Custom white balance versus post processing: There have been some threads here on UHH about white balance lately. I would like to know which approach people here like to use to obtain...

CO

There have been some threads here on UHH about white balance lately. I would like to know which approach people here like to use to obtain the most accurate white balance. We can do a custom white balance at the scene and store that as a preset in the camera. That requires a fairly large white balance card because the viewfinder or square in the viewfinder must be filled with the color of the card. It can then be selected and applied to photos immediately. Another approach would be to take a photo at the scene of a white card, gray card, or something like an X-Rite Color Checker. We can then use the eye dropper in post processing later to get the correct white balance. What do you prefer to do? Which is better?

SonyA580 Loc: FL in the winter & MN in the summer

Shoot RAW, correct in post.

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

"...Another approach would be to take a photo at the scene of a white card, gray card, or something like an X-Rite Color Checker. We can then use the eye dropper in post processing later to get the correct white balance... My method of choice CO...

I've tried "Presets" and found them an ineffective solution for my studio work. Most all sessions involve multiple light sources and varying camera angles and or views... I'm certainly not keen about trying to load multiple "Presets" throughout a shoot. A color target (I use an 8 x 11 inch x-rite Color Checker) is ideal in my humble estimation. I simply have the talent hold this target for a WB test for before each illumination scenario... It's really critical for catalog fashion...

Note: the aforementioned assumes you're post processing in Camera RAW and use the WB eyedropper..

Hope this helps...

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

CO wrote:

There have been some threads here on UHH about whi... (show quote)

As I have gotten older, my eyes have gotten less trustworthy around discerning color. My strategy is therfore to understand my source lighting as well as possible and set my camera to match. I will infrequently make small adjustments in post processing. Blue hour photos get more post processing, because my cameras will not go as far as the 20,000K that is sometimes required.

I have seen a lot of photos, especially by older photographers, which even my own eyes can see missed the mark in color...usually either in WB or saturation, or both. If my eyes see that it is wrong, you can bet that it isn't right.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

SonyA580 wrote:

Shoot RAW, correct in post.

Are you using some calibrated target or just winging it?
How do you know what is “correct”?

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

I shoot raw. I use auto WB but raw doesn't care what WB I have set. That only affects the jpg that the camera produces.

When it comes to postprocessing if the image doesn't look right I correct it. If there's something that should be white (or neutral gray) in the image LR can adjust the image so it's really neutral. If there isn't, I just adjust temperature and tint until it looks right to me.

Strodav Loc: Houston, Tx

SonyA580 wrote:

Shoot RAW, correct in post.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

GoofyNewfie wrote:

Are you using some calibrated target or just winging it?
How do you know what is “correct”?

I'm the same: Shoot RAW, correct in post.

I used to be religious about shooting a WB shot with my WhiBall greycard from my wallet. I might not have been filling the frame enough or other issues, but the overall observation was clicking these colors with the dropper just gave me another change in Post that still needed tweaking. So instead, I just shoot in RAW with AUTO WB and adjust to preference in Post, with no greycard shot. I've never found any software that took the greycard and 'dropper click' adjustment that made the WB perfect. At best, it helps me judge which direction to adjust the images, as in up or down on the K temp or toward Red or Green on the tint.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

CO wrote:

There have been some threads here on UHH about whi... (show quote)

I don't care for cards. The Color Checker is what I use when it's important or mixed light, or incandescent or light with a heavy color cast. Otherwise AWB works very well for me. I routinely profile my displays which is important when adjusting images "by eye" -

The ColorChecker workflow includes developing an accurate color profile to apply to raw images, generally using Lightroom.

I never use custom white balance - too much of a hassle, especially when doing shoots in multiple lighting scenarios

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDtebpvATzc

kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy

Plus one for shooting raw.

BboH Loc: s of 2/21, Ellicott City, MD

I use Kelvin and check with red.
I set the Kelvin temperature according to what seems to be the light at the moment. I than photograph something red - If the red in the camera's LCD matches the red of the object photographed I have a good white balance, seldom needing more than minor PP adjustment. If the light is of mixed source, like indoors, especially a museum, I use automatic.

tcthome Loc: NJ

I vary. Mostly I just shoot raw & if it doesn't look rite in post or if I want a different look I'll adjust eg. warmer. I have & sometimes use the x-rite CCPP & it does make a difference. I have also used a white piece of cardboard on site & created a custom WB preset. That I did just to try after seeing a video on it. I mostly shoot wildlife, nature, landscapes casually so its not as important as shooting product, wedding, or studio portrait work for customers. Creating camera profiles with the x-rite for different lighting , sunny, cloudy, fluorescent , tungsten, & having them stored in a program like LR will do the trick. I have seen a landscape photographer adjust looking in the camera lcd rear screen until it matched what it looked like on site.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Due to the camera settings I use, I do my white balance in processing. Additionally, I also do a hue correction. In some of my digital work, I also do Lens Color Correction.
--Bob

CO wrote:

There have been some threads here on UHH about whi... (show quote)

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

DirtFarmer wrote:

I shoot raw. I use auto WB but raw doesn't care what WB I have set. That only affects the jpg that the camera produces.

When it comes to postprocessing if the image doesn't look right I correct it. If there's something that should be white (or neutral gray) in the image LR can adjust the image so it's really neutral. If there isn't, I just adjust temperature and tint until it looks right to me.

My approach also. Sorry by why so much time in prep and risk missing a shot, when raw and post will do the trick to your taste.

Traveller_Jeff

larryepage wrote:

As I have gotten older, my eyes have gotten less t... (show quote)

As soon as I had the first of my eyes treated with cataract surgery, I saw that my untreated eye cast everything I looked at in a darkish yellow, while my treated eye saw the pure colors as I remembered them. Cataracts develop so slowly that one doesn't realize how one's color perceptions are slowly changing. With both my "new eyes" now, I see color as vividly as ever. I've learned there is no such thing as "old eyes," just untreated ones. Check your vision out at an ophthalmologist, not an optometrist. If cataracts are present and treated, then in terms of your vision, you'll feel like your personal white balance has been restored.