View Full Version : Let's talk White Balance...
HoldyourfireAl
10-20-2008, 11:38 PM
Lately, I've been keeping wb set to shade, if I'm taking pics on a sunny day outside or of people inside when using a flash. I feel that I'm getting better color saturation. By the way, I'm using an XSi.
Thoughts?
HoldyourfireAl
10-20-2008, 11:42 PM
What pic do you prefer?
http://holdyourfireal.smugmug.com/photos/394423621_QpBG6-X2.jpg
http://holdyourfireal.smugmug.com/photos/394424969_fUYtN-X2.jpg
P1X4R
10-21-2008, 12:11 AM
second one looks more natural. very "cool" tone compared to the "warmer" one which is fine also.
that's the beauty of digital.
P1X4R
10-21-2008, 12:20 AM
btw, i'm really bad when it comes to white balance. :D
i usually set it to auto correction in LightRoom.
HoldyourfireAl
10-21-2008, 01:16 AM
I kinda like the warmer tone.
I'd say it depends on what you wanted from the shot. Both look great in their own ways.
I think the 2nd image is a more natural look, but the 1st makes it feel more like autumn, bringing out the yellows and oranges more.
Like I said, I guess it depends what you're aiming for.
Almart
10-21-2008, 09:48 AM
I had issues with both so decided to do a photoshop tweek for you !!!:D
mongobredboy
10-21-2008, 10:25 AM
id have to go with kujo, sir al
it depends on what you want the viewers to see/feel with your pictures., and if ever you think youve screwed the wb, theres always PS to help you with
ComputerFly
10-21-2008, 11:04 AM
I kinda like the warmer tone.
It's all artistic. A lot of people 'like' warmer, but is it realistic? If you're trying to change a perception about a shot, do what you like. I like the second shot far more, as I think it looks realistic.
ComputerFly
10-21-2008, 11:11 AM
I had issues with both so decided to do a photoshop tweek for you !!!:D
This is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Almart made his own representation of what he thought the photo should 'look like', even though he has no idea what it should look like, because he wasn't there when the photo was shot. This is what I mean by people being artistic with their photos.
HoldyourfireAl
10-21-2008, 12:14 PM
I had issues with both so decided to do a photoshop tweek for you !!!:D
Nice!
Mandragora
10-21-2008, 12:19 PM
This is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Almart made his own representation of what he thought the photo should 'look like', even though he has no idea what it should look like, because he wasn't there when the photo was shot. This is what I mean by people being artistic with their photos.
that's not entirely true . . its the job of a lighting designer/director (or director of photography if you will) to know exactly what the color temperature is of a certain setting. sunlight in a forest is always going to be sunlight in a forest . . . .
P1X4R
10-21-2008, 01:37 PM
Man lives in the sunlit world of what he believes to be reality.
But, there is, unseen by most, an underworld, a place that is just as real,
but not as brightly lit.....
A DARKSIDE. :eplus2:
http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh285/P1X4R_2008/TMP/al.jpg
Mandragora
10-21-2008, 02:07 PM
lol
nice
Almart
10-21-2008, 02:42 PM
Man lives in the sunlit world of what he believes to be reality.
But, there is, unseen by most, an underworld, a place that is just as real,
but not as brightly lit.....
A DARKSIDE. :eplus2:
2008/TMP/al.jpg[/IMG]
You're right, I see it now !!!!!
ComputerFly
10-21-2008, 02:48 PM
that's not entirely true . . its the job of a lighting designer/director (or director of photography if you will) to know exactly what the color temperature is of a certain setting. sunlight in a forest is always going to be sunlight in a forest . . . .
What exactly isn't true in my statement?
My statement was to say that someone (Almart) who wasn't there when the photo was shot, changed the photo to suit their needs or wants. They completely changed the mood and statement of the photo, because that's what they wanted to see. So instead of a mid-day sort of shot, he created a moody early evening style shot from the same photo.
Sunlight in a forest ISN'T always going to be sunlight in a forest, at different times of the day and different seasons of the year. And someone who wasn't there when the photo was taken definitely isn't going to be able to pinpoint what the color temperature should be of a given photo.
With statues, if I have one, and you have one, we both have a point of reference on what the color should be (assuming they are painted somewhat identically). With Al's nature shot, only he knows what it really looked like.
