White Balance Calibration...

[LSP_Kevin]

To set white balance on my camera, I have to go into the settings, find and select 'white balance', then choose 'custom', and then point it at something and depress the go button. No option to set it from an internally stored image that I'm aware of.

 

I shoot in RAW now, too, but have always had trouble achieving a natural look setting it in post. The canned settings in Photoshop just never look right to me, and when I try to adjust it manually, it usually results in something too pink or too green! In the end, I usually just use the 'curves' function in Photoshop, which usually does a great job.

 

Kev

[D Bellis]

The canned settings in Photoshop just never look right to me...

The key is to put a known white card or scrap of paper in the shot to use as the white setpoint in PS. Click on Color Cast in the enhance menu, and then click on the white scrap. Just crop or clone out that white scrap afterward.

 

D

[Guest Paul Budzik]

If you're using Camera Raw for processing, just shoot a follow-up frame with a gray card in place of the model.  Then in Camera Raw select all your images (select the gray card image first so it's in the preview window) then use the white balance tool and click on the gray card and all the images will be balanced.  However, I would still do a proper custom WB in the camera so you're not relying too heavily on twisting pixels.

 

Paul

[modelingbob]

Man, I sure like the way my Nikon does it. Put the white calibration card on the table under the lights, then click the WB calibrate button from the popup menu. All done, nice and simple. 

[Guest Paul Budzik]

No simpler than Canon.  Just select the image and press the button.  That way you can store the gray card information for your different lighting setups and you don't even have to shoot another image.

My Canon Camcorders store multiple custom WB profiles so you just select the one you want.

 

I don't think there is anything magical about setting a custom white balance.

 

Paul

Edited December 15, 2016 by Paul Budzik

[Guest Peterpools]

Easiest and most simplest way to set white balance:

It's simply based on the type of light you are shooting photos with. Just set the WB for:

Daylight

Shadow

Cloudy

Incandescent

Fluorescent

That's it. It has nothing to do with anything else. You can manually set the color temperture to fine tune but nothing else is needed. WB has nothing to do with exposure, what you are metering or the metering mode.

I've been a Nikon shooter since the early sixties and my weapon of choice these days:

Nikon D810

Peter

Edited December 15, 2016 by Peterpools

[Guest Paul Budzik]

I'm sorry, but I don't know one serious photographer that doesn't set a custom white balance and shoot in RAW.  They might shoot JPEG for little brochure thumbnails but they will always do a custom WB.  It takes what, 30 seconds at most and no "fine tuning" necessary.  I'd say that's a whole lot easier and more accurate.

 

If your camera can do custom WB, why in the world would you ignore it?

 

Paul

Edited December 15, 2016 by Paul Budzik

[D Bellis]

IIf your camera can do custom WB, why in the world would you ignore it?

Well, the guy that introduced me to digital photography was the photographer at the museum where we both worked at the time. I was an exhibit technician often tasked with assisting him. After years of setting up the camera for shooting artifacts both on display and in the archives, he settled on doing it all in PhotoShop after the fact instead. Why? It was FAR more efficient. All of the images had to be run through PhotoShop anyway, so he found it best to just do it all there instead of wasting time doing it in the camera at each and every shoot. 

 

Once he figured this out, he joked about having a $25,000 'point-and-shoot' camera.  

 

I guess it depends on one's mindset whether to do it all in or out of the camera. 

 

D

[Guest Paul Budzik]

You do to give yourself more headroom so if you need to tweek it in post processing you can me more accurate. It's about getting it right, not efficiency.  But if efficiency is your thing why even build the model, just buy a diecast and post card, that will save you all sorts of time.

 

Paul

[D Bellis]

Because not many of us are into getting all Rube Goldberg with a camera. 

 

Modeling is modeling. Sharing pictures of them is usually a peripheral afterthought at best. The proof of that lies in the number of cellphone/smartphone pics used here and elsewhere. Diecasts don't enter the equation at all, but nice hyperbole. 

 

Once again, it depends on a person's mindset whether they do it in or out of the camera. The difference (if any) is minimal. Nothing personal. 

 

D 

[Guest Peterpools]

These are two completely different points of views:

Adjusting WB in the camera or adjusting it when doing post work. I still don't understand why everyone is having such a hard time with WB. It has absolutely nothing to do with exposure, JPEG or RAW when creating the image. WB is nothing more then correcting the color temperature of the light your are shooting in, so colors look natural in the final image. Placing a white card in the scene or a test scene and then seeing what color it is , is a nice way of checking but all it is is a reference and is not metered; it's used to adjust WB until the color is white. Of course you can have the correct WB and the wrong exposure setting and the white card will never be white. So understanding how to achieve the correct exposure is important but not a function of WB at all.

There is also a handy tool made by X-Rite called a Color Checker that lets you achieve a perfect WB but the corrections are done in post work and not normally in-camera. I already explained in my first post how to adjust for WB, which takes a mere few seconds. Shooting in JPEG, you are letting the camera processor do a lot of the calibrations for you but still has nothing to do with WB. Of course, you can set your WB to AUTO and then camera will figure it out. Our brain adjusts for color and what we see color wise, is normally a perceived color but not what it actually is, while the sensor and processor, try to reproduce what is there. Different lights have different Kelvin temperatures and different color casts.

I always shoot in RAW, my files are normally 36 MB and I process 100% of my images (except those few quick grab shots with my iPhone) in both Adobe Lightroom CC and Photoshop CC. Shooting in RAW, now allows complete control and creativity, plus the post programs allow any and all changes/adjustments that are desired.

What camera you use doesn't make a bit of difference as long as it allows you set set the WB. There are times the WB is quickly changing in a scene and I'll just go with Auto WB and normally the Nikon nails it.

Correct exposure is a function of ISO, shutter speed and aperture: WB has nothing to do with it. WB is a function of light temperature and exposure has nothing to do with it. They are tools that let the photographer create the image he or she sees in their mind.

Peter

Edited December 15, 2016 by Peterpools

[Shaka HI]

I say we work what works best for us. I'll continue to pursuit what works best for me, but consider how others do their stuff based on the work I see from them. I like correcting the WB with my camera. Very little correction with any software required (still a mystery for me)  -- for me. Cheers gents!

 

Edited December 17, 2016 by Shaka HI

[Guest Peterpools]

Shaka

WB looks to be on the money and if the background is white, what is needed is a second light source to increas the exposure a bit just to tur the gray white. It could be done in post work  but way either to just add a second light or a reflector.

Peter

[Shaka HI]

Peter...normally I have an extra light source, but my setup had to be moved to accommodate a new fridge delivery (through the garage)...and I had to forgo it for this shot. Good catch.