 Suzanne Colson |
White Balance Setting Problem I shoot in Raw and end up editing the white balance on a good deal of photos. I thought I would experiment with a Custom WB Setting. I have a Canon 30D and shoot at a 18% gray card in the same lighting condition. Now the problem is my photos are way too 'cool' and I am compensating for that. Am I missing something? I know that Canon used to suggest a white card, but their manual says that a gray card will work better. Can anybody give me some advice? Oh, I shoot the grey card using AWB, Manual Focus, about 12" from the card - just in case I am missing something?
|
|
|
|
||
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
A similar question garnered a response that gray cards aren't always a neutral gray. So, if yours happens to be one that isn't neutral gray, maybe somebody will be able to give you a brand name that's known for more fidelity. I've usually used a piece of inkjet paper if I carry something with me and intend on using a custom WB. I know being off on the exposure for the sample picture will make the WB off, but with a gray card, you should be okay by just pointing and shooting. If a different kind of gray card doesn't help, maybe you'll be closer with something white.
|
|
|
|
||
|
William Schuette |
Greg is right. There can be a difference between a gray card used for setting exposure and one for setting white balance. For the best solution, get an Expodisk, it allows you to set a custom white balance for any lighting situation beautifully. It runs about $120.00. For a cheaper alternative, try Whibal, a standardized card that you take a picture of and can set your white, black and gray points in post processing. Bill
|
|
|
|
||
|
Suzanne Colson |
Thank you everyone for your responses. I ended up trying another grey card and much better. What is interesting is there doesn't seem to be a noticeable difference other then the coating on the card so I was surprised. Again thanks!
|
|
|
|
||
|
John H. Siskin |
I don’t use Kodak cars to set the balance; the color is not neutral. I usually use a Mcbeth Color Checker. Thanks, John Siskin
|
|
|
|
||
|
Deborah Liperote |
Suzanne- this has nothing to do with your question but I just wanted to know ...are you the one that asked me about wedding photography? My husband deleted some of my emails before I got to respond to them.
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
Good job husband.
|
|
|
|
||
|
William Schuette |
Suzanne, you may have answered your own question. Some cards do have a protecgive coating on them and you have to watch for reflections off the card when you are metering or taking a shot for white balance or exposure. Bill
|
|
|
|
||
|
Diane L. Thomas |
I used the gray card up until now. Our club went to a local photographers studio and he told us about the One Shot Digital Calibration Target Go to the Photvision web site and (www.photovisionvideo.com)and check it out for your self. I haven't had it long and only used it once and really like it a lot. Diane Thomas
|
|
|
|
||
|
Danny Bruce |
I have a WhiBal and actually got to speak (prior to buying it) to Michael Tapes (creator of WhiBal). He explained how "easy" it was to get perfect color and how to batch hundreds of files (weddings) easily. Well, after getting it, and shooting a few weddings, I take a 'sample' whibal shot under the same lighting conditions as the formal group shots, then I open the Raw files inside my Canon DPP software, I view the whibal shot, choose the WB selector tool, click on the WhiBal (to color correct the shot), copy the recipe, and paste it to ALL the formal shots done under the same lighting. Well, the color cast DOES change, but it seems to change too much! It seems to "cool" down the photos TOO MUCH. They become very dull/cold. That just doesn't seem right. I can't get ahold of anyone at Whibal to ask about this. Any ideas anyone?
|
|
|
|
||
|
John H. Siskin |
I hope I don’t hate myself for posting this, but here goes. There seems to be a desire among photographers to spend money for a magical fix. I see this a lot. In this case I don’t understand why you need something more sophisticated than an 8X10 inch grey card to do a balance. The card needs to be neutral; if the card is slightly blue your files will be slightly yellow. If the card is green the files will be magenta. You walk over to the subject hold the card at arms length And take a picture. Balance all your raw files later in the proprietary program from you camera maker or in Photoshop CS2 or in whatever. I have a bunch of 30X40 inch plastic grey cards; if someone will tell me why it is essential that the target be this big, I could sell these things at a profit. If you put a device over you lens you are averaging the colors in your shot, not the lights in your shot. Use one of these discs in a blue room and let me know if you get a good grey balance. The great and powerful Oz said to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. By the way the reason I use the GretagMacbeth ColorChecker is that I have had one for years. I have always done a lot of photography for reproduction and these were a standard for defining accurate color. If you are trying top shoot events in jpg you will have some bad days whether you use a custom white balance or not. Please forgive my ranting. Thanks, John Siskin
|
|
|
|
||
|
Thomas A. Lohse |
I take a completely different approach - I leave the white balance setting in auto. No cards to carry around. I consider the ability to adjust white balance back on my computer the biggest advantage for shooting RAW. One less thing to worry about in the field means more concentration on the composition.
|
|
|
|
||
|
William Schuette |
Thomas, the only problem with your approach is that Adobe Camera Raw gives you an almost infinite variation of white balance possibilities. Without some reference, getting accurate color from memory is really a shot in the dark. Of course, if you are not concerned about color accuracy but are merely adjusting to your personal preference it doesn't really make a difference. I have used both the external reference card to set white balance in processing and an expodisk to set custom white balance. And forgiving all John's ranting ;), I prefer the expodisk and have not found a situation where it didn't work well. Bill
|
|
|
|
||
|
Bob Ashby |
Something that has not been mentioned and maybe it's assumed here is the calibration of the system. If your system is not calibrated and you have a correct profile for the printer/ink/paper combination, then you will chase a wild goose in a attempt to get the correct color for your final product. Bobby
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
The disk over the lens works by aiming at the light source. But it's still a ridiculous mark up and there's still other ways to accomplish the same goal. A rant without Iraq? Don't worry about it.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jennifer Fields |
I have a Canon 30D and I use a grey card for all my WB and am always pleased with the results. One thing you mentioned is that you shoot the grey card in AWB. When I did this I had color balance problems. You have to set the camera to custom white balance first, then take the picture of the grey card, then go into the menu and set the custom WB with the image of the grey card you just took. This makes all the difference!! -Jennifer
|
|
|
|
||
|
Suzanne Colson |
Thanks everyone for your responses. I tried what you suggested Jennifer and it seems to make a big difference. While shooting the grey card in AWB seems to work sometimes, shooting while set at the custom white balance setting works 99% of the time.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Scott Hampton |
Hi there. I'm new to BetterPhoto. Hi everyone! I used to shoot with a custom White Balance and got excellent results using an el cheapo grey card, a sheet of white paper, and an element in the same lighting that I believed was neutral, using in-camera metering. Not all at the same time, of course. Those are what I would use. I stopped using the grey card and the white paper because they damaged easily. I had a scrape across the grey card, and that affected the validity of it. Paper had a slight curve in it, as my thumb would leave a depression that forced the paper to move forward from my thumb. Neutral object in the scene? Still use it, if I need to. Tried the ExpoDisc and was impressed. I paid about $100 US for a 67mm ExpoDisc. I took it back, though. Inconsistent results, and couldn't always be used as intended (aiming back to the light source, for instance). It was good, but not as good as my new secret weapon. What's that? An incident light meter. I'm not an old-school film user, I'm all digital. And I use my meter. I have the BEST results using my meter. And, yes, I shoot RAW. CS2 doesn't really fuss when I shoot with my meter (a few subjective things, like if I WANT to shoot with heavy shadows). Why Because the exposure is dead on from an incident meter. As a matter of fact, I can even shoot JPG with my incident meter and not have to worry about color. I do that for small, quick jobs that can't justify the overhead of RAW. I'm budget-conscous, and don't want to spend on something that I won't use. Since I use strobes, I nneded the incident meter. Fortunately, it meters ambient light (regular room light, or "around you" light), so I kind of made the most of the investment. Hope this helps!
|
|
|
|
||
|
John H. Siskin |
Hi scott, I don't understand how you can use an incident light meter to set your color balance. I understand how you might find it useful for exposure; but If I am trying to shoot accurate color under fluorescent lights how will an incident meter reading help me? Thanks, John Siskin
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
|
|
|
|
||
|
William Schuette |
I think Scott missed the point of the Expodisk. It can be used to make your camera's meter function as an incident light meter by checking your in camera exposure readings while you are pointing your camera back toward the light source but that is not its intended purpose. Nor would it work for measuring strobe intensity since the duration of the light would be too short to measure with anything other than a flash meter. Bill
|
|
|
|
||
|
Scott Hampton |
Oops! Sorry, I forgot to put that in. Had to rush and wanted to drop a quick line. Sorry. Gregory L., I don't understand Homer there... John S., Yes, the WB setting has to be set, as well. I forgot to mention that. Here's what I do: get a light reading for the [area] that the subject is in (set it under their chin, or on their cheek in the lit side, for example). Dial those coordinates into my camera. Set the WB for the [area] that the subject is in. Fire a test shot or two. (Sometimes I may want to up the shutter speed a little to force a faster speed if I'm shooting in low light.) Shoot, blah, blah, blah. When I go to Camera RAW in CS2 there really isn't any color work to do in post...just cropping and a little cosmetic work (stray hair, create a missed catchlight, etc.) I was very familiar with the ExpoDisc. I WANTED to keep it. Didn't use if for strobes though, as that wouldn't work, hope that wasn't misinterpreted. So to summarize, I was saying that I found an incident light meter, coupled with putting those settings into my camera, and setting correct white balance (thanks, John), give me exposure that doesn't require color adjustments in Photoshop. Hope this helps, and sorry for any confusion!
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||