Almart
10-21-2008, 02:58 PM
Sunlight in a forest is always going to be sunlight in a forest . . . .BUT, it's not what is there.... it's what you see !!!!
Lets face it, reality can get a little boring at times, if it weren't true then why would everyone be into comic and movie characters !!!
Mandragora
10-21-2008, 03:13 PM
What exactly isn't true in my statement?
My statement was to say that someone (Almart) who wasn't there when the photo was shot, changed the photo to suit their needs or wants. They completely changed the mood and statement of the photo, because that's what they wanted to see. So instead of a mid-day sort of shot, he created a moody early evening style shot from the same photo.
Sunlight in a forest ISN'T always going to be sunlight in a forest, at different times of the day and different seasons of the year. And someone who wasn't there when the photo was taken definitely isn't going to be able to pinpoint what the color temperature should be of a given photo.
With statues, if I have one, and you have one, we both have a point of reference on what the color should be (assuming they are painted somewhat identically). With Al's nature shot, only he knows what it really looked like.
whoa .. sorry buddy . . didn't mean offense
yes, different times of day are different color temps and all that . . sorry i didn't elaborate, thought that was understood . . and yes, there are people in the world whose job specifically is to know exactly what the lighting in that shot is.
my point only is that the way a forest is lit is not a random occurrence. at noon in the middle of the summer the lighting is going to be the same as the day before and the day after and so on . . its not some willy nilly thing.
ComputerFly
10-21-2008, 07:07 PM
No offense whatsoever. I'm just discussing logically what white balance does to a photo.
How the forest is lit IS random. It all depends on how the weather is, how the clouds are formed, how many leaves are on the trees, time of day, the season etc. There are a ton of variables that can change how the forest looks at any given point. The point I'm trying to make is, only Al, the guy that took the photo, knows what it looked like when he took the pic.
So which is it, since you are a photographer, and you seem to think you have a grip on it: which photo represents what Al was seeing when he took the photo?
Is it this one?
http://holdyourfireal.smugmug.com/photos/394424969_fUYtN-X2.jpg
or this one?
http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p159/Computerfly/forest2.jpg
Or maybe this one?
http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p159/Computerfly/forest.jpg
You keep trying to say, another person, who wasn't there, can tell me what the temperature should be when the shot was taken, and I'm telling you, it's impossible. Only Al knows if the shot is accurate.
ComputerFly
10-21-2008, 07:10 PM
whoa .. sorry buddy . . didn't mean offense
yes, different times of day are different color temps and all that . . sorry i didn't elaborate, thought that was understood . . and yes, there are people in the world whose job specifically is to know exactly what the lighting in that shot is.
my point only is that the way a forest is lit is not a random occurrence. at noon in the middle of the summer the lighting is going to be the same as the day before and the day after and so on . . its not some willy nilly thing.
This is the part I'm arguing. I don't care who it is, if they weren't there when the shot was taken, they can't tell what the temperature of the shot should be.
P1X4R
10-21-2008, 10:04 PM
i work in an environment where we have developed a standard by which everyone adheres to. it's very important that all work done matches exactly to what everyone else is working on. i used to talk to users who would say that something was off because the monitor's RGB alignment was off or it was too blue or too red, etc, etc.. man, i'm so glad i don't do monitor calibrations anymore! we now have a full-time guy that does this. it was such a huge pain having to swap out a "bad" monitor and re-calibrate it. i wasn't about to get into ISF certification. my poor eyes wouldn't last! :laugh:
HoldyourfireAl
10-21-2008, 10:42 PM
No offense whatsoever. I'm just discussing logically what white balance does to a photo.
How the forest is lit IS random. It all depends on how the weather is, how the clouds are formed, how many leaves are on the trees, time of day, the season etc. There are a ton of variables that can change how the forest looks at any given point. The point I'm trying to make is, only Al, the guy that took the photo, knows what it looked like when he took the pic.
So which is it, since you are a photographer, and you seem to think you have a grip on it: which photo represents what Al was seeing when he took the photo?
