Site Sponsors
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 67

Thread: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

  1. #1
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Hi There
    This post is just to establish my situation as a nutter in irrevocable terms!
    Some may have been amused / bored / irritated by the discussion on this in the Thanks to Rob thread.
    Rob - if you're reading this, thank you again.
    I have a distinct feeling that I wasn't making myself clear - hopefully these samples will help - I should note that I'm not writing off AWB in all situations, but I think it's unhelpful for landscape.

    In each case the left hand shot has been taken with 'daylight' WB (4891K -5 tint). The right hand shot has been taken with AWB - I've noted the wb for each below:


    Daylight Left, AWB: 6414 tint 4


    Daylight Left, AWB: 6372 tint 2


    Daylight Left, AWB: 6026 tint 3


    Daylight Left, AWB: 6105 tint 1


    Daylight Left, AWB: 4181 tint 4


    Daylight Left, AWB: 4199 tint 3


    Daylight Left, AWB: 4254 tint 7

    In the 38 pairs of shots I took, the AWB went from:

    4075 - 6428, the tint from -22 to +16 - (n.b. the fact that the AWB seems to be getting cooler as time goes on is misleading - the spread was actually fairly evenly diverse)

    In almost every case the 'daylight' gave a more realistic representation of the scene, and in the first couple of shots the AWB has the nasty yellow cast which I had hated so much with Nikon.

    So, to my point.

    1. There may be no 'correct' White balance in situations like this, but if you use AWB, then your colour balance is going to slew considerably from hot to cold - if you process the pictures 1/2 hour after taking them, then this is obvious, if you process them 3 days later you're unlikely to remember exactly what the colour was like anyway.

    2. Fixing a white balance (in this case daylight) is, as Rob put in his revelatory message, is like using slide film - you KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET, and you can understand the results. You also have a sensible starting point from which to work. Of course, you could take a grey card reading when you start and use that . . . but it'll change from shoot to shoot, and it's still only going to be arbitrary (incidentally, I took a grey card and the dog urinated on it before the first shot!).

    3. The AWB on the Nikon is prone to give too warm results with a yellow cast in evening light (you might feel that's my opinion).

    Sorry if this just seems like Slack banging his greens drum again!

    We all learn about white balance, we develop procedures to use it, but I think most people really haven't thought about the situation in mixed outdoor lighting - and I've seen very little written about it, the common mantras about grey cards and macbeth chards come up - and they really don't meet the case!

    If this has made one person think a little, then it's been worthwhile!

    Just this guy you know

  2. #2
    Senior Subscriber Member Steen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Denmark, CPH
    Posts
    2,500
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    of course, all this talk about yellow cast ... it was the dog

  3. #3
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Maggie O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Standards Are Down All Over
    Posts
    3,064
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Y'all should just shoot with your M8. It's got great AWB now!

  4. #4
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by bondo View Post
    of course, all this talk about yellow cast ... it was the dog


    Hi Steen
    nice to know you got to the heart of the matter so fast

    Just this guy you know

  5. #5
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Thanks Jono,
    I need to change around and try the daylight in white balance. The very first day I had the D300 I posted about the AWB as I was shooting side with my M8. The M8 was also on AWB but the values I was getting from the M8 were in a tight group whereas the D300 was much more varied and we very cool. What is interesting is how little we talk about tint. I loook toward to having another look at this thread on a good screen at home.

