White balance problem

PatrickO

PatrickO

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,808
Name
Patrick
Edit My Images
Yes
Did a shoot in the park today and I'm having real trouble with the WB. I was shooting in RAW with WB set to auto. PP is with Lightroom3
I know I should have used a grey card, but I didn't . No flash, no reflector.
It was early afternoon and the light was changing as the sun and cloud came and went. I tried to keep my subjects in the shade most of the time.
I've tried taking the WB from the subjects white T-shirt but get different readings depending on where on the shirt I take the sample. TBH none of the readings from the shirt look right

This is an unedited SOC jpeg exported from Lightroom. How would you go about setting the WB?

fvFhkVx.jpg
 
Patrick, if you're shooting Raw and intend to edit your Raw images, then the WB setting is irrelevant. The WB setting only affects the Jpg's.
 
I am not an expert but would start by using the t shirt and then make the necessary adjustments with the sliders.
 
PatrickO said:
Did a shoot in the park today and I'm having real trouble with the WB. I was shooting in RAW with WB set to auto. PP is with Lightroom3
I know I should have used a grey card, but I didn't . No flash, no reflector.
It was early afternoon and the light was changing as the sun and cloud came and went. I tried to keep my subjects in the shade most of the time.
I've tried taking the WB from the subjects white T-shirt but get different readings depending on where on the shirt I take the sample. TBH none of the readings from the shirt look right

This is an unedited SOC jpeg exported from Lightroom. How would you go about setting the WB?
Click to expand...

Get your whites right first and the rest will follow, manually set your temperature and tint. This shot looks underexposed so you need to adjust that as well.
 
Last edited:
The couple have taken on a green/yellow tinge because of the tree canopy. I'm not on a calibrated monitor but a from a rough edit you need to take the temp towards the blues about -5 to -10 and the tint away from the greens about +25. The exposure and contrast also both need to be increased. I have LR 5 which means I can paint on these adjustments on the couple only thus keeping the green canopy. I don't think you can do this on LR 3. Adding a vignette I think is a further improvement.

Edit: very rough edit:

[url=https://flic.kr/p/nokZhQ]fvFhkVx-3 by Zambog, on Flickr[/URL]
 
Last edited:
chphotos said:
Patrick, if you're shooting Raw and intend to edit your Raw images, then the WB setting is irrelevant. The WB setting only affects the Jpg's.
Click to expand...

Thanks Cliff. Yes I know that, but I want set the WB for exporting a JPEG

sep9001 said:
I am not an expert but would start by using the t shirt and then make the necessary adjustments with the sliders.
Click to expand...

Thanks Kev, as I say the T-shirt is giving me wildly differing readings depending on where I sample from .

JennyGW said:
Get your whites right first and the will follow, manually set your temperature and tint. This shot looks underexposed so you need to adjust that as well.
Click to expand...

Thanks Jenny. Setting from the white is giving strange looking and wildly varying results depending on where I sample from. Yes I haven't started PP for contrast, exposure etc.

zednini said:
The couple have taken on a green/yellow tinge because of the tree canopy. I'm not on a calibrated monitor but a from a rough edit you need to take the temp towards the blues about -5 to -10 and the tint away from the greens about +25. The exposure and contrast also both need to be increased. I have LR 5 which means I can paint on these adjustments on the couple only thus keeping the green canopy. I don't think you can do this on LR 3. Adding a vignette I think is a further improvement.
Click to expand...

Thanks Gerry. Have tried the settings you suggest and this is the result. (Yes, I know it needs exposure/contrast etc, but just trying to get the WB clear in my head)
What do you think?

SN3v0lI.jpg


Edit: Think our posts crossed.
 
Last edited:
Patrick, I think with exposure and contrast adjustments you'll be getting close on the couple. Again however I am on an uncalibrated monitor !
 
"Thanks Jenny. Setting from the white is giving strange looking and wildly varying results depending on where I sample from. Yes I haven't started PP for contrast, exposure etc."

I don't mean pick a point. I mean use the sliders to adjust the temperature and tint manually. Use your eyes to judge, not automatic.

Your edit is still VERY underexposed. Are you using a calibrated display?
 
Sort the exposure (about +1 in LR) and the white(about -30 in LR) and then you can easily set the WB from his shirt. In JPG Temp +36, tint +13. Will be different in RAW

4379-1398636956-3e6016d8358d587ad0521d1ca59e843a.jpg
 
JennyGW said:
"Thanks Jenny. Setting from the white is giving strange looking and wildly varying results depending on where I sample from. Yes I haven't started PP for contrast, exposure etc."

I don't mean pick a point. I mean use the sliders to adjust the temperature and tint manually. Use your eyes to judge, not automatic.

Your edit is still VERY underexposed. Are you using a calibrated display?
Click to expand...

Ah yes I see what you mean now.
Now I view it here it does look underexposed.
No I'm using my rubbish laptop screen. Hoping to order a decent screen and calibration equipment soon.
 
I think the edit by Zednini is about the closest. Here's my attempt. In RAW edit (Photoshop CC) I just cooled the WB slightly, adjusted the exposure, selectively lightened their hair (more detail now). The result was a little cool on their skin so in Photoshop I added a slight warming layer. I also cropped it a lot. They are presumably a loving couple and so you want surely to focus on them, not all the background trees?

 
It's not always best to use a white shirt for the WB, a shadow on it or better still grey is a better bet, I'd also advise putting highlight clipping warning on in lightroom, it's a really bad idea to set WB from a clipped area.
 
swanseamale47 said:
Interesting, camera raw (same processing engine) will let you WB from a clipped area (I just tried it)
Click to expand...

although LR won't let you select from an area clippe in you initial photo, it will allow you to select from an area thats become clipped as a result of your processing (if that makes sense)
 
boyfalldown said:
although LR won't let you select from an area clippe in you initial photo, it will allow you to select from an area thats become clipped as a result of your processing (if that makes sense)
Click to expand...
Yes it makes sense to me as the sliders are in the order Adobe would prefer you to use, so WB first won't matter later (in theory)
 
PatrickO said:
Yes.
But, LR3 (which I have) only allows global correction for the whole image.
I believe later versions of LR allow you to correct selected areas.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Patrick. I've only used Photoshop, so I wasn't sure how far LR would go.
 
boyfalldown said:
Sort the exposure (about +1 in LR) and the white(about -30 in LR) and then you can easily set the WB from his shirt. In JPG Temp +36, tint +13. Will be different in RAW

4379-1398636956-3e6016d8358d587ad0521d1ca59e843a.jpg
Click to expand...


Sorry.. but that's just way off.. it's yellow!!
 
How does that affect colour?
 
Pookeyhead said:
Sorry.. but that's just way off.. it's yellow!!
Click to expand...

I'm inclined to agree. I like the suggestion just to bring it in by eye, rather than do any analysis of the t-shirt (which isn't known to be truly white in any case). Zednini's edit is pretty close to my eye.
 
swanseamale47 said:
Interesting, camera raw (same processing engine) will let you WB from a clipped area (I just tried it)
Click to expand...

It's pointless trying to adjust WB from a clipped area, because it's clipped :) R255, G255, B255. It's already neutral... it's already white and has no colour cast to remove, so it's highly unlikely using it as a colour temperature point will achieve anything, or if it does change anything, will be far from accurate.

Colour balance is subjective anyway. I wouldn't panic over it. If you are being a perfectionist, then the only real way to be sure is a grey card as reference. Without that, anything you do is guesswork. Clearly the problem here though is scatered green light from the forest, so all that is actually required is a reduction in green until the skin tones look natural. SOme +exp comp because it's under exposed, and a little shallow s-curve for punch. Being a JPEG your shadows have suffered due to incorrect exposure though.

Dn17IOY.jpg


Increased saturation a wee bit... I just thought her hair looked fab like that... but that's a personal thing.
 
Zednini's edit is excellent, all the others look from poor to terrible.
I hate to agree with Pookey (I really really do) but Boyfalldown's was monstrously amber and overexposed to my eyes on my cheapo LG monitor.

What I find strange is how the OP can't get exactly the same as Zednini (different crop for some reason?) even with his suggestions, is there some other processing going on?
I have to say : the flesh colour is deeply affected by the green light from the leaves, maybe there is nothing good to save here.
 
I really appreciate all advice. The posted pics all have their strengths. Which is "best" is, of course, subjective.

I have a decent monitor arriving tomorrow and will start working on the the whole set. Yes there are lots more! With varying light conditions.

Part of the reason for wanting an objective WB measure was to try to get the set looking consistent. Looks like I will be doing each pic by eye.
 
JennyGW said:
Thanks, Patrick. I've only used Photoshop, so I wasn't sure how far LR would go.
Click to expand...

I'm a big fan of LR. I do 99% of my PP with it and only rarely go into Photoshop. LR really speeds up the workflow and is great for organising folder/files/images.
 
View attachment 10437
That's my best shot at it.

As far as I know if you shoot in RAW the white balance does not work in camera. You have to alter it in post processing if you are not happy with it.
If I shoot using jpeg I use a grey card or white piece of paper to set white balance.For the above photo I would have used auto white balance.
 
shapeshifter said:
That's my best shot at it.

As far as I know if you shoot in RAW the white balance does not work in camera. You have to alter it in post processing if you are not happy with it.
If I shoot using jpeg I use a grey card or white piece of paper to set white balance.For the above photo I would have used auto white balance.
Click to expand...

That's good. I think one of the problems is that there is a differential cast over the couple it seems stronger at the top and on the girl's face.

I'm no expert but I think the white balance in a RAW file is carried in a tag which sits alongside the RAW data. When you import it the white balance is initially set by the tagged info. If you change the balance you are substituting your balance for the tagged balance and working directly on the RAW data. In the jpeg the white balance is of course hard wired. Any adjustments you make are on top of the existing adjustments.
 
shapeshifter said:
View attachment 10437
That's my best shot at it.

As far as I know if you shoot in RAW the white balance does not work in camera. You have to alter it in post processing if you are not happy with it.
If I shoot using jpeg I use a grey card or white piece of paper to set white balance.For the above photo I would have used auto white balance.
Click to expand...

When you shoot RAW the white balance is applied to the temporary JPG that you chimp on the cameras LCD screen. The wb setting is also applied when you bring the RAW image into ACR or Lightroom. The difference with a RAW file is that you can easily change from the settings used when shot.

When you edit a RAW file no physical changes are actually made to the file at all. It is a non-destructive edit.

One thing to note is that it is nigh impossible to accurately adjust white balance of your exposure is wrong.
 
Last edited:
Here's my edit, Patrick. It's obviously the best because I'm so totally ace. ;)

14060245932_14d46739a9_o.jpg
 
shapeshifter said:
View attachment 10437
That's my best shot at it.

As far as I know if you shoot in RAW the white balance does not work in camera. You have to alter it in post processing if you are not happy with it.
If I shoot using jpeg I use a grey card or white piece of paper to set white balance.For the above photo I would have used auto white balance.
Click to expand...

He has green hair!
 
boyfalldown said:
I love your intelligent contribution - every time :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

As much as I loved your edit, lol ;) Lighten up :D

You must have missed all the other replies I have made on this thread, I wonder why that could be, lol
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top