How to set "custom WB" (Page 3): The OP stated. "leaves me unable to complete this task successfully" He can complete the task being colorblind using the method I mentioned and this...

r1ch Loc: Colorado

Ysarex wrote:

The OP's original question -- note thread title -- involved setting a custom WB and