«

I just got the 12" version of this, and one thing about it is
curious. The white side looks a bit creamy. In fact,there's a
stitched border around the perimeter of the white material, and the
border is clearly whiter than the main field.

I need to do some experimenting using the white side to set custom
white balance, and then the grey side to do that, and see which
seems better. But I just wondered if there was an explanation for
why the white side looks like that. The grey side looks pretty
neutral to me.

Savageduck says...

> Do not use the "White" side for custom WB. always use
> the "18% Grey". The white is not a calibration standard.
> If you want to use the white side to set a "White Point"
> it will do. The Grey target is the thing to have in the
> image. Then in ACR or Lightroom use the WB eye dropper
> tool to click on the grey target to set your custom WB.
> You can then apply that WB setting to all the images
> shot in a set of images shot under the same light
> conditions/illumination.

And is the grey side also the correct side for setting
custom white balance in the camera?

> Check their video tutorial on use.
> < http://www.whibalhost.com/_Tutorials/WhiBal/01/ >

If what he says is true - that light grey, not 18%, is what
you want for white balance, then if I use the Ezybalance
grey it looks like I should shoot it at +2 stops or
thereabouts so it's light grey in the picture. Does that
make sense?

On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:28:27 -0800, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>That is his argument, that most grey references were intended for
>You are adjusting WB not exposure. Shoot with whatever exposure
>compensation your illumination requires. It is color temperature, not
>exposure which should be the concern.
>
>The older WhiBal cards included a darker grey for JPEG WB & exposure
>adjustment (JPEG WB adjustment is always going to be subjective and not
>particularly exact).
>The current WhiBal cards ( I have two one credit card sized and one
>larger 6 x 3.5 card) only have the calibrated grey for RAW WB
>adjustment along with a "black point" & "white point" target and a
>contrast target.

I have - and use - a WhiBal card from Michael Tapes, but I don't use
it prior to set a custom white balance. I use it for table-top
photography where I'm using external lighting. I take one shot with
the card in the image, and then the next shots without the card. All
shots are done with a fixed aperture and speed setting (M).

When I process the image, I use Photoshop Curves and use the white,
black, and gray points on the card to set the curve, save that curve,
and apply it to subsequent shots done under the same lights.

Most of the time, it works a treat. Sometimes, though, it's really
off. In those cases, I set the curve manually and save that.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On 11/15/2011 3:54 PM, Savageduck wrote:
> On 2011-11-15 12:41:39 -0800, tony cooper <> said:
>
>> On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:28:27 -0800, Savageduck
>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>>
>>> That is his argument, that most grey references were intended for
>>> You are adjusting WB not exposure. Shoot with whatever exposure
>>> compensation your illumination requires. It is color temperature, not
>>> exposure which should be the concern.
>>>
>>> The older WhiBal cards included a darker grey for JPEG WB & exposure
>>> adjustment (JPEG WB adjustment is always going to be subjective and not
>>> particularly exact).
>>> The current WhiBal cards ( I have two one credit card sized and one
>>> larger 6 x 3.5 card) only have the calibrated grey for RAW WB
>>> adjustment along with a "black point" & "white point" target and a
>>> contrast target.
>>
>> I have - and use - a WhiBal card from Michael Tapes, but I don't use
>> it prior to set a custom white balance. I use it for table-top
>> photography where I'm using external lighting. I take one shot with
>> the card in the image, and then the next shots without the card. All
>> shots are done with a fixed aperture and speed setting (M).
>>
>> When I process the image, I use Photoshop Curves and use the white,
>> black, and gray points on the card to set the curve, save that curve,
>> and apply it to subsequent shots done under the same lights.
>>
>> Most of the time, it works a treat. Sometimes, though, it's really
>> off. In those cases, I set the curve manually and save that.
>
> Using that method is OK for JPEGs sometimes, but is always susceptible
> to lighting quirks, and as you said you are setting an adjustment curve
> using the white, black, & grey points, that is not setting the WB for
> the JPEG after the fact. Trying to fix WB in a JPEG is always going to
> be an eye-ball kludge.
>
> Using your RAW, or DNG files and your WhiBAl card grey target for
> setting WB in Lightroom or ACR is going to give you a much better result.
>

You can easily set WB in PS.

Duplicate the layer.
Filter | Blur | average
create a levels layer
touch the middle pointer to the blurred image
that will set layers to neutral gray.
delete the blurred layer
your image will be color corrected.