  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by Maggie O View Post
    Y'all should just shoot with your M8. It's got great AWB now!
    HI Maggie
    No it hasn't - but that's quite different story

    Just this guy you know

  7. #7
    Senior Subscriber Member Steen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Denmark, CPH
    Posts
    2,500
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Thanks Jono, now I shall try to stay serious
    All jokes aside, your investigations have been very useful for me, because finally I realize that I don't understand what is going on in a built in camera WB meter.
    Does it meter the light-source-light or the reflected colour temp so to say ?
    And is a specific Kelvin value an absolute thing or a relative one with regards to impact on the colors in a photo. And are there other factors at play in the resulting color renderings ? I'm no longer so sure.
    So maybe I end up buying one of those Sekonic Colormeter C-500, then some day I might understand what's going on, and be able to control it better.
    With such a one I don't even need to take any pictures, I can just meter all day long
    http://www.ephotozine.com/article/Se...-Colour-Meters

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by bondo View Post
    Thanks Jono, now I shall try to stay serious
    All jokes aside, your investigations have been very useful for me, because finally I realize that I don't understand what is going on in a built in camera WB meter.
    Does it meter the light-source-light or the reflected colour temp so to say ?
    And is a specific Kelvin value an absolute thing or a relative one with regards to impact on the colors in a photo. And are there other factors at play in the resulting color renderings ? I'm no longer so sure.
    So maybe I end up buying one of those Sekonic Colormeter C-500, then some day I might understand what's going on, and be able to control it better.
    Thank you Steen (not that I need to be taken seriously of course)

    I think that most people really do think that there is a 'correct' white balance for a particular picture. This may be the case in a controlled lighting situation where one is actually trying to reproduce colours in absolute terms.

    In nature, you aren't ever going to get controlled lighting, and if you take an 'ambient' WB in a shady area it will vary vastly from that in a sunny area. The AWB in the camera is trying to take a view on this - evening light is especially problematical, as the real sunlight is so warm, whereas the shadows are really cool.

    Add to this the problem that when we look at a scene, we do selective WB corrections for different areas (generally speaking if you see a piece of white paper in tungsten light or in sunlight then your eyes tell you it's white).

    Then you need to add the fact that for a landscape photographer, you don't even want to correct for colour temperature - if you do a grey card in evening light, (assuming the dog hasn't pissed on it first) then you'll get rid of your evening light.

    Guy might say "well, you can do anything you want then", but for me, I want to represent the light as closely as possible to the way I saw it (I have to hope that others will see it the same way - but let's not go there!).

    I've brought this subject up a number of times over the last year or so, and generally speaking I seem to get rubbished or 'glossed over'. For me it's important stuff.

    With the D3 (and also the M8, but I was already doing that), the answer is to shoot always with 'Daylight' 'Cloudy' or 'Tungsten'. It's remarkable how good it gets it, but if the worst comes to the worst, at least you have one fixed 'variable' to work from

    Just this guy you know

  9. #9
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Steen that is part of the issue it takes it's reading off of what is reflected and not what is falling. So it is guessing and in this case with green foilage it is getting fooled . Reason why setting it to daylight is it will always render 5500 kelvin. Every shot will say 5500 kelvin so with a daylight setting think of it more in terms of the light falling on the subject not reflected and this is exactly what is happening to Jono. On AWB it's reading the green and taking a guess and in many cases it is wrong if you set it to 5500 kelvin in camera or daylight the camera say okay the scene will render daylight temp. Now it maybe warmer out at sunset and such and will render the color but the color will be cleaner because the camera is saying daylight to itself and no tint get's involved from reading off the scene.

    Maybe a good analogy is a reflected light meter and a incident light meter . A incident will read the light falling on the subject (input daylight setting for color) and a reflected meter reading will set itself to the light reflect( input color reflected here). They kind of work the same way
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  10. #10
    Subscriber & Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,178
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    414

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Jono,

    Interesting to see and thank you for posting.

    For completeness, it might be interesting to state the approximate time of day for the shots. Also, which RAW converter.

  11. #11
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by cmb_ View Post
    Jono,

    Interesting to see and thank you for posting.

