| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/20/2007 03:43:22 AM · #101 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
<===== Just learned something he did not know. |
And what's that, Leroy?
R. |
green being WB neutral and Christmas trees being a neutral green. So, basically everything in that post :-D |
Ah...
Message edited by author 2007-11-20 03:43:50.
|
|
|
|
11/20/2007 04:44:26 AM · #102 |
| well fotomann your picture looks terrible. i dont know if you can set your auto white balance like i can with my e-500. but once it is set up its fine, i do have the ocasional bright then dark background but thats when im using my camera on auto. mainly im on manual so i can take a tad bit darker pictures. |
|
|
|
11/20/2007 04:53:42 AM · #103 |
Originally posted by dwterry:
You guys are being silly. AWB is *not* a brand thing. |
Actually, on this point I disagree, for two reasons.
1) The Nikon AWB algorithm doesn't just average the scene. Color Matrix Metering compares it to a database of 30,000 image profiles and attempts a more intelligent guess as to what the WB/tint should be.
2) Nikon then encrypt this WB data in the RAW image. Which means that RAW conversion software will interpret the WB values differently depending on the camera brand.
So Canon and Nikon will give different AWB results both in initial shooting and during post-processing. |
|
|
|
11/20/2007 06:43:35 AM · #104 |
I feel that while this argument makes a few valid points, that it is pretty much a moot issue just the same. Automatic white balance is not much different compared to every other automatic parameter on today's more advanced cameras. It can be defeated or used as the user sees fit.
In many cases, and for most users of a DSLR camera, it is a valued feature that serves a useful purpose. Most people do not understand the purpose of white balance anyway. It is a difficult concept to comprehend since it is foreign to the human vision system. The brain does automatic white balancing automatically, does it not?
Yes, it can be effectively adjusted in the image post-production stage, so it is not a deal-breaker that must be done precisely in the image production stage from a technology and work flow process perspective.
I would be hard pressed to imagine still camera users doing what we do in the broadcast world whereby we use a white / ASA grey card to calibrate the white balance. Especially for casual shooters of snapshots and landscapes.
So, it is a tool like any other in your camera to use as you see fit. Besides, if you consider the myriad of new in-camera image adjustment capabilities of the latest cameras and then automatic white balance is likely the least of your concerns...
|
|
|
|
11/20/2007 08:46:22 AM · #105 |
Originally posted by Morgan:
I feel that while this argument makes a few valid points, that it is pretty much a moot issue just the same. Automatic white balance is not much different compared to every other automatic parameter on today's more advanced cameras. It can be defeated or used as the user sees fit.
In many cases, and for most users of a DSLR camera, it is a valued feature that serves a useful purpose. Most people do not understand the purpose of white balance anyway. It is a difficult concept to comprehend since it is foreign to the human vision system. The brain does automatic white balancing automatically, does it not?
Yes, it can be effectively adjusted in the image post-production stage, so it is not a deal-breaker that must be done precisely in the image production stage from a technology and work flow process perspective.
I would be hard pressed to imagine still camera users doing what we do in the broadcast world whereby we use a white / ASA grey card to calibrate the white balance. Especially for casual shooters of snapshots and landscapes.
So, it is a tool like any other in your camera to use as you see fit. Besides, if you consider the myriad of new in-camera image adjustment capabilities of the latest cameras and then automatic white balance is likely the least of your concerns... |
This is all true enough, with one BIG caveat: most of us here in DPC are not, or do not aspire to be only, "casual shooters of snapshots and landscapes". So an understanding of White Balance and how it works, particularly an understanding of the limitations of AWB, is pretty important to us, or ought to be.
Once again, the detailed "explanation" of "WB For Dummies", so to speak, is now in its own thread here.
R.
|
|
|
|
11/20/2007 09:59:55 AM · #106 |
Originally posted by dwterry:
TRY IT. Stop trying to convince yourself that AWB is "okay" and go try the experiment. |
I proved to myself that AWB works just fine years ago when I started shooting digital. With the way I shoot, what I shoot, why I shoot, and my work flow, AWB works just fine 90% of the time. It gives me what I want, when I want, without worry, without thought, hassles or trouble.
The difference between those of us that find AWB a perfectly acceptable tool to use and those that think AWB should never be used is... we don't mind if you never use AWB but you are trying to change how we think so that we all think alike.
Maybe you should try using AWB and see what it can do for you?
Mike
|
|
|
|
11/20/2007 03:05:03 PM · #107 |
Originally posted by MikeJ:
we don't mind if you never use AWB but you are trying to change how we think so that we all think alike. |
Nah... Not trying to convince everyone to "do it my way" or even "think like I do". Only trying to wake up anyone who might be thinking that AWB is safe to use in all cases. And so I'm purposely erring on the side of conservative "don't use it" just to make the point.
Personally, I think it's has a time and a place. But not everyone (yet) understands that. So that's why I started the thread.
For reference as to why I even started this thread: there was a DPC photographer, which I have not named, who I had just finished helping. He had shot a very pretty girl who, in one image had nice skin tones and in another had a blue tint to her face. - the difference? the oft mentioned orange shirt had filled the frame! The culprit? He used AWB.
Luckily he shot raw and the fix was easy. But what if he hadn't? What if he was new enough that he didn't yet have a raw work flow? Are there such photographers here on DPC who don't shoot raw and don't understand the impact of AWB? You bet. And that's why I started the thread ... hoping to help others.
|
|
|
|
11/20/2007 06:46:42 PM · #108 |
It's called learning the ropes. Just like with exposure, if you don't take your exposure reading the right way, you can end up with over, under, backlit or washed out front exposure. People that want to learn will take situations like this and learn that you have to consider where your camera's sensitive area is and know what area of the subject is the best to use and then lock on that area and re-compose.
There are going to any number of times when a custom white balance won't do any better and can also give you false security. If you create a custom white balance in an area and take some pictures and then move a few feet away to take some more and there is a red wall that is bouncing light onto the subject, your white balance is going to be wrong because it's not taking into consideration the red color cast the wall is bouncing onto the subject. If the shooter does take this into consideration they have to create a new custom white balance... but what if it's a very active kid, a couple dancing across a floor, animals performing or anything where you have to shoot and keep shooting and don't have time to do a custom color balance every 5 minutes. In cases like this, you do like all the rest of us that have learned and you shoot in AWB and Raw. Or AWB and jpeg, which can also be adjusted, just not as easily.
Photographers should learn everything there is about their cameras. That includes shooting in AWB as well as doing custom white balance. Then they can make their own dicission on when the best time is to use either one. I'm not sure if anyone else is (I don't think so) but I've never said that AWB was safe to use all the time. Sometimes it will be a handy tool to use. Even I use it about 10% of the time... although if I need real critical balance control, I'll also shoot a McBeth color chart as well as a WhiBal card and use a digital calibration target to set my white balance. But I've only had to do that a few times when I was testing painted backgrounds and I wanted to make sure I was being true to their colors.
Remember, you can only carry other photographers so far... then you have to let go of the bike and let them ride on their own. It will hurt the first few times you let go, but then they will get better and you won't hurt so much. ;)
Mike
|
|
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 06:37:22 PM EDT.