Is it this one?
http://holdyourfireal.smugmug.com/photos/394424969_fUYtN-X2.jpg
or this one?
http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p159/Computerfly/forest2.jpg
Or maybe this one?
http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p159/Computerfly/forest.jpg
You keep trying to say, another person, who wasn't there, can tell me what the temperature should be when the shot was taken, and I'm telling you, it's impossible. Only Al knows if the shot is accurate.
I would say that this "feels" like the right shot to me. The cooler one feels like it's devoid of color.
http://holdyourfireal.smugmug.com/photos/394423621_QpBG6-X2.jpg
Almart
10-22-2008, 12:38 AM
Hey Al, you may find this article useful !!!
http://www.f8prophoto.com/tutorial-colour-correction.html (http://www.f8prophoto.com/tutorial-colour-correction.html)
Mandragora
10-22-2008, 05:32 PM
This is the part I'm arguing. I don't care who it is, if they weren't there when the shot was taken, they can't tell what the temperature of the shot should be.
i'm gonna let this go . . i'm not interested in arguing this point. :)
Mandragora
10-22-2008, 05:40 PM
i work in an environment where we have developed a standard by which everyone adheres to. it's very important that all work done matches exactly to what everyone else is working on. i used to talk to users who would say that something was off because the monitor's RGB alignment was off or it was too blue or too red, etc, etc.. man, i'm so glad i don't do monitor calibrations anymore! we now have a full-time guy that does this. it was such a huge pain having to swap out a "bad" monitor and re-calibrate it. i wasn't about to get into ISF certification. my poor eyes wouldn't last! :laugh:
OMG tell me about it
i just got a new high end (sorta) printer over the summer and it took a month of calibrating and begging to get it to work right . . . just a nightmare
Almart
10-22-2008, 11:06 PM
Photoshop to change the mood once again, and let me state for the record, I was never in the forest with Al so I don't know what color the light really was!!!:rolleyes2
HoldyourfireAl
10-28-2008, 03:01 AM
Here's some new ones to compare. Thoughts?
http://holdyourfireal.smugmug.com/photos/404374756_CV8df-XL.jpg
http://holdyourfireal.smugmug.com/photos/404374773_nxHpt-XL.jpg
HoldyourfireAl
10-28-2008, 03:02 AM
http://holdyourfireal.smugmug.com/photos/404374844_2uDpr-XL.jpg
http://holdyourfireal.smugmug.com/photos/404374870_SFWo2-XL.jpg
HoldyourfireAl
10-28-2008, 03:03 AM
http://holdyourfireal.smugmug.com/photos/404375035_sHCKd-XL.jpg
http://holdyourfireal.smugmug.com/photos/404375051_gtZif-XL.jpg
HoldyourfireAl
10-28-2008, 03:08 AM
http://holdyourfireal.smugmug.com/photos/404374408_XAhu2-XL.jpg
http://holdyourfireal.smugmug.com/photos/404374441_rRMwt-XL.jpg
HoldyourfireAl
10-28-2008, 03:13 AM
http://holdyourfireal.smugmug.com/photos/402888747_jDXHy-XL.jpg
http://holdyourfireal.smugmug.com/photos/402891777_SY22i-XL.jpg
HoldyourfireAl
10-28-2008, 12:52 PM
http://holdyourfireal.smugmug.com/photos/404401467_4Dhgq-XL.jpg
http://holdyourfireal.smugmug.com/photos/404401483_HydSE-XL.jpg
Almart
10-28-2008, 01:28 PM
The cooler versions seem like they are more color accurate if you could call them that.
I like the warmer ones but there seems to be some color contamination in parts and that is why I prefer the cooler images.
Just my 2 cents.:inquisiti
Almart
10-28-2008, 01:40 PM
I find that most images can be "helped" by photoshop , I have brightened up your baseball shot to show you what I mean.
Also if your camera allows you to shoot in raw mode you can fine tune the color temp after the fact to tweak it just right.
HoldyourfireAl
10-28-2008, 01:55 PM
I find that most images can be "helped" by photoshop , I have brightened up your baseball shot to show you what I mean.
Also if your camera allows you to shoot in raw mode you can fine tune the color temp after the fact to tweak it just right.
Thanks for doing that! I have to learn how to shoot in RAW & use Photoshop! As far as cooler & warmer, it seems to me that the ones taken with the "shade" white balance on the XSi are coming out truer to what I'm seeing.
vBulletin® v3.8.8, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.