--
Peter

On 11/15/2011 6:22 PM, Savageduck wrote:
> On 2011-11-15 14:07:22 -0800, PeterN <> said:
>
>> On 11/15/2011 3:54 PM, Savageduck wrote:
>>> On 2011-11-15 12:41:39 -0800, tony cooper <>
>>> said:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:28:27 -0800, Savageduck
>>>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> That is his argument, that most grey references were intended for
>>>>> You are adjusting WB not exposure. Shoot with whatever exposure
>>>>> compensation your illumination requires. It is color temperature, not
>>>>> exposure which should be the concern.
>>>>>
>>>>> The older WhiBal cards included a darker grey for JPEG WB & exposure
>>>>> adjustment (JPEG WB adjustment is always going to be subjective and
>>>>> not
>>>>> particularly exact).
>>>>> The current WhiBal cards ( I have two one credit card sized and one
>>>>> larger 6 x 3.5 card) only have the calibrated grey for RAW WB
>>>>> adjustment along with a "black point" & "white point" target and a
>>>>> contrast target.
>>>>
>>>> I have - and use - a WhiBal card from Michael Tapes, but I don't use
>>>> it prior to set a custom white balance. I use it for table-top
>>>> photography where I'm using external lighting. I take one shot with
>>>> the card in the image, and then the next shots without the card. All
>>>> shots are done with a fixed aperture and speed setting (M).
>>>>
>>>> When I process the image, I use Photoshop Curves and use the white,
>>>> black, and gray points on the card to set the curve, save that curve,
>>>> and apply it to subsequent shots done under the same lights.
>>>>
>>>> Most of the time, it works a treat. Sometimes, though, it's really
>>>> off. In those cases, I set the curve manually and save that.
>>>
>>> Using that method is OK for JPEGs sometimes, but is always susceptible
>>> to lighting quirks, and as you said you are setting an adjustment curve
>>> using the white, black, & grey points, that is not setting the WB for
>>> the JPEG after the fact. Trying to fix WB in a JPEG is always going to
>>> be an eye-ball kludge.
>>>
>>> Using your RAW, or DNG files and your WhiBAl card grey target for
>>> setting WB in Lightroom or ACR is going to give you a much better
>>> result.
>>>
>>
>> You can easily set WB in PS.
>>
>> Duplicate the layer.
>> Filter | Blur | average
>> create a levels layer
>> touch the middle pointer to the blurred image
>> that will set layers to neutral gray.
>> delete the blurred layer
>> your image will be color corrected.
>
> Why bother with all that tedium? You are setting WB as a starting point
> for post processing, not color balancing, or exposure compensating
> All I do is, at some point in shooting a series of shots, is to place
> the WhiBal card in the scene under the working illumination and take a
> shot.
>
> Then in ACR I use the WB tool to set the WB without making any other
> adjustments. Click on "Done" in ACR. Then in Bridge I select all of the
> other images taken under the same conditions and apply the "previous
> correction". Now each of those has the custom WB set and I can go ahead
> and open all of those individually or as a batch in ACR, and I do not
> have to worry about WB settings.
>
> Here is a basic set up. In these two cases the background color efects
> the WB in the scene. On the Left is the uncorrected NEF, on the Right
> the WB corrected image, having used the WhiBal grey target in ACR.
> < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/WB%20compW.jpg >
>
>

That method is fine if you enjoy carrying an extra thing. Also it will
not remove color casts when you are shooting animals through glass in a
zoo.

--
Peter

I appreciate the responses. But at the risk of shocking you, I
have to tell you that I don't have ACR, or Bridge, or PhotoShop, or
Elements, or Lightroom, or any other software that costs money.
That's just the way it is. And I've been shooting jpeg. So, I
need to be able to set custom white balance in the camera.

So is there any free software for XP that has the eyedropper WB
correction function for raw files? Or even for jpeg files? I've
been using XnView, but I don't think it has WB adjustment at all.

I bought the camera used, with no disks. Should I look at the
Canon software that comes with the camera? I've never heard of
anybody actually using it, and just assumed it was awful. But
maybe that's not right.

