M9 white balance setting

[wda]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi,... I use a Color Checker Passport. And if you happen to forget to set a new manual balance and the balance is off, no big deal as you can find a correct balance in LR.

Jean-Michel

I find the Xrite ColorChecker Passport ideal and rather better than the small WhiBal grey card. It is very easy to shoot a frame aimed at the big neutral grey (almost white) page and thus set the measured light value in camera. It is extremely valuable in doubtful lighting conditions and gives a more accurate datum when the rile is processed in LR. (or whatever).

[happymac]

I tend to keep my camera to daylight, probably because I usually shot daylight slide film in the past.

 

So do I. It makes it much easier to remember the mood of the light situation.

[dmorris]

Expodisk has been mentioned a few times. I have seen it used the wrong way (pointing at the subject) too often to have much trust in the results obtained. It should be used to balance incident light, pointing at the light source.

If used properly (which is very simple) it works. Not that hard, just have to follow the instructions.

[Reds]

Imho there's often a creative choice to be made with WB as well, depending where/when you're shooting. I usually set mine to either 5800k for daylight or 2900k for tungsten and work from there in post. At least a series of shots is consistent that way.

 

'correct' and neutral WB isn't always the best choice, sometimes you might want to warm it up, or cool it down a bit depending on the mood.

 

If accurate colour is critical/important - worth using a WB tool, as others have mentioned. E.g. Blue dresses going purple or vice versa at a wedding, say.

[dmorris]

Imho there's often a creative choice to be made with WB as well, depending where/when you're shooting. I usually set mine to either 5800k for daylight or 2900k for tungsten and work from there in post. At least a series of shots is consistent that way.

 

'correct' and neutral WB isn't always the best choice, sometimes you might want to warm it up, or cool it down a bit depending on the mood.

 

If accurate colour is critical/important - worth using a WB tool, as others have mentioned. E.g. Blue dresses going purple or vice versa at a wedding, say.

Very good point about the creative process and control at the actual point of shooting.

[algrove]

I have recently been using the T. Overgaard method of shooting the WhiBal card from a few inches away in open shade to set manual WB and find it puts the graph right down the middle of the histogram.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It does not really matter which setting you use, as long as it is a fixed one for consistency. If you use AWB your starting point is jumping all over the place and it will take too long in raw conversion to get your images to match.

[brill64]

on the subject of custom or manual white balance, how much of the frame needs to be filled with the grey card?

 

an area just a little larger than the rangefinder patch under the various combined lighting conditions needing a manual white balance.

[pelagia]

I could not resist saying this:

 

From the above comments: "AWB is awful" or "AWB is terrible"! Why say this, if you are a professional? AWB is a snapshot function, and works great in normal conditions. But a digital camera is just a calculator, and it never has a will. You have a will. Of course, if you challenge this calculator with mixed light of various spectra, what you get is a result of the best estimate of the calculator's algorithm.

 

Jamie, you said nicely: "but you don't necessary want to make grey things grey". Exactly. Do as you wish. But do not blame the little tool for functions which you do not use anyway. I see from your excellent wedding portfolio, that you turn your color and bw images to warmish.

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped} I see from your excellent wedding portfolio, that you turn your color and bw images to warmish.

 

Thanks so much! (assuming this was meant for me )

 

I do tend to want to warm up digital files, which to me often trend towards the over magenta or over cyan. For BW, I'm mimicking the Ilford fibre-based stocks I printed to in the darkroom; they were just that little bit warm as well.

 

In my brain I'm still trying for the skin tones I used to get from Portra and earlier stocks. So warming in digital is important for skin tones too

 

Often this is directly related to white balancing at the raw conversion stage (though I also try to maintain neutral blackpoints and whitepoints when I print).

 

And of course, why you'd use a whi-bal or grey card during the "golden hours" outside is beyond me... Part of the beauty of the light at different times of the day is its colour; your "computer" in the camera will take that all away from you

[IkarusJohn]

This may sound daft, but I'm curious about the impact, or apparent lack of it, of taking a WhiBal reading on exposure. Why aren't they linked?

 

Back when I used my Hasselblad for travel, I used to take exposure readings from skin tones, or from a neutral grey card, particularly from darker skin colours. You just got used to assessing the closest thing to neutral grey, and reading that with a Gossen spot meter. If you weren't so picky, you'd go for an incident reading, and take your chances.

 

What intrigues me is that if you set white balance manually (using a WhiBal card in the same light as your subject) why is this information not also used for exposure setting? Or have I missed something relatively simple?

 

I do understand that white balance is not the same thing as exposure. But I do seem to be going through the same motions.

 

Cheers

John

[jaapv]

There is nothing stopping you taking your expore from a grey card. And you can include the graycardin yourshot for whitebalance, but the custom camera whitebalance setting does not allow for this and should be taken fromneutral white.

[algrove]

on the subject of custom or manual white balance, how much of the frame needs to be filled with the grey card?

 

I often use this method and am very careful with my wide angle lenses when shooting the WhiBal card. If too far from the card, you can capture more than the card and this has the potential to throw off the WB setting.

 

Even with the small 3x5 card I must put a 35mm lens around 1 inch from the card to make sure I am only exposing the card. For wides I am contemplating getting a larger card, but have not done so as yet.

 

To John-

 

I do not shoot the WhiBal card in the same light as my subject, but I shade the card with my torso so as to shoot the card in what I would call open shade.

[Jamie Roberts]

This may sound daft, but I'm curious about the impact, or apparent lack of it, of taking a WhiBal reading on exposure. Why aren't they linked?

 

{snipped}

 

John--of course they *can* be; however the 18% grey used for exposure isn't the ideal gray card for colorimetric white balance (usually a brighter grey).

 

But think of where the "Expodisc" got it's name It was actually an exposure tool before it was a white balance tool.

 

@algrove--are you saying you use the whibal card for exposure, or white balance? The only point in using that card for white balance is to put it in the same light as your subject (and that's one of the problems with it: if you can't get to that light, you can't use the card as a reference).

 

Also, if you want to use a whibal or whatever, you don't need to fill the frame unless you're making a custom white balance for JPEG settings. If you're shooting raw, just include the card (in the right light) and then in post click on the card. That's it.

 

Still, I find I don't use them at all anymore--it's just easier to approximate white balance with degrees K when shooting then tweak in post.

[algrove]

I am saying that I often use the "Overgaard" method of using the WhiBal card as he describes in his site. The Manual method. That's all. Thought I was helping.