    For completeness, it might be interesting to state the approximate time of day for the shots. Also, which RAW converter.
    HI Chris

    Pictures were taken between 6.20 and 6.50
    Converted using default values in Aperture with no corrections for exposure or white balance

    Just this guy you know

  12. #12
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Now to add the images on the right maybe exactly what you want and the good base than you can fine tune the warm in with the kelvin slider . Now the tint is correct so you can bounce to get the feel you want but now you are on a good base.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  13. #13
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Steen that is part of the issue it takes it's reading off of what is reflected and not what is falling. So it is guessing and in this case with green foilage it is getting fooled . Reason why setting it to daylight is it will always render 5500 kelvin. Every shot will say 5500 kelvin so with a daylight setting think of it more in terms of the light falling on the subject not reflected and this is exactly what is happening to Jono. On AWB it's reading the green and taking a guess and in many cases it is wrong if you set it to 5500 kelvin in camera or daylight the camera say okay the scene will render daylight temp. Now it maybe warmer out at sunset and such and will render the color but the color will be cleaner because the camera is saying daylight to itself and no tint get's involved from reading off the scene.

    Maybe a good analogy is a reflected light meter and a incident light meter . A incident will read the light falling on the subject (input daylight setting for color) and a reflected meter reading will set itself to the light reflect( input color reflected here). They kind of work the same way
    HI Guy
    A couple of points
    1.
    Does the D3 not have an incident white balance meter? (I know the Olympus E1 and E2 DO have one). I've been looking around and can't find out.
    2.
    The Daylight setting on the D3 is 4891 with a tint of -5 (FWIW) it comes up the same in ACR and Aperture.

    Just this guy you know

  14. #14
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Now to add the images on the right maybe exactly what you want and the good base than you can fine tune the warm in with the kelvin slider . Now the tint is correct so you can bounce to get the feel you want but now you are on a good base.
    Hi Guy
    I don't understand what you're saying here - the images on the right are all awful.

    Just this guy you know

  15. #15
    Van
    Guest

    Thank you

    You did a nice evaluation, your effort is appreciated by me.

    And I agree, not too many talk about it, and you are right. I have on occasions, even asked sales persons about the Nikon green/yellows and they do not acknowledge it.

    Can you achieve a better WB in PP, or is it a better result to select sunlight, cloudy etc at the shot? Did you try to dial in the K temp?

    Also, what about WB bracketing, will that not assist?

    I need to ask one more, I hope this does not sound ridiculous , but what do you mean when you note in your post, the tint readings, i.e. -4?

    Much appreciated... Van




    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Thank you Steen (not that I need to be taken seriously of course)

    I think that most people really do think that there is a 'correct' white balance for a particular picture. This may be the case in a controlled lighting situation where one is actually trying to reproduce colours in absolute terms.

    In nature, you aren't ever going to get controlled lighting, and if you take an 'ambient' WB in a shady area it will vary vastly from that in a sunny area. The AWB in the camera is trying to take a view on this - evening light is especially problematical, as the real sunlight is so warm, whereas the shadows are really cool.

    Add to this the problem that when we look at a scene, we do selective WB corrections for different areas (generally speaking if you see a piece of white paper in tungsten light or in sunlight then your eyes tell you it's white).

    Then you need to add the fact that for a landscape photographer, you don't even want to correct for colour temperature - if you do a grey card in evening light, (assuming the dog hasn't pissed on it first) then you'll get rid of your evening light.

    Guy might say "well, you can do anything you want then", but for me, I want to represent the light as closely as possible to the way I saw it (I have to hope that others will see it the same way - but let's not go there!).

    I've brought this subject up a number of times over the last year or so, and generally speaking I seem to get rubbished or 'glossed over'. For me it's important stuff.

    With the D3 (and also the M8, but I was already doing that), the answer is to shoot always with 'Daylight' 'Cloudy' or 'Tungsten'. It's remarkable how good it gets it, but if the worst comes to the worst, at least you have one fixed 'variable' to work from

  16. #16
    Senior Member LCT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    317
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    I must be missing something but can't you choose WB settings you need in your raw converter? Or do you shoot jpegs perhaps?

  17. #17
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by LCT View Post
    I must be missing something but can't you choose WB settings you need in your raw converter? Or do you shoot jpegs perhaps?
    Of course you can, (and of course these were shot RAW), but why would you want to import a batch of photographs where not a single one had either correct, or the same white balance? Added to which - how do you know what was right when you import photographs an hour/day/week later?

