Auto WB way way off but LR can fix

kirbinster

Thought I would share this snow scape sunset I shot on auto WB yesterday. The D300 really screwed the pooch on this one. Not only did it decide that white should be a dark blue, but it screwed with the metering in matrix mode. Fortunately Lightroom let me correct the WB (I shoot RAW) and fix the exposure so the picture can look like what I was trying to capture.

Before:


After:

perroneford

I would have set a WB off the snow, and gone about my business. AWB has a VERY hard time with scenes like this. As does Matrix when you've essentially got 1/3 of the frame as a bright, featureless, landscape, and a contrasty scene otherwise.

Richard

As long as you're shooting raw, camera WB settings don't mean anything. One click in post is all it takes with a scene like this. I don't even think about white balance while I'm shooting.

pathfinder

The color of snow always causes a lot of discussion, since many folks assume that snow is "white". And yet yet snow is really a reflector ( maybe a white reflector ) that only reflects the color of light shining on its surface. Hence, in shadow, snow really is a bit blue, since it is illuminated by the blue sky. In late afternoon sunlight it may be a warmer yellow orange. Just like seeing green clouds over an Iowa cornfield, or red clouds over Monument Valley in Arizona.

I was not present when the posted images above were shot, so I have no idea what color the sky really was, but I do know that snow in the shade usually does look a bit blue, like the AWB setting captured it. If I was asked which shot seems more "correct" as to color balance, I would probably pick the first image. The second image is much warmer, and that has its appeal too.

In the end, the choice of color balance is not "a fact", but a choice made by the photographer for what looks best. I feel no compunction to render what is most "accurate", but prefer what is most preferable to my eye, or the eyes of my viewers. Humans color correct what we know are whites or greys, but cameras do not do that. Until the files are edited by the shooter, at least.


A few links about the color/colors of snow

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=6366

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=5586

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=26319

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=85873

Here's what is taught in art school about sunlit and shaded objects, I think this really sums up the "color of snow", and other neutral subjects == http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=232451&postcount=11

In Versace's "Welcome to Oz" he talks about toning shadows bluish, and sunlit portion of an image warmish, too.

arodney

Yup, there's really no reason to even thinkg about WB if you shoot raw. Raw is raw, WB happens far later in the processing. Ignore the camera LCD, it's a big fat lie in terms of color and exposure. I set my camera for Auto white balance so I don't even have to think about moving scene to scene, in LR, the 'as shot' will use that metadata to attempt a decent starting point. From there, Tint and Temp are great for fine tuning.