On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 18:47:38 -0800, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>On 2011-11-15 17:34:37 -0800, PeterN <> said:
>
>> On 11/15/2011 6:22 PM, Savageduck wrote:
>>> On 2011-11-15 14:07:22 -0800, PeterN <> said:
>>>
>>>> On 11/15/2011 3:54 PM, Savageduck wrote:
>>>>> On 2011-11-15 12:41:39 -0800, tony cooper <>
>>>>> said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:28:27 -0800, Savageduck
>>>>>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is his argument, that most grey references were intended for
>>>>>>> You are adjusting WB not exposure. Shoot with whatever exposure
>>>>>>> compensation your illumination requires. It is color temperature, not
>>>>>>> exposure which should be the concern.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The older WhiBal cards included a darker grey for JPEG WB & exposure
>>>>>>> adjustment (JPEG WB adjustment is always going to be subjective and
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>> particularly exact).
>>>>>>> The current WhiBal cards ( I have two one credit card sized and one
>>>>>>> larger 6 x 3.5 card) only have the calibrated grey for RAW WB
>>>>>>> adjustment along with a "black point" & "white point" target and a
>>>>>>> contrast target.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have - and use - a WhiBal card from Michael Tapes, but I don't use
>>>>>> it prior to set a custom white balance. I use it for table-top
>>>>>> photography where I'm using external lighting. I take one shot with
>>>>>> the card in the image, and then the next shots without the card. All
>>>>>> shots are done with a fixed aperture and speed setting (M).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When I process the image, I use Photoshop Curves and use the white,
>>>>>> black, and gray points on the card to set the curve, save that curve,
>>>>>> and apply it to subsequent shots done under the same lights.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Most of the time, it works a treat. Sometimes, though, it's really
>>>>>> off. In those cases, I set the curve manually and save that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Using that method is OK for JPEGs sometimes, but is always susceptible
>>>>> to lighting quirks, and as you said you are setting an adjustment curve
>>>>> using the white, black, & grey points, that is not setting the WB for
>>>>> the JPEG after the fact. Trying to fix WB in a JPEG is always going to
>>>>> be an eye-ball kludge.
>>>>>
>>>>> Using your RAW, or DNG files and your WhiBAl card grey target for
>>>>> setting WB in Lightroom or ACR is going to give you a much better
>>>>> result.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You can easily set WB in PS.
>>>>
>>>> Duplicate the layer.
>>>> Filter | Blur | average
>>>> create a levels layer
>>>> touch the middle pointer to the blurred image
>>>> that will set layers to neutral gray.
>>>> delete the blurred layer
>>>> your image will be color corrected.
>>>
>>> Why bother with all that tedium? You are setting WB as a starting point
>>> for post processing, not color balancing, or exposure compensating
>>> All I do is, at some point in shooting a series of shots, is to place
>>> the WhiBal card in the scene under the working illumination and take a
>>> shot.
>>>
>>> Then in ACR I use the WB tool to set the WB without making any other
>>> adjustments. Click on "Done" in ACR. Then in Bridge I select all of the
>>> other images taken under the same conditions and apply the "previous
>>> correction". Now each of those has the custom WB set and I can go ahead
>>> and open all of those individually or as a batch in ACR, and I do not
>>> have to worry about WB settings.
>>>
>>> Here is a basic set up. In these two cases the background color efects
>>> the WB in the scene. On the Left is the uncorrected NEF, on the Right
>>> the WB corrected image, having used the WhiBal grey target in ACR.
>>> < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/WB%20compW.jpg >
>>>
>>>
>>
>> That method is fine if you enjoy carrying an extra thing. Also it will
>> not remove color casts when you are shooting animals through glass in a
>> zoo.
>
>Carrying an "extra thing" is not an issue. I can hang it around my neck
>by the lanyard, or I can slip it into a shirt pocket.
>There is no problem getting a reference shot in any series of shots,
>before, after, or during. I can just hold the card out at arms length
>and take a reference shot, like so.
>< p://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/WB-Comp-02.jpg >

I do carry my WhiBal card in my camera bag. When I was at the Gay
Pride Rally, though, I wasn't about to ask the people I photographed
if they'd hold up the card for the first shot for me. I've used the
card in the field less than half a dozen times in the last two years.

I find white balance to be a very, very minor problem 95% of the time.
It's usually correctable in post processing if it is a problem.

The only time it concerns me is shooting under artificial lighting
from more than one type of light, and when there is a series involved
and the colors have to be true throughout the series. In this
situation, I shoot the card and set up a curve to use on all the
shots.

>Personally, shooting zoo animals, indoors, through glass, are not
>subjects I would deliberately seek out.

I don't think anyone deliberately seeks out subjects that are
problems. What we do is deal with problems that arise with subjects
we stumble on that are good photographic material.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Savageduck says...

> You still haven't been specific as to which model Canon
> camera you own, and whether or not it has RAW
> capability.

Sorry. It's a T2i.

> You will be able to set a custom WB when you open a CR2
> in DPP using that WB eye-dropper tool.

Ok, I'll find that on the Canon site. Thanks.

