Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="WayneF" data-source="post: 443905" data-attributes="member: 12496">Fuss is about the right word, WB can be difficult.&nbsp; &nbsp; The tools are easy, but without help, sometimes it's hard to know what's right.&nbsp; &nbsp; Which is really not the same thing as not caring what's right.&nbsp; <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; I'm thinking maybe you are just not very critical of Auto WB yet.&nbsp; <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp;&nbsp; All it can know is what actual colors it sees in the scene, but it has no way to know anything about the light, or what color they should be.&nbsp;&nbsp; But if there is a wide range in an average scene, including white, it can often get close then.&nbsp; Other times, it can't.&nbsp; Easily fooled, like a picture of all green foliage...&nbsp; My notion is (maybe excepting bright direct sun), that WB generally always needs human attention.I would suggest getting a good White Balance card (Porta Brace brand, $5 at B&amp;H), and try including it in a few scenes (try a few different lighting situations, outdoors, and&nbsp; incandescent and flash, etc), and then clicking it with the WB tool, to see the difference that correct WB can make (compared to Auto or other camera settings).&nbsp; You only include it in the first test shot, and correct the rest in the same light from it.My only experience with Capture NX is that it came free with a D300, so I tried to like it once.&nbsp;&nbsp; Just couldn't though, Adobe is just too strong.&nbsp; Others seemed to like Capture, but I concluded they just didn't know better.&nbsp; <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; (this obviously reflects my strong bias).&nbsp; Don't have to overtly copy settings to other files (extra steps) - you can, but you can also simply select all the files and then make the setting.&nbsp;&nbsp; This is wonderful when you have a hundred pictures in a studio session, all in the same light.&nbsp; You don't want to repeat the same work a hundred times.Capture was created by NIX, which was bought by Google, and so no more Nikon product.&nbsp; However, Nikon has a new one now, Capture NX-D.&nbsp; I don't know who makes it, but it is free, as of now.&nbsp; &nbsp;<a href="http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Imaging-Software/Capture-NX-D.html" target="_blank">Nikon Capture NX-D RAW Processing Software | Software for Nikon Digital Cameras</a></blockquote>

[QUOTE="WayneF, post: 443905, member: 12496"] Fuss is about the right word, WB can be difficult. The tools are easy, but without help, sometimes it's hard to know what's right. Which is really not the same thing as not caring what's right. :) I'm thinking maybe you are just not very critical of Auto WB yet. :) All it can know is what actual colors it sees in the scene, but it has no way to know anything about the light, or what color they should be. But if there is a wide range in an average scene, including white, it can often get close then. Other times, it can't. Easily fooled, like a picture of all green foliage... My notion is (maybe excepting bright direct sun), that WB generally always needs human attention. I would suggest getting a good White Balance card (Porta Brace brand, $5 at B&H), and try including it in a few scenes (try a few different lighting situations, outdoors, and incandescent and flash, etc), and then clicking it with the WB tool, to see the difference that correct WB can make (compared to Auto or other camera settings). You only include it in the first test shot, and correct the rest in the same light from it. My only experience with Capture NX is that it came free with a D300, so I tried to like it once. Just couldn't though, Adobe is just too strong. Others seemed to like Capture, but I concluded they just didn't know better. :) (this obviously reflects my strong bias). Don't have to overtly copy settings to other files (extra steps) - you can, but you can also simply select all the files and then make the setting. This is wonderful when you have a hundred pictures in a studio session, all in the same light. You don't want to repeat the same work a hundred times. Capture was created by NIX, which was bought by Google, and so no more Nikon product. However, Nikon has a new one now, Capture NX-D. I don't know who makes it, but it is free, as of now. [URL="http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Imaging-Software/Capture-NX-D.html"]Nikon Capture NX-D RAW Processing Software | Software for Nikon Digital Cameras[/URL] [/QUOTE]

Verification