    If you use a fixed white balance, you get to understand the colours of the camera, and how you can / should amend them - if every batch you get has the sort of wild variations I'm alluding to above, you don't have a decent place to start from.

    Just this guy you know

  18. #18
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Thank you

    Hi Van
    Quote Originally Posted by Van View Post
    You did a nice evaluation, your effort is appreciated by me.

    And I agree, not too many talk about it, and you are right. I have on occasions, even asked sales persons about the Nikon green/yellows and they do not acknowledge it.


    Irritating isn't it - it's actually why I stopped using Nikon a couple of years ago and moved to Olympus (which has fine colour) and Leica.

    Quote Originally Posted by Van View Post

    Can you achieve a better WB in PP, or is it a better result to select sunlight, cloudy etc at the shot? Did you try to dial in the K temp?
    Well, you can (and I do) change it in PP as required, but it seems to me that the camera actually does a fine job if you set it to direct sunlight and then use that as a base to work from

    Quote Originally Posted by Van View Post
    Also, what about WB bracketing, will that not assist?
    Well, of course you can, but they you are back to having to make an evaluation on an image by image basis at some later time, without the scene in front of you any more.

    Quote Originally Posted by Van View Post
    I need to ask one more, I hope this does not sound ridiculous , but what do you mean when you note in your post, the tint readings, i.e. -4?
    The white balance value is made up of two components - the colour temperature and the tint - if you're using ACR or Lightroom or Aperture (and other converters I'm sure) then the tint value is given (and can be changed)

    Just this guy you know

  19. #19
    Van
    Guest

    Re: Thank you

    Got it. I knew it was something like you mentioned, the tint in LR. I just did not remember that slider.

    Another thought I just had... if you used the live view, I wonder... if this will give you the D3's interpretation of the scene's WB, and then you can dial in the Kelvin or whatever...



    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hi Van


    Irritating isn't it - it's actually why I stopped using Nikon a couple of years ago and moved to Olympus (which has fine colour) and Leica.


    Well, you can (and I do) change it in PP as required, but it seems to me that the camera actually does a fine job if you set it to direct sunlight and then use that as a base to work from



    Well, of course you can, but they you are back to having to make an evaluation on an image by image basis at some later time, without the scene in front of you any more.



    The white balance value is made up of two components - the colour temperature and the tint - if you're using ACR or Lightroom or Aperture (and other converters I'm sure) then the tint value is given (and can be changed)

  20. #20
    Van
    Guest

    Magenta

    Have you noticed, at times, too much magenta in portrait shots? I have, in both Raw and Jpeg. Did you find a different WB selection for that?

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hi Van


    Irritating isn't it - it's actually why I stopped using Nikon a couple of years ago and moved to Olympus (which has fine colour) and Leica.


    Well, you can (and I do) change it in PP as required, but it seems to me that the camera actually does a fine job if you set it to direct sunlight and then use that as a base to work from



    Well, of course you can, but they you are back to having to make an evaluation on an image by image basis at some later time, without the scene in front of you any more.



    The white balance value is made up of two components - the colour temperature and the tint - if you're using ACR or Lightroom or Aperture (and other converters I'm sure) then the tint value is given (and can be changed)

  21. #21
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hi Guy
    I don't understand what you're saying here - the images on the right are all awful.
    I meant the left side , my bad the Daylight setting ones.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  22. #22
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    I meant the left side , my bad the Daylight setting ones.
    Gotcha - I get my right and left completely screwed when driving on the continent.

    Just this guy you know

  23. #23
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    HI Guy
    A couple of points
    1.
    Does the D3 not have an incident white balance meter? (I know the Olympus E1 and E2 DO have one). I've been looking around and can't find out.
    2.
    The Daylight setting on the D3 is 4891 with a tint of -5 (FWIW) it comes up the same in ACR and Aperture.
    I don't think any of Nikons or canons are incident based but reflected based but something we should check. Usually it is coming in from the lens and calculated there.

