White Balance - What Settings Do You Use?
Hi,
What settings do you all use for white balance? I have everything on the camera set to manual and used to do all the white balance manually too but found that for photography where I am moving around, I really couldn't do this efficiently.
I end up using auto WB and then adjusting later on in PP. I occasionally use a preset if I can see the camera really getting the white balance wrong for certain shots (i.e. I'm indoor at a concert and it is making the images too warm, I might set it to low light preset so that the PP adjustments are more minimal).
Any thoughts or even tips as to whether I am doing the right thing or how I could improve this technique?
Thanks,
Vig
What settings do you all use for white balance? I have everything on the camera set to manual and used to do all the white balance manually too but found that for photography where I am moving around, I really couldn't do this efficiently.
I end up using auto WB and then adjusting later on in PP. I occasionally use a preset if I can see the camera really getting the white balance wrong for certain shots (i.e. I'm indoor at a concert and it is making the images too warm, I might set it to low light preset so that the PP adjustments are more minimal).
Any thoughts or even tips as to whether I am doing the right thing or how I could improve this technique?
Thanks,
Vig
0
Comments
Good point about the RAW.
The grey card thing is fine but my issue is that I'm shooting in constantly different light so I'd have to keep shooting the card.
don't know if you shot film, but you could sorta fix white balance (or color temp) withthe use of filters...but with changing temps from scene to scene we could not be changing filters that often...so shoot on your fav film..fix in darkroom ... Pretty much same scenario to day..shoot at your fav iso..fix in Lightroom / AcR or your Fav raw converter...
+1
Setting WB in camera is only worth when you know for sure your WB remains stable throughout the shoot (or part of the shoot). E.g. when you shoot with studio strobes it's a fairly safe bet to set WB to "flash" so the jpgs (I shoot RAW + small jpegs ) can serve as decent "proofs".
Same when shooting an event like wedding, when you may have a need to quickly switch from indoors (tungsten or luminescent with high ISO) to outdoors (sunlit with regular ISO). Custom/User settings on the many modern cameras work wonders in this respect. Again, simply to produce decent looking SOOC jpegs and have a little less work during post.
However, this only matters if you deal with a high volume shoot. In any other case AWB + later adjustment in ACR/LR save you time and worries while shooting.
Author "Color Management for Photographers"
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Sent from my MID7016 using Tapatalk
Forum for Canadian shooters: www.canphoto.net
You’re missing the point if shooting raw and thinking we are letting the camera do any thinking that affects the image. WB has zero effect on the raw data. It is only a metadata suggestion one can accept or ignore. You can alter it to your heart’s content in a raw converter, it isn’t at all based on the camera doing any thinking. The beauty here is that since the raw isn’t affected, the initial default preview in a converter with AWB is likely to be pleasing. Especially if you move from one WB situation to another (outdoors, then indoors).
As for gray, not the right tonality for raw capture (fine for JPEG). White is a better tone considering the distribution of raw data (half of all that data being in the first stop of highlights). As for paper white, well sure, as long as it is spectrally neutral. That is possible but necessarily likely.
Author "Color Management for Photographers"
http://www.digitaldog.net/
+1
Not using advances of technology is akin to making fire by friction instead of using microwave when all you need is to heat some things up. Surely, can be entertaining, but a tad inefficient.
In Adobe raw converters, the WB shown is “as shot” which just means the converter’s current default rendering is based on the metadata seen. But each companies converter will produce a different result. It is only a starting point. In an Adobe converter, you can select something else in the popup besides “as shot” to get closer or just specifically WB one or more images using something you know is white and neutral or use the card you captured on one such image.
If I shot JPEG’s, I’d be far, far more concerned with WB settings, custom WB etc. For raw, I isn’t anything I need to worry about so I figure, let Auto set the WB, maybe it will be fine and I can just move on.
Author "Color Management for Photographers"
http://www.digitaldog.net/
I do feel that my RAW converter might be doing some work for me which I don't want. I use Aperture FYI...
I'm fully aware of that. However, not everyone shoots raw. I piled off 900 images at the provincial basketball championships: no way in hell I'm shooting those raw. Next week, I'll do some casual engagement pics for a friend. Those I will shoot raw.
The reason I stated what I did is that not everyone uses all the tools in the toolbox the same way, and I've seen more than a few pics screwed up because AWB didn't work in a specified situation and polluted a jpeg with tones that can't easily be removed. And the OP struck me as someone that might be shooting jpeg images.
Forum for Canadian shooters: www.canphoto.net
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Actually as I have learned the hard way from Hockey, it depends on which lighting system they use. Some of the older systems use sodium I think that cycles. You can see it if you do burst photos. AKTse and I hit it every so often when shooting hockey. The newer lighting systems don't have the same issue.
Pictures | Website | Blog | Twitter | Contact
But if one is shooting under Sodium halide lighting, it is the same annoyance from wherever in the arena you are shooting, isn't it?
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
I always shoot Aperture priority and Auto white balance. I let the camera do everything possible that it will do automatically, I just want to shoot pictures. I want the camera to get out of my way and not think about settings, or have to adjust them.
Auto white balance just works if you are going to be processing the photos in Lightroom.
In processing simply choose all the photos in a given lighting condition and click on something white....done....why complicate it.
If you happen to be in one of those rare lighting conditions where Auto white balance shows some variation...then choose any one of the other WB setting (it doesn't matter how wrong it is) That will give you a consistent white balance, then in Lightroom post click on something white, instant correction to them all.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/21695902@N06/
http://500px.com/Shockey
alloutdoor.smugmug.com
http://aoboudoirboise.smugmug.com/
I used the auto WB - the shoot was mostly outside and it was extremely sunny so finding shade was imperative. I actually could have manually set the white balance but went with auto and the pictures look great. Very little PP will be needed - not sure if it was helped by the lens which I am now in love with. I rented it because I am going to get this or the 50mm (I have a 7D so not full-frame) but right now I am leaning towards the 35mm.
I understand my comment is not about WB, but... 35mm for headshots?
Just my 2 cents...
Yep - I had an 85mm and a 24-105...my favourite shots were with the 35mm though!
Yes indeed. One of the principle reasons not to shoot JPEG. Once you bake that cake, if you used salt instead of sugar, it can only taste awful.
With a product like Lightroom, you should be able to process 900 images quite quickly with raw and not have to worry about a lot of pre and post processing thanks to that raw data. You are correct that the camera is making a huge number of decisions for you when shooting JPEG and if you don't like them, you are kind of stuck with them.
Author "Color Management for Photographers"
http://www.digitaldog.net/