Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Learning
Photography Q&A
do you use a white balance?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="T-Man" data-source="post: 475984" data-attributes="member: 22038"><p>Ok, Wayne.</p><p></p><p>I'm not trying to make you into a convert. I'm just sharing what works for me. I'm pointing out that you're criticizing something you haven't actually tried. I'm addressing the fact you're making several incorrect assumptions. And you are incorrect on several fronts, as I've already noted.</p><p></p><p>You're incorrect about in-camera WB having no effect on a RAW image, because when you import the image into LR or PS, the WB setting in-camera is your default starting point. I prefer to have that starting point correct or as close to correct as possible before I get started processing the image. There is no downside to that, and I don't get why you insist on telling me my eyes don't see what they plainly see and why you keep assuming that since I disagree with what you've said, that means I haven't tried anything else or "haven't thought that out." I have indeed directly compared all of the various methods for setting WB in-camera thus far discussed, and have had the advantages plainly demonstrated to me, back to back, in the same environment and have seen the results side by side, firsthand. You have not, per your admission. </p><p></p><p>You said: "And of course, if you instead aim the Expodisk at the scene, it is falsely affected by colors in the scene, green trees or blue sky, etc. Have you thought that out?"</p><p></p><p>No, it is not "falsely affected," because all of those colors contribute to the incident light temp in the scene. It is "correctly affected." Sorry. </p><p></p><p>You said: "I use a different method. Because the raw WB tool is of course designed for the white card system. So is the camera Preset WB method.</p><p></p><p>In truth, I don't shoot JPG, so I only mess with the white card for any critical or important work, certainly for flash sessions, or sometimes obvious difficult cases, or where there will be many pictures in same lighting."</p><p></p><p>Wrong. The camera preset WB isn't "designed" for anything other than to receive light information from a neutral white/gray colored surface as affected by the environment you're shooting in. The camera doesn't care what source it uses to receive that information. </p><p></p><p>I don't shoot JPG either. At all. Ever. That's a non-sequitur. I just explained why setting custom WB is useful for RAW as well. I can't speak to how in-camera WB settings affects or doesn't affect a RAW image imported into any other RAW processing software other than Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop, as that's all I ever use. I can tell you your in-camera WB setting accompanies the RAW image imported into those 2 applications. The same situations where you say you use the white card for are the same situations where the Expodisk shines, and in fact has proven to me to be superior to the white/gray card. But wait, I thought you just said it wasn't useful to set a custom WB when you're shooting RAW. If you believe that to be the case, why even bother using the white card in any situation? And if you do use the white card, then you should know there is no "fiddling with menus" involved. That's the advantage us Nikon shooters have over the Canon shooters, with our handy dandy little "WB" button. Once you're in WB preset mode to begin with, changing to a different WB preset involves a simple press of the white balance and shutter buttons. Hardly daunting.</p><p></p><p>And, the instructions you quoted do not contradict what I said. I only said the Expodisk is picking up light from multiple sources and directions, not a single light source. If you do not wish to neutralize a particular light source, don't aim directly at that source. You can point it in any direction you wish, and as long as you are aiming it somewhere in the environment you're shooting and not into the shadows, you'll get a good result. Even if you didn't, so what? It's not as if you can't adjust in post. I also said it isn't required or even desirable for all situations and plainly explained its limitations. It's a useful tool to have, and I believe it's the best tool to use for in-camera WB for interior shots and portraits. Even if I used it in only for portraits, in controlled interior lighting exclusively, it's still worth the $50 I spent on it TO ME, as skin tones have always been the most difficult thing for me to get adjusted correctly in all situations.</p><p></p><p>Sorry, but it just irks me when people criticize stuff they've never actually tried.</p><p></p><p>Use whatever you have confidence in and works for you. Again, your mileage may vary...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="T-Man, post: 475984, member: 22038"] Ok, Wayne. I'm not trying to make you into a convert. I'm just sharing what works for me. I'm pointing out that you're criticizing something you haven't actually tried. I'm addressing the fact you're making several incorrect assumptions. And you are incorrect on several fronts, as I've already noted. You're incorrect about in-camera WB having no effect on a RAW image, because when you import the image into LR or PS, the WB setting in-camera is your default starting point. I prefer to have that starting point correct or as close to correct as possible before I get started processing the image. There is no downside to that, and I don't get why you insist on telling me my eyes don't see what they plainly see and why you keep assuming that since I disagree with what you've said, that means I haven't tried anything else or "haven't thought that out." I have indeed directly compared all of the various methods for setting WB in-camera thus far discussed, and have had the advantages plainly demonstrated to me, back to back, in the same environment and have seen the results side by side, firsthand. You have not, per your admission. You said: "And of course, if you instead aim the Expodisk at the scene, it is falsely affected by colors in the scene, green trees or blue sky, etc. Have you thought that out?" No, it is not "falsely affected," because all of those colors contribute to the incident light temp in the scene. It is "correctly affected." Sorry. You said: "I use a different method. Because the raw WB tool is of course designed for the white card system. So is the camera Preset WB method. In truth, I don't shoot JPG, so I only mess with the white card for any critical or important work, certainly for flash sessions, or sometimes obvious difficult cases, or where there will be many pictures in same lighting." Wrong. The camera preset WB isn't "designed" for anything other than to receive light information from a neutral white/gray colored surface as affected by the environment you're shooting in. The camera doesn't care what source it uses to receive that information. I don't shoot JPG either. At all. Ever. That's a non-sequitur. I just explained why setting custom WB is useful for RAW as well. I can't speak to how in-camera WB settings affects or doesn't affect a RAW image imported into any other RAW processing software other than Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop, as that's all I ever use. I can tell you your in-camera WB setting accompanies the RAW image imported into those 2 applications. The same situations where you say you use the white card for are the same situations where the Expodisk shines, and in fact has proven to me to be superior to the white/gray card. But wait, I thought you just said it wasn't useful to set a custom WB when you're shooting RAW. If you believe that to be the case, why even bother using the white card in any situation? And if you do use the white card, then you should know there is no "fiddling with menus" involved. That's the advantage us Nikon shooters have over the Canon shooters, with our handy dandy little "WB" button. Once you're in WB preset mode to begin with, changing to a different WB preset involves a simple press of the white balance and shutter buttons. Hardly daunting. And, the instructions you quoted do not contradict what I said. I only said the Expodisk is picking up light from multiple sources and directions, not a single light source. If you do not wish to neutralize a particular light source, don't aim directly at that source. You can point it in any direction you wish, and as long as you are aiming it somewhere in the environment you're shooting and not into the shadows, you'll get a good result. Even if you didn't, so what? It's not as if you can't adjust in post. I also said it isn't required or even desirable for all situations and plainly explained its limitations. It's a useful tool to have, and I believe it's the best tool to use for in-camera WB for interior shots and portraits. Even if I used it in only for portraits, in controlled interior lighting exclusively, it's still worth the $50 I spent on it TO ME, as skin tones have always been the most difficult thing for me to get adjusted correctly in all situations. Sorry, but it just irks me when people criticize stuff they've never actually tried. Use whatever you have confidence in and works for you. Again, your mileage may vary... [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Learning
Photography Q&A
do you use a white balance?
Top
