White Balance...

A

alfaholic

Banned
Hello everyone...

I would like to know what would you say about white balance in photos below. Do you think skin tones are correct, or maybe little warmer?

Everything else is not important, just white balance.
My friend made those photos, and people who print his photos told him that white balance is way off, but on my calibrated monitor photos look ok, maybe little bit on the warm side, but still within normal parameters.

BBB_0625.jpg

BBB_0640.jpg

BBB_0643.jpg

BBB_0665.jpg

BBB_0667.jpg

BBB_0670.jpg

BBB_0723.jpg

BBB_0731.jpg
 
K

Krs_2007

Senior Member
The first few look under exposed. You should adjust to get them to look like the last one. I like the last one the most as far as exposure, the white balance appears ok but adjust exposure and shadows and then re-upload before I say anything about white balance.
 
A

alfaholic

Banned
Thank you.

This is all JPG straight from the camera. My friend shoot that way, he sells photos on place. Do not ask me anything, that is just his way to do it. I ask this because people who print his photos told him that camera is broken, but I think it is just the opposite.
Do you think f8 was wrong aperture and that is why photos are little bit dark?
 
W

WayneF

Senior Member
alfaholic said:
Hello everyone...

I would like to know what would you say about white balance in photos below. Do you think skin tones are correct, or maybe little warmer?


View attachment 111428
Click to expand...

bbb_0643b.jpg



Mostly, it just needs about one stop more exposure. And the JPG compression setting is way too high, visible JPG artifacts - there's no excuse for that. :) (EDIT: This is probably in your editor save, and I should have worded this: JPG Quality setting is way too low).

For WB, I just clicked on the white dress. Not much change, just removed a bit of yellow, and removed a slight bit more magenta. Not much change.
 
Last edited:
P

photogramps

Senior Member
Definitely they are under-exposed and IMO the white balance is off as well.
When using a flash it is best to get the subjects to stand away from walls to avoid the dark shadows on the walls behind them.
f8 in a dark room will likely produce dark photos unless there is sufficient additional lighting.
 
K

Krs_2007

Senior Member
^ exactly what Wayne said, this can be adjusted for jpg but its just more of a reason to use RAW. Nothing wrong with the aperture as long as you need it, its more about the shutter speed and light that is wrong which is making these dark.
 
Horoscope Fish

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
White balance appears pretty good to me as well; possibly a very minor tweak in some of them... Maybe.

Exposure is an issue, definitely, but you're not asking about that. Correct the exposure, though, and the whites start looking white of course which makes me wonder if maybe someone simply doesn't really understand what "white balance" is?

Here's your first shot with a +1.00 EV added. I'm no expert but the white balance looks pretty spot on to me (it's certainly not "way off"):
....
0625.jpg

....
 
D

Don Kuykendall_RIP

RIP :(
I agree with the the others. WB is probably close enough but the exposure is off and that will affect how the WB looks.

Just another reason to shoot RAW and do a proper Post Processing. It would take about a minute to make it look great with a RAW file

BBB_0625.jpg
 
Last edited:
A

alfaholic

Banned
Thank you all.

Picture control was Standard, maybe natural is better for less contrast and saturation, for my eyes portraits are better without too much saturation and contrast.
 
Horoscope Fish

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
alfaholic said:
Thank you all.

Picture control was Standard, maybe natural is better for less contrast and saturation, for my eyes portraits are better without too much saturation and contrast.
Click to expand...
When shooting JPG what I find works well when shooting outdoors is "Landscape". I set "Sharpening" to +6 and leave the other settings at default.

For shooting JPG's when indoors I use "Standard" with "Saturation" set to +1 and Sharpening set to +6.

This might be something to experiment with to see what you think works best for you.

....

....
 
Last edited:
G

Geoffc

Senior Member
alfaholic said:
Thank you.

This is all JPG straight from the camera. My friend shoot that way, he sells photos on place. Do not ask me anything, that is just his way to do it. I ask this because people who print his photos told him that camera is broken, but I think it is just the opposite.
Do you think f8 was wrong aperture and that is why photos are little bit dark?
Click to expand...

