W
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-23-2006
(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> Thanks for all the answers.
> I do understand the advantage of using the RAW format to correct the WB
> afterwards, but how does the camera initially decide what color or
> white will be the real white?


The camera simply puts into the raw file what the WB setting was, the
raw converter can then do whatever it want to with that information.
Most raw converters will start out using what the camera was set to and
of course allow the user to change the WB to whatever they want.

The data in the raw file has no color corrections done to it at all, it
is just the raw data from the sensor.

So when you are using raw you are not really correcting the color
afterwards as much as setting it.

Scott

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Life Balance Coaching: Balance Work And Life Like A Pro 88059355 Digital Photography 1 01-06-2008 07:32 PM
Custom White Balance: Gray Card or White Card? Steve Cutchen Digital Photography 31 10-28-2005 09:13 PM
Affects of a PL filter on white balance and white balance (D100) jeff liss Digital Photography 1 09-05-2003 02:07 PM
10D White Balance and color temperature Mark C Digital Photography 3 07-28-2003 06:10 PM
Sony 717 with Warmcard White Balance Chip Gallo Digital Photography 0 07-19-2003 04:07 PM



Advertisments