jaapv Posted March 27, 2015 Share #21 Posted March 27, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I never use auto - I'd rather a set was off and consistant, then I can fix one image and fix them all. At home mostly Kelvin. I use greycard if I'm uncertain and have time. Never shoot RAW. Life's too short. Unless what comes out of the camera is a disaster you can't tell the difference. With all due respect, I think you should brush up on your postprocessing skills Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 27, 2015 Posted March 27, 2015 Hi jaapv, Take a look here Let's talk WB!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
CheshireCat Posted March 27, 2015 Share #22 Posted March 27, 2015 Never shoot RAW. Life's too short. Unless what comes out of the camera is a disaster you can't tell the difference. :eek: I can tell the difference between the JPEG out of camera and the RAW displayed by Lightroom without any postprocessing. And let me guess... you shoot JPEG sRGB, right ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted March 27, 2015 Share #23 Posted March 27, 2015 I've shot plenty of RAW and I'll put my PP skills up against anyone's here. Honed pretty well over the years with the M8 and M9. Their jpegs were crap. The M240's jpegs are a huge improvement, in fact good enough that although I have kept shooting "the serious stuff" with dng+jpeg/fine just in case, I haven't needed to resort to using a single dng so far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted March 27, 2015 Share #24 Posted March 27, 2015 The reason so many features have been added to raw converters is so one can get the most out of one's files and expand one's abilities to interpret and express images. There is no single "correct" way for photos to always look and white balance is just one more arbitrary setting. The more and more I got into learning about color with digital files and more that the software and my skills improved, the more that I understood that basic color balance in a photo is just a starting point. Yes, sometimes jpeg images look good, but can you do more with the image? And if so, is raw a better way to go than trying to adjust a jpeg? So here is an example of an out of camera jpeg and an adjusted image (using just the tools in DXO in the raw conversion process) that tries to enhance the impact of the photo. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/242602-lets-talk-wb/?do=findComment&comment=2788088'>More sharing options...
AndrewDD Posted March 27, 2015 Share #25 Posted March 27, 2015 With all due respect, I think you should brush up on your postprocessing skills With all due respect, I know what I'm doing. I do find it funny how offended people get about not shooting RAW. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted March 27, 2015 Share #26 Posted March 27, 2015 With all due respect, I know what I'm doing. I do find it funny how offended people get about not shooting RAW. You may know what you are doing, but the problem here is you are recommending people to shoot JPEG. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted March 27, 2015 Share #27 Posted March 27, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Shooting raw is not mandatory per se. We used to shoot "poor man's raws" when raw files were not available but we did save our jpegs as tiff files then and we tweaked the latter in Photoshop at least. Letting people believe that one cannot tell the difference between an out-of-camera jpeg and a post processed file is a mistake at best. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted March 27, 2015 Share #28 Posted March 27, 2015 An out of camera jpeg is a postprocessed raw file. Just the camera has done the postprocessing and output it as a jpeg, instead of the user doing it. The parameters for how the camera processes the image are quite easy to vary according to taste. Including setting them such that the output jpeg very closely resembles an unprocessed raw file. That's basically what I always did with P&S cameras that had no raw output and forced NR that was horrid. Then I saved them as .tif's and applied aftermarket NR software. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted March 27, 2015 Share #29 Posted March 27, 2015 An out of camera jpeg is a postprocessed raw file. Just the camera has done the postprocessing and output it as a jpeg, instead of the user doing it. The parameters for how the camera processes the image are quite easy to vary according to taste. Including setting them such that the output jpeg very closely resembles an unprocessed raw file. That's basically what I always did with P&S cameras that had no raw output and forced NR that was horrid. Then I saved them as .tif's and applied aftermarket NR software. The RAW DNG that comes out of the camera is a processed file too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted March 27, 2015 Share #30 Posted March 27, 2015 An out of camera jpeg is The parameters for how the camera processes the image are quite easy to vary according to taste. Including setting them such that the output jpeg very closely resembles an unprocessed raw file. For my work, I have some issues with this approach although occasionally use cameras that can only shoot jpegs. 1. The adjustments in the camera are way too limited and rarely are up to what I can do from a raw file. 2. It is difficult to preview them on the camera's LCD. 3. It is time consuming to do this while shooting. Even when shooting tethered to a laptop I rarely spend the time on site trying to fine tune the color and shadow/highlight detail while shooting. 4. Some cameras have built in raw to jpeg features that allow for later output of a jpeg file. So that is another reason to shoot raw as it can be fine tuned after the shot as opposed to using a typical limited OOC jpeg. This is a great way to go if you need to send a jpeg and don't have time to adjust the raw on a computer. 