    For Aperture 4891 could be the case, some programs run daylight at different numerical values. So no hard and fast rule on 5500, that is just the standard value for daylight. LR is more like 5300. i have to check C1 but i think it is lower also
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  24. #24
    Senior Member LCT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    317
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    ...why would you want to import a batch of photographs where not a single one had either correct, or the same white balance?...
    Well frankly i don't care. If i've shot daylight pics i just choose the daylight setting or 5200 K in the raw converter for instance. Even if my in-camera settings were totally false, the pic will have 5200 K like other ones finally no? Again i have the feeling that i'm missing something here but i can't seem to see where sorry.

  25. #25
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by LCT View Post
    Well frankly i don't care. If i've shot daylight pics i just choose the daylight setting or 5200 K in the raw converter for instance. Even if my in-camera settings were totally false, the pic will have 5200 K like other ones finally no? Again i have the feeling that i'm missing something here but i can't seem to see where sorry.
    Hi There
    . . . and if the camera has set a different tint value for each shot? Will you not bother with that?

    If you're going to set everything back to daylight, what's the point of having it on AWB in the first place?

    Just this guy you know

  26. #26
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post

    For Aperture 4891 could be the case, some programs run daylight at different numerical values. So no hard and fast rule on 5500, that is just the standard value for daylight. LR is more like 5300. i have to check C1 but i think it is lower also
    Hi Guy
    That brings up another interesting point - you have implied that the camera says 'daylight' and the program then picks up it's standard for daylight . . . but both ACR and Aperture use the 4891 and -5 value - isn't it more likely that when you set the camera to 'daylight' then it puts specific values into the raw file which is then picked up by the program?

    Mind you, the Aperture value for the M8 is different from that in ACR, and both are quite different (much warmer) than the ones for the D3.

    Just this guy you know

  27. #27
    Senior Member LCT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    317
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    ..If you're going to set everything back to daylight, what's the point of having it on AWB in the first place?
    Well i don't see the point of choosing any in-camera setting to put it bluntly. I generally choose AWB to chimp more easily (when i chimp) but i know that this won't be good enough of course and i don't care because the 'serious' WB settings will be done in the raw conveter anyway. Well never mind i must be too tired (or stupid) tonight. Time to go to bed. Cheers.

  28. #28
    Van
    Guest

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    I too shoot NEF/RAW. But I agree with Jono. In fact, the WB affects everything the camera processes. I believe if you can get it right, right off the bat, you will get a more accurate exposure. I have found the WB can affect the exposure settings.

    Quote Originally Posted by LCT View Post
    Well frankly i don't care. If i've shot daylight pics i just choose the daylight setting or 5200 K in the raw converter for instance. Even if my in-camera settings were totally false, the pic will have 5200 K like other ones finally no? Again i have the feeling that i'm missing something here but i can't seem to see where sorry.

  29. #29
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by LCT View Post
    Well i don't see the point of choosing any in-camera setting to put it bluntly. I generally choose AWB to chimp more easily (when i chimp) but i know that this won't be good enough of course and i don't care because the 'serious' WB settings will be done in the raw conveter anyway. Well never mind i must be too tired (or stupid) tonight. Time to go to bed. Cheers.
    Well, that's fine - but it relies on you actually remembering what the light was actually like . . . so well that you can tweak the wb on individual shots until you have what you want. I'm pretty good on colour (and I have a good memory for it too) but not that good.

    Sleep well!

    Just this guy you know

  30. #30
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Jono,
    if you were to take one of the AWB shots and change it to daylight in Aperture, what does the program do with the tint? I am not experienced in dealing with the tint and how the RAW converters change the tint when you change the temperature. This will probably spawn some other questions from me but my brain is only working in little baby steps right now.