I'm not being funny, but did you say he sells them?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
E

Eyelight

Senior Member
Colors do not look off to me, but I don't have the best of screens to get very critical. The background is common with skin tone and that messes with the old eye/brain. Here is a more neutral background and the only change other than the download & upload. Not a perfect change, but meant just to show the idea.

BBB_0625.jpg
 
Last edited:
A

alfaholic

Banned
Geoffc said:
I'm not being funny, but did you say he sells them?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Click to expand...
Oh yes. :)
People who make money working this job usually shoot jpg only and print directly from SD card.
I understand why, but the answer includes psychology and sociology more than anything else.
I can explain if you want... :)
 
G

Geoffc

Senior Member
alfaholic said:
Oh yes. :)
People who make money working this job usually shoot jpg only and print directly from SD card.
I understand why, but the answer includes psychology and sociology more than anything else.
I can explain if you want... :)
Click to expand...

Well I'm shocked, or maybe I'm not :confused: I would have thought if somebody is handing over cash for photographs they would do so because they were of a professional quality that was better than they could expect from a point and shoot camera operated by a photography novice.

If you're going to take jpg and print straight from the card with no processing you need to be on top of your game in terms of exposure, white balance and general lighting of the scene or you will end up with flat, underexposed shadowy pictures that look like ....... well we know what they would look like :rolleyes: Personally I only achieve those things on a good day when I'm doing everything properly, which is why I shoot raw which often saves my bacon.

Now I don't know the context in which the photographs were taken, how much your friend charges or whether the psychology and sociology includes intimidating the victims, so there may be a reason why people are happy, or relieved to handover cash for the photos. Hopefully the range of services does not extend to weddings as that could really shatter someones dreams.

Please don't take my reply as nasty as my initial response was genuine based only on the photos posted however more and more we see people posting on this forum and others saying that they are starting their professional career this weekend shooting a paid wedding and by the way "what lens, flash, settings should I use?". This proliferation of would be pro photographers has ruined the industry for those who can actually take a good album. Personally I am only an amateur and whilst I would say that I'm reasonably competent I'm not sure that I would currently charge for my work.

In answer to the original post, I'm sure you friend uses a grey card to set the white balance in order to create the best off the camera images so it should be spot on :) Seriously though, if he's having WB problems, this is the answer and is the only time I'm happy with my un-adjusted images. I don't always do it and as a result I spend time messing around in lightroom.
 
A

alfaholic

Banned
Thank you very much.
I agree with everything you said, but I would just remind you that there are some cultural differences between people living in different parts of our planet.

I can say two things, first one is that people here very slowly accept any changes, and second thing is that in this country people do not live well as they lived 20 or 30 years a go. We had some nasty wars and conflicts, this country was once soft socialist, now we are still in transition to capitalism which is at its death, so people live hard and earn about 300 Euro per month.

When you do not have enough money for your family, and you work some illogical jobs to make money only for food and to pay school for your children, then you do not have time to learn more about art, science, aesthetics, you do not have will to do anything other than survive.
Everything you can is stick to some old rules your parents had, they lived very well but it was because of the global politics, not because they did not have modern technology, then the next thing you do is to turn to religion and patriotism which is everything to people who does not have anything else in their lives.

Yes, photographers here mostly shoot JPG and print straight from the camera, they sell their photos to guests on the weddings, birthdays, baptism, they also get some money from people employed them, so most of them make from 100 to 200 Euro per job, so it is understandable they mostly shoot with D70, D80, D90, D7000, but that is not excuse for not editing their photos.