5. Adjusting jpeg images after the fact have limitations as they generally contain much less data than the raw files. 6. I am a professional and have a responsibility to my clients to meet my standards of quality. I even do this for simple record shots... e.g. to show various basic features in a home - thermostats, solar panels, etc. I want a consistent quality level. This standard generally carries over to my personal work, but I have lots of casual p&s jpeg photos too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 28, 2015 Share #31 Posted March 28, 2015 With all due respect, I know what I'm doing. I do find it funny how offended people get about not shooting RAW. If you can't see a difference, well.... I'm not offended, just mildly surprised. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted March 28, 2015 Share #32 Posted March 28, 2015 This is an interesting read: RAW and Jpeg white balance problems Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overgaard Posted March 28, 2015 Share #33 Posted March 28, 2015 Auto in daylight 3200 Kelvin generally in evening with artificial light. Manual setting of WB in camera with WhiBal card when it has to be correct. leica.overgaard.dk - Thorsten Overgaard's Leica Pages - WhiteBal greycards for white balancing digital photography and video Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted March 28, 2015 Share #34 Posted March 28, 2015 What is not being mentioned here is even if you set the white balance "correctly" for different kinds of lighting, that does not guarantee that a given subject will look right. It is just a starting point that often still needs to be tweaked using other color and exposure tools. An analogy would be shooting b/w film using the in camera average meeter reading on every subject then always processing the film and printing the photo the same way on the same contrast paper. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
david strachan Posted March 28, 2015 Share #35 Posted March 28, 2015 One can use Colour Temperature Meters... https://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2014/04/reading-a-color-temp-meter/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
david strachan Posted April 14, 2015 Share #36 Posted April 14, 2015 a white handkerchief is a beaut emergency white balance "card". Good in mixed light, and getting complexions right. I do it with my M8, and get good consistent colour results...if I need to. All my "hankies" are white.... But generally Auto. Blue is easy to remove with temp sliders, the shadow green of the M8's is less simple. Colour balance is often just how you want to make the photograph anyway...a part of the colour debate. cheers Dave S Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted April 14, 2015 Share #37 Posted April 14, 2015 An out of camera jpeg is a postprocessed raw file. Just the camera has done the postprocessing and output it as a jpeg, instead of the user doing it. The parameters for how the camera processes the image are quite easy to vary according to taste. Including setting them such that the output jpeg very closely resembles an unprocessed raw file. That's basically what I always did with P&S cameras that had no raw output and forced NR that was horrid. Then I saved them as .tif's and applied aftermarket NR software. Agreed. Allowing the camera to process the JPEG for you is to give up artistic control. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted April 14, 2015 Share #38 Posted April 14, 2015 Agreed. Allowing the camera to process the JPEG for you is to give up artistic control. Hogwash. You're not giving up anything you don't want to. A lot of people shoot RAW and fiddle around with an image to get it like the out of camera JPEG would give them or fiddle with it and totally ruin an image. A JPEG file can still be postprocessed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alberti Posted April 14, 2015 Share #39 Posted April 14, 2015 An out of camera jpeg is a postprocessed raw file. Just the camera has done the postprocessing and output it as a jpeg, instead of the user doing it. The parameters for how the camera processes the image are quite easy to vary according to taste. Including setting them such that the output jpeg very closely resembles an unprocessed raw file. That's basically what I always did with P&S cameras that had no raw output and forced NR that was horrid. Then I saved them as .tif's and applied aftermarket NR software. . . and the preferences for that in-camara PP are ofter much better balanced than in packages (LR and C1 differing their rendering and attitude anyway towards colors, details, on-screen rendering.) I have a feeling that C1 does not dedicate precious time to this issue. I compared the M8 direct JPG with reality - and they often looked better balanced than the packages , implying the guys in Solms know their trade well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted April 14, 2015 Share #40 Posted April 14, 2015 Leica obviously assumes everyone shoots RAW with their M's and then resets in whatever RAW developer they use. JPEG's are obviously a long way down Leica's priority list and, given that they regard the M's are professional cameras, that might be a reasonable stance to take. Other makers give more priority to getting WB correct and providing good out-of-camera JPEG's. Would it be unreasonable to expect both good RAW and good JPEG images, with reasonably accurate WB? The JPEG's out of my Olympus EP-5, along with their WB is so good, I rarely bother with RAW from this camera. Other than quick posts for things like eBay, I never use anything other than RAW with my digital M's. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.