  31. #31
    Senior Member LCT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    317
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Well, that's fine - but it relies on you actually remembering what the light was actually like . . . so well that you can tweak the wb on individual shots until you have what you want...
    Not sure if i'm good on colors but yes i do work this way. Perhaps i'm wrong after all. Or perhaps i'm a genius hehe! Bye folks.

  32. #32
    Member gromitspapa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    220
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Good stuff to know. I had always heard the AWB was pretty good in the D300, so I tried a few just to check. These were converted directly to JPEG from Capture NX with direct sunlight on the left and AWB on the right. I like the direct sunlight WB better as well.








  33. #33
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Maggie O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Standards Are Down All Over
    Posts
    3,064
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    HI Maggie
    No it hasn't - but that's quite different story
    OHHHHHHHHH YES IT DOES!!!!!

  34. #34
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hi Guy
    That brings up another interesting point - you have implied that the camera says 'daylight' and the program then picks up it's standard for daylight . . . but both ACR and Aperture use the 4891 and -5 value - isn't it more likely that when you set the camera to 'daylight' then it puts specific values into the raw file which is then picked up by the program?

    Mind you, the Aperture value for the M8 is different from that in ACR, and both are quite different (much warmer) than the ones for the D3.
    Exactly the camera has a daylight value built in it is a standard and won't change which will reside in the DNG or NEF etc. The Raw processors just may see it at a different value that the raw processors algorithm is set too. Reason I said 5500 is not Gospel different programs tend to place different values. And this comes down to way different raw processors see the same file different Adobe may like it like this or C1 may like it like that. It is what is built into there profiles for that particular camera
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  35. #35
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by TEBnewyork View Post
    Jono,
    if you were to take one of the AWB shots and change it to daylight in Aperture, what does the program do with the tint? I am not experienced in dealing with the tint and how the RAW converters change the tint when you change the temperature. This will probably spawn some other questions from me but my brain is only working in little baby steps right now.
    Good Question - I don't know what happens in Lightroom, but Aperture doesn't have a specific 'daylight' temperature (you can make up your own presets for it). If you change the colour temperature it doesn't change the tint automatically.

    Just this guy you know

  36. #36
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Good Question - I don't know what happens in Lightroom, but Aperture doesn't have a specific 'daylight' temperature (you can make up your own presets for it). If you change the colour temperature it doesn't change the tint automatically.
    Soooo....
    Before you made this change to using daylight had you been adjusting the tint or only the temps when you were trying to fix the yellow problems? It would be interesting to see if you took the AWB shots and changed the Temp and time to be exactly like the daylight shots and see if there are any exposure differences or if everything then looks exactly the same.
    Last edited by Terry; 7th May 2008 at 15:59.

  37. #37
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by TEBnewyork View Post
    Soooo....
    Before you made this change to using daylight had you been adjusting the tint or only the temps when you were trying to fix the yellow problems? It would be interesting to see if you took the AWB shots and changed the Temp and time to be exactly like the daylight shots and see if there are any exposure differences or if everything then looks exactly the same.
    HI There
    Yes - if you change the temp to 4981 and the tint to -5 then the shots are identical (phew!). I guess that's LCT's point - but if you're going to batch change all your pictures to daylight . . . . why not shoot them like that in the first place! (of course, until RobMac chipped in, I didn't even know what the standard settings for daylight were).

    Just this guy you know

  38. #38
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by gromitspapa View Post
    Good stuff to know. I had always heard the AWB was pretty good in the D300, so I tried a few just to check. These were converted directly to JPEG from Capture NX with direct sunlight on the left and AWB on the right. I like the direct sunlight WB better as well.
    HI There
    It's something that most of us mostly don't think about a great deal under normal circumstances.
    Looks like it's been useful to you! Good! Thanks for posting.