Grey card? Raw? Postprocessing?
Oh please. :)
Those are all foreign and nasty words. :)

I am an amateur, but I would work for half of that price if I can choose to shoot raw and edit my photos.
But, people think only about money, so if someone ask them to make photos like this they will do it, no matter it is destructive and it will ruin the business globally.
I would not accept the job if I can have my minimum of quality, but then they will employ someone who will work for 3 times less money, someone who bought some cheap old camera and shoot only jpg with flash directly in the face, but then we are again at the beginning: people generally - employers, do not know anything about photography and quality so the do not care who is photographing and how, they only want their faces to be sharp and that is it.
If you try to use shallow DOF you are in trouble, they will complain about blurry photos and that just goes on and on...
:)
 
Last edited:
G

Geoffc

Senior Member
alfaholic said:
Thank you very much.
I agree with everything you said, but I would just remind you that there are some cultural differences between people living in different parts of our planet.

I can say two things, first one is that people here very slowly accept any changes, and second thing is that in this country people do not live well as they lived 20 or 30 years a go. We had some nasty wars and conflicts, this country was once soft socialist, now we are still in transition to capitalism which is at its death, so people live hard and earn about 300 Euro per month.

When you do not have enough money for your family, and you work some illogical jobs to make money only for food and to pay school for your children, then you do not have time to learn more about art, science, aesthetics, you do not have will to do anything other than survive.
Everything you can is stick to some old rules your parents had, they lived very well but it was because of the global politics, not because they did not have modern technology, then the next thing you do is to turn to religion and patriotism which is everything to people who does not have anything else in their lives.

Yes, photographers here mostly shoot JPG and print straight from the camera, they sell their photos to guests on the weddings, birthdays, baptism, they also get some money from people employed them, so most of them make from 100 to 200 Euro per job, so it is understandable they mostly shoot with D70, D80, D90, D7000, but that is not excuse for not editing their photos.

Grey card? Raw? Postprocessing?
Oh please. :)
Those are all foreign and nasty words. :)

I am an amateur, but I would work for half of that price if I can choose to shoot raw and edit my photos.
But, people think only about money, so if someone ask them to make photos like this they will do it, no matter it is destructive and it will ruin the business globally.
I would not accept the job if I can have my minimum of quality, but then they will employ someone who will work for 3 times less money, someone who bought some cheap old camera and shoot only jpg with flash directly in the face, but then we are again at the beginning: people generally - employers, do not know anything about photography and quality so the do not care who is photographing and how, they only want their faces to be sharp and that is it.
If you try to use shallow DOF you are in trouble, they will complain about blurry photos and that just goes on and on...
:)
Click to expand...

I appreciate people need to make some money and if the standards reflect what is the norm and expected that's fine. I'm not paying so it's not a problem to me.

I didn't suggest he shoot raw, I just said that I do as it often saves me. What I said was you need to nail the settings (exposure etc) when shooting jpg as what you see is what you get.

A grey card or equivalent is virtually free and takes ten seconds to set so that's easy and will ensure the jpgs are correct. As for the cameras you mention, they are all good a capable of taking great pictures. I had a D70 so I know what they can do. Again, with older gear it's more important that you get a good capture.

Anyway, probably enough said on the matter, as I was just surprised when you initially said he sold the images, however you have now added some context.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
R

rocketman122

Senior Member
colors are fine. the flash neutralized a lot of that color cast. dont worry about it. its the wall paint that you cant deal with. I always say, you deal with the best under the circumstances you were given. no need for color balance.

exposure though, they are far from consistent. some 1/3 off some 1/2 and some 2/3 off.

5th pic is good and the last is about 1/2 over. you should overexpose females about 1/3 stop but when shooting also look what color their skin is. if theyre pale then under a bit and it will calculate it properly.

was the ceiling the same paint color?
 
A

alfaholic

Banned
rocketman122 said:
colors are fine. the flash neutralized a lot of that color cast. dont worry about it. its the wall paint that you cant deal with. I always say, you deal with the best under the circumstances you were given. no need for color balance.

exposure though, they are far from consistent. some 1/3 off some 1/2 and some 2/3 off.

5th pic is good and the last is about 1/2 over. you should overexpose females about 1/3 stop but when shooting also look what color their skin is. if theyre pale then under a bit and it will calculate it properly.

was the ceiling the same paint color?
Click to expand...

Thank you very much.

I really do not know, it is my friend's work, but I think the ceiling was white.
 
Top