On 11/15/2011 9:49 PM, Savageduck wrote:
> On 2011-11-15 18:47:38 -0800, Savageduck
> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> said:
>
>> On 2011-11-15 17:34:37 -0800, PeterN <> said:
>>
>>> On 11/15/2011 6:22 PM, Savageduck wrote:
>>>> On 2011-11-15 14:07:22 -0800, PeterN <>
>>>> said:
>>>>
>>>>> On 11/15/2011 3:54 PM, Savageduck wrote:
>>>>>> On 2011-11-15 12:41:39 -0800, tony cooper <>
>>>>>> said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:28:27 -0800, Savageduck
>>>>>>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That is his argument, that most grey references were intended for
>>>>>>>> You are adjusting WB not exposure. Shoot with whatever exposure
>>>>>>>> compensation your illumination requires. It is color
>>>>>>>> temperature, not
>>>>>>>> exposure which should be the concern.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The older WhiBal cards included a darker grey for JPEG WB &
>>>>>>>> exposure
>>>>>>>> adjustment (JPEG WB adjustment is always going to be subjective and
>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>> particularly exact).
>>>>>>>> The current WhiBal cards ( I have two one credit card sized and one
>>>>>>>> larger 6 x 3.5 card) only have the calibrated grey for RAW WB
>>>>>>>> adjustment along with a "black point" & "white point" target and a
>>>>>>>> contrast target.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have - and use - a WhiBal card from Michael Tapes, but I don't use
>>>>>>> it prior to set a custom white balance. I use it for table-top
>>>>>>> photography where I'm using external lighting. I take one shot with
>>>>>>> the card in the image, and then the next shots without the card. All
>>>>>>> shots are done with a fixed aperture and speed setting (M).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When I process the image, I use Photoshop Curves and use the white,
>>>>>>> black, and gray points on the card to set the curve, save that
>>>>>>> curve,
>>>>>>> and apply it to subsequent shots done under the same lights.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Most of the time, it works a treat. Sometimes, though, it's really
>>>>>>> off. In those cases, I set the curve manually and save that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Using that method is OK for JPEGs sometimes, but is always
>>>>>> susceptible
>>>>>> to lighting quirks, and as you said you are setting an adjustment
>>>>>> curve
>>>>>> using the white, black, & grey points, that is not setting the WB for
>>>>>> the JPEG after the fact. Trying to fix WB in a JPEG is always
>>>>>> going to
>>>>>> be an eye-ball kludge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Using your RAW, or DNG files and your WhiBAl card grey target for
>>>>>> setting WB in Lightroom or ACR is going to give you a much better
>>>>>> result.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You can easily set WB in PS.
>>>>>
>>>>> Duplicate the layer.
>>>>> Filter | Blur | average
>>>>> create a levels layer
>>>>> touch the middle pointer to the blurred image
>>>>> that will set layers to neutral gray.
>>>>> delete the blurred layer
>>>>> your image will be color corrected.
>>>>
>>>> Why bother with all that tedium? You are setting WB as a starting point
>>>> for post processing, not color balancing, or exposure compensating
>>>> All I do is, at some point in shooting a series of shots, is to place
>>>> the WhiBal card in the scene under the working illumination and take a
>>>> shot.
>>>>
>>>> Then in ACR I use the WB tool to set the WB without making any other
>>>> adjustments. Click on "Done" in ACR. Then in Bridge I select all of the
>>>> other images taken under the same conditions and apply the "previous
>>>> correction". Now each of those has the custom WB set and I can go ahead
>>>> and open all of those individually or as a batch in ACR, and I do not
>>>> have to worry about WB settings.
>>>>
>>>> Here is a basic set up. In these two cases the background color efects
>>>> the WB in the scene. On the Left is the uncorrected NEF, on the Right
>>>> the WB corrected image, having used the WhiBal grey target in ACR.
>>>> < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/WB%20compW.jpg >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> That method is fine if you enjoy carrying an extra thing. Also it
>>> will not remove color casts when you are shooting animals through
>>> glass in a zoo.
>>
>> Carrying an "extra thing" is not an issue. I can hang it around my
>> neck by the lanyard, or I can slip it into a shirt pocket.
>> There is no problem getting a reference shot in any series of shots,
>> before, after, or during. I can just hold the card out at arms length
>> and take a reference shot, like so.
>> < p://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/WB-Comp-02.jpg >
> Oops!
> < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/WB-Comp-02.jpg >
>
>>
>> Setting WB is not meant to remove color casts, there are other ways of
>> doing that.
>> Shooting animals through glass at a zoo presents a whole bunch of
>> issues which go well beyond WB issues. If you are going to specialize
>> in that type of photography I an sure you will be able to devise
>> solutions for those problems.
>>
>> Personally, shooting zoo animals, indoors, through glass, are not
>> subjects I would deliberately seek out.
>
>

I must confess that I have rarely seen WB as an issue with landscapes.
Why adjust the WB when I seek to capture the color that is present. If
you set WB for daylight at sunset, or sunrise, you will get closer to
the colors you want. If I need to make a WB adjustment, I do it in ACR,
by eye. If you don't like shooting in zoos, that's fine. There are many
ways to make adjustments. And it is nice to learn about alternatives. It
would be a dull world if we all liked the same thing. I still like my
method to remove unwanted color casts.

--
Peter

Alan Browne <> writes:

> Shoot raw and all can be forgiven later.

Yes, moving to a purely raw workflow was a big, productive, step upwards
for me.

A custom white balance can still be useful; while you can produce any
result from raw later without it, it can be considerably easier.