    Just this guy you know

  39. #39
    Subscriber & Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,178
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    414

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    i have to check C1 but i think it is lower also
    C1 4
    M8 - Daylight = 5267, -3
    DMR - Daylight = 5555, 4

    C1 Pro v. 3.7.8
    M8 - Daylight = 5300, -2
    DMR - Daylight = 5600, 2

    For the M8 files, if you set the WB to Daylight in Camera, the numbers in C1 are the same if you select As Shot or Daylight (both selections give you 5267, -3 in C1 4 or 5300, -2 in C1 Pro).

    regards, Charles

  40. #40
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    HI There
    Yes - if you change the temp to 4981 and the tint to -5 then the shots are identical (phew!). I guess that's LCT's point - but if you're going to batch change all your pictures to daylight . . . . why not shoot them like that in the first place! (of course, until RobMac chipped in, I didn't even know what the standard settings for daylight were).
    Well now you know a good setting for your shots and if you are in AWB ever again you have a home base that you can adjust to that looks good to you.

    I think the lesson I've learned is that simply trying to white balance with the dropper (or changing to a preset like daylight) after using AWB might not be all you need to do. It is a combo of changing the WB and adjusting the tint. If you have a few minutes to play around wanna come up with the numbers in Lightroom some of us would really like you.

  41. #41
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    I see some serious sweet talking going on here. The kicker is the little Angel.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  42. #42
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by TEBnewyork View Post
    Well now you know a good setting for your shots and if you are in AWB ever again you have a home base that you can adjust to that looks good to you.

    I think the lesson I've learned is that simply trying to white balance with the dropper (or changing to a preset like daylight) after using AWB might not be all you need to do. It is a combo of changing the WB and adjusting the tint. If you have a few minutes to play around wanna come up with the numbers in Lightroom some of us would really like you.
    HI There
    Unfortunately I don't have the latest version of lightroom . . . BUT . .
    I do have ACR 4.wotsit, (doesn't that give the same values as lightroom). It's the same for the D3 files as Aperture. Best I can do I'm afraid!

    Mind you - you should't have a problem finding out - just shoot a D300 file with the Daylight setting, and then open it in lightroom and look at the settings.

    Just this guy you know

  43. #43
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    I see some serious sweet talking going on here. The kicker is the little Angel.
    HI Guy
    It would seem that Im not THAT nice

    Just this guy you know

  44. #44
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    HI Guy
    It would seem that Im not THAT nice
    It's OK we still love you...I will play around with it. I have to go out and shoot some daylight non AWB shots.

  45. #45
    Subscriber & Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,178
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    414

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    I thought the values Jono posted were the preset values.

  46. #46
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    I see some serious sweet talking going on here. The kicker is the little Angel.
    Obviously I'm not very good at it.

  47. #47
    Subscriber & Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,178
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    414

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Jono -

    Do the preset values in Aperture differ from the in-camera settings?
    You stated the Daylight in-camera comes up as 4891K -5 tint.
    If you select the Daylight preset are the numbers the same?

    - Charles

  48. #48
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by cmb_ View Post
    I thought the values Jono posted were the preset values.
    HI Chris
    the 4981 and -5 are the preset daylight values in Aperture - and also in ACR as far as I can see (they should therefore be the same in Lightroom), but as you pointed out with your Leica value check - they may vary (interesting that these are the same for Aperture and ACR). They may also be different for the D300 (which Terry has).

    Just this guy you know

  49. #49
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by TEBnewyork View Post
    Obviously I'm not very good at it.
    Of course you are - who could be better
    However, in between writing these messages, I've been trying to deal with a rather nasty data problem in Middlesborough . . . so I'm not terribly susceptible to the idea of downloading the latest version of Lightroom and installing it!

    Just this guy you know

  50. #50
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Auto White Balance, Nature and why not to do it!

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Of course you are - who could be better
    However, in between writing these messages, I've been trying to deal with a rather nasty data problem in Middlesborough . . . so I'm not terribly susceptible to the idea of downloading the latest version of Lightroom and installing it!
    I will do this, don't worry. I thought you had kept Lightroom up and running. Good luck fixing the other problems.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •