Custom white balance

R

RegG

Suspended / Banned
Messages
177
Name
Reg
Edit My Images
Yes
I have been reading up on the use of ND filters and have found a lot of very useful tips on this excellent forum. One thing keeps cropping up and that is the suggested use of a Custom White Balance. However, I can't seem to find any simple instructions on how to set a CWB and what to use to set it. For example, it has been suggested that a piece of grey or white card is used to set a CWB.

Can anyone give me more detailed instructions on what to use, how to set a CWB, and when I should be using it please?
 
Thanks to Flightphoto and Russellsnr for the prompt replies.

Flightphoto - the link you posted was very useful and has explained how to go about setting a CWB very clearly - thanks again.

Russellsnr - the piece of kit you recommended looks very useful but is probably a little OTT for my level of experience! Also, being retired and on a limited budget, I would not be able to justify the expense at this time! Thanks again for your reply though.

:thumbs:
 
russellsnr said:
Reg, If cost is a factor have a look at this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUIyHCjJy6Y
You don't have to buy there exact product as there are similar to be had on Ebay ranging from about £9
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/12-Collap...230?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item35b1f11fc6

Russ
Click to expand...

Hi Russ,

Thanks for taking the time to reply and point me in the right direction. I've had a quick look at both links. The You Tube video looks to be very informative and the item on eBay is more within my limited budget. I will try to sit down later and watch the video in its entirety and will, hopefully, understand what I need to do!

Thanks again, Reg :thumbs:
 
Custom white balance is explained in the camera handbook. You don't need anything special, just a piece of white paper.
 
RegG said:
and when I should be using it please?
Click to expand...

can't see anyone answering this bit.. heres an extreme example.. however its a fairly regular one for me..

indoor sports hall... take a picture and everyhting has a strong yellow/orange tint.. if you take a picture of somehting white and use those settings to set the custome WB and shoot again.. colours look better and the yellow/orange tint gone...

its hard to get it perfect from ornage tint to proper colours.. heres an example of before and after i set mine in camera.. canon 1dmkIV
wb.jpg




lots of people will tell you not to bother.. to shoot in raw and then fix on computer.. that to me is the same as saying.. go take a bad picture on purpose and fix it later..
 
KIPAX said:
lots of people will tell you not to bother.. to shoot in raw and then fix on computer.. that to me is the same as saying.. go take a bad picture on purpose and fix it later..
Click to expand...

I'm a little confused by this so bare with me whilst I explain what I thought then tell me im wrong if need be.

At the time of shooting the camera tries to decide the wb temp and stores that value with the image. Likewise if you set the white balance in camera that wb temp is stored. Now the rear screen preview uses the in camera jpg processing and the white balance stored to produce the preview. Correct wb in the previews is obviously a good thing.

Now assuming that you are shooting jpg....job done. Correct wb in jpg.

But if you are shooting raw, that wb is just an arbitrary value assigned as it can be changed in post. You can set or change this in post, either as a guess or based on the grey target reading.

One obvious disadvantage is that you'd need the target in the same light as you are shooting, in the case of a sports event that may not be 100% right, but this is a problem for both raw and jpg shooters alike.

now your comment has gotten me second guessing these ideas. I can see the point in getting exposure correct even in raw, as pushing / pulling exposures can introduce issues but I'm struggling to get my head around the point with white balance.
 
PistolPeteUK said:
Now assuming that you are shooting jpg....job done. Correct wb in jpg.
Click to expand...

There ya go :)

PistolPeteUK said:
But if you are shooting raw,
Click to expand...


PistolPeteUK said:
You can set or change this in post,.
Click to expand...

OK and lets say that works great... Am I missing your point somewhere? your still saying shoot a bad picture and fix later..if the only point of shooting in raw is to do that then thats wrong IMHO

My point is.. if you can a) take a good picture in camera.. or b) take a bad picture then make equally as good fixing later... then i would prefer a)... wouldnt you?

if someone is shooting in raw for whatever reason then the problem is probably mute.. but telling someone to shoot in raw so they can fix white balance is wrong IMHO ..

you need to remeber not everyone wants to shoot in raw.. I never do.. many others dont.. but those that do then....whatever :)
 
KIPAX said:
OK and lets say that works great... Am I missing your point somewhere? your still saying shoot a bad picture and fix later..if the only point of shooting in raw is to do that then thats wrong IMHO

My point is.. if you can a) take a good picture in camera.. or b) take a bad picture then make equally as good fixing later... then i would prefer a)... wouldnt you?

if someone is shooting in raw for whatever reason then the problem is probably mute.. but telling someone to shoot in raw so they can fix white balance is wrong IMHO ..

you need to remeber not everyone wants to shoot in raw.. I never do.. many others dont.. but those that do then....whatever :)
Click to expand...

I shoot in raw but IMO your point is equally valid.

When I shoot a show, I still set a white balance that loosely reflects the type of lighting in use (not type, not temperature). I do this because, while I could correct this in post, I would rather not have to spend the time doing it.

Then I only correct the ones where the lighting changed dramatically from what I predicted.

Other stuff I shoot, like outdoor stuff, wildlife etc. Yep, always set a white balance either as daylight or custom. same reason, saving time in post.

I'd rather spend my lightroom time improving an image rather than fixing it :D
 
RichardtheSane said:
I'd rather spend my lightroom time improving an image rather than fixing it :D
Click to expand...

I think thats a very important distinction.. RAW being used to improve rather than fix.. don't know if everyone will get what I mean.. but thats basically the way I see RAW

Its the concept of taking a bad picture on purpose and the only reason to shoot RAW is to fix later..that concept to me is absoloutly 100% bad!
 
Isn't the main problem with correcting white balance after, that it's guesswork to get it right?
 
Quoting me acknowledging the need to set white balance for jpg is all well and good but kinda pointless as I queried your comment about shooting raw.

How is it shooting a bad picture when its simply a value that can set before or after the fact with absolutely no detriment to the data? I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm geniunely failing to see this point.

Yes I see the points about not having to it in post as it's quicker, but surely as that's just the case of setting it once for an image and syncing (for Lightroom users) that's no slower than setting it at the time - doesn't mean its a bad picture.

I also see the point about guessing the correct white balance after shooting, but surely if you are not in a position to shoot a grey target you are guessing at the time anyway so another moot point.
 
I'm with PistolPeteUK on this one.I don't see using RAW to correct the WB as fixing a deliberately badly taken picture. I just think it's less faff than carrying a piece of card or paper around with you.

As someone who used to shoot film, it would have been good to have the opportunity to change the WB when I took night shots using normal daylight film.
 
KIPAX said:
I think thats a very important distinction.. RAW being used to improve rather than fix.. don't know if everyone will get what I mean.. but thats basically the way I see RAW Its the concept of taking a bad picture on purpose and the only reason to shoot RAW is to fix later..that concept to me is absoloutly 100% bad!
Click to expand...

Well, if you consider a scenario where you're going out to take black and white images with a digital camera, you might treat a colour RAW file equally as 'bad' as a poorly white-balanced image intended for colour reproduction. It does not properly represent the intended result.

If we were to follow your logic, why not put a yellow or red filter on the front of the lens and leave the monochrome preview conversion on the camera and in Lightroom or Photoshop at defaults?

I will confess, though, that for various reasons I have done and do do this on occasion. :)

However, you gain some flexibility in doing the b/w conversion in PP. Is that 'fixing' it later?

I do a fair number of night cityscapes, where you have a huge mix of different light sources and it is impossible or impractical to get to the other side of the Thames just to get a colour reading of the light on a particular building. Choosing your white balance in those situations is as much a question of mood and interpretation for the individual photo as it is about getting it 'accurate', whatever that may be in that context - it's far better to do that in PP when you are looking at the image on a properly calibrated screen.

Of course, I can appreciate that if you're firing off several hundred shots at a sports event where you may have critical deadlines to meet, then that approach would be totally unsuitable. It's really a matter of tailoring workflow to each photographer's individual needs.
 
Last edited:
But surely, even if you're taking hundreds of shots at a sports event, you will only send a very small selection off so if, for example, you send off 10, it wouldn't take much time to tweak the WB in RAW for just those, unless you are referring to taking Jpegs.
 
KIPAX said:
lots of people will tell you not to bother.. to shoot in raw and then fix on computer.. that to me is the same as saying.. go take a bad picture on purpose and fix it later..
Click to expand...

Totally agree. Get the best pic you can in camera, and then if taken in RAW improve when processing. :) If it needs it. ;)
 
redhed17 said:
Totally agree. Get the best pic you can in camera, and then if taken in RAW improve when processing. :) If it needs it. ;)
Click to expand...

I generally shoot using cloudy in camera and it only changes if im indoors. And I do change it in raw but ive tried the whole changing dependant on the lighting and the truth is im never happy. I shoot nikon and nikon looooves green. Canon loves red so I find I have to up the reds a little to make the shot look how I want it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top