DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Tips, Tricks, and Q&A >> Using the 'wrong' white balance.
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 33 of 33, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 04/20/2003 04:25:00 PM · #26
Originally posted by uabresch:
Gordon,

I am new to all of this (digital photography). I've been reading through this thread, and I don't understand how you use that Photoshop sheet with the sets of colors. Would you mind explaining it for a total layperson?

~Ursula


Basically, 'white' light under certain conditions varys in colour. Tungsten lights in doors tend to be quite orangy, sunlight is fairly blue and cloudy days the 'white' light is even bluer. The 'white balance' setting on your camera adjusts for these different colours of white.

Often, you also have a 'custom white balance' option, where you are supposed to place a white or neutral grey sheet in the light, take a picture and use this as a reference for the camera to set the accurate white balance colour.

The colour sheet is used to fool the camera, by taking a close-up shot of one of the colour squares and using that to set the custom white balance. This has the effect of moving the whole image towards the colour of the complimentary colour (the adjacent colour square) So if you shoot one of the 'blue' squares, you'll find that the overall picture has an orangy tint when you use that reference for the white balance.

All this is a lot easier to do in practice if you just try it out, than it is probably to explain :)
04/20/2003 04:47:24 PM · #27
Gordon,
What I am trying to figure out, is setting up these colors so that they mimic certain filters (ie-81A and son on). I have basically figured out some of them, but getting the right tone of colors is eluding me (and it is much more difficult not having all those filters-hence the reason this is such a great idea-save tons of money). I guess trial and error is the way to go to get the right tone, and that will be particular to each persons taste also. I have seen there are "warming cards" oout there, but they seem much larger then needed. The colors tend to be in the light cyan area.
Anyone come across a site with anything more specific to this. I have looked at Pantone and a few others, but not a lot mentioned.
tracy
 04/20/2003 04:49:13 PM · #28
All right, I understand it now. I don't think my camera can do that, as it doesn't keep a "memory" of white balance from one shot to the next, even though it has a number of white balance settings (time to upgrade to a better camera?). Thanks for answering!
 04/20/2003 07:20:27 PM · #29
Problem with white balance is that the card may or may not help dpeending on what you're trying to capture. If the subject matter is a mountain peak 2 miles away, the card won't help :) it may be sunny where you are, but on the mountain it might be cloudy...

I shoot RAW because it's adjustable later. Shooting JPEG is limiting and creates artifacts as at least on the Canon 10D the RAW conversion algorithm isn't that great.

04/20/2003 08:36:17 PM · #30
Originally posted by paganini:
Problem with white balance is that the card may or may not help dpeending on what you're trying to capture. If the subject matter is a mountain peak 2 miles away, the card won't help :) it may be sunny where you are, but on the mountain it might be cloudy...

I shoot RAW because it's adjustable later. Shooting JPEG is limiting and creates artifacts as at least on the Canon 10D the RAW conversion algorithm isn't that great.


You are still missing the point - look at the card - these are colour filters, not ways of getting white right. The thread is all about using the wrong white balance. So these are simulating red filters, or warm-up filters etc. without having to carry the glass filters about.

While you can do all that with Canon RAW it isnt true for JPEG or other cameras

Message edited by author 2003-04-20 21:04:24.
 04/21/2003 12:01:24 AM · #31
Ah, i see what you're saying....

but warming filters are nothing more than saturation filters, isn't it? You can always add tint to whatever you want in PS by increasing the color balance toward the colors of interest later on. I know it's one extra process, but still a relatively easy thing to do.

RAW is still the best way to go at it IMHO, as it preserves the sensor's information at time of exposure and allows you to do whatever you want afterwards. It's time consuming, but really, how many photos do you keep on the ones you have shot?? Usually what I do is a rough edit after I download the photos, then i delete the ones right off the bat. Then i extract the embedded JPEGS and then delete the ones after that, by the time I do processing on the RAW files, not many have survived past that point :)


Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by paganini:
Problem with white balance is that the card may or may not help dpeending on what you're trying to capture. If the subject matter is a mountain peak 2 miles away, the card won't help :) it may be sunny where you are, but on the mountain it might be cloudy...

I shoot RAW because it's adjustable later. Shooting JPEG is limiting and creates artifacts as at least on the Canon 10D the RAW conversion algorithm isn't that great.


You are still missing the point - look at the card - these are colour filters, not ways of getting white right. The thread is all about using the wrong white balance. So these are simulating red filters, or warm-up filters etc. without having to carry the glass filters about.

While you can do all that with Canon RAW it isnt true for JPEG or other cameras
 04/21/2003 10:29:47 AM · #32
Originally posted by paganini:
Ah, i see what you're saying....

but warming filters are nothing more than saturation filters, isn't it? You can always add tint to whatever you want in PS by increasing the color balance toward the colors of interest later on. I know it's one extra process, but still a relatively easy thing to do.


Its true if you are doing it to a RAW or a TIFF, but if you are changing the balance on a JPEG, it is probably better to do it in camera, so that you end up with a shot with the tint, but still making use of the whole colour palette. Just another way to do it.
 04/21/2003 01:15:53 PM · #33
That's for sure. That's why I am going to shoot in RAW and use the embedded JPEG if i wanted something quick.... The good thing about 10D is that you can save both a RAW and JPEG image as big as you want :) Sure it burns a lot of flash rom space though, but it's one way to get quick out of the camera results and a RAW file to further enhance it if needed.



Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by paganini:
Ah, i see what you're saying....

but warming filters are nothing more than saturation filters, isn't it? You can always add tint to whatever you want in PS by increasing the color balance toward the colors of interest later on. I know it's one extra process, but still a relatively easy thing to do.


Its true if you are doing it to a RAW or a TIFF, but if you are changing the balance on a JPEG, it is probably better to do it in camera, so that you end up with a shot with the tint, but still making use of the whole colour palette. Just another way to do it.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/27/2025 03:13:59 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/27/2025 03:13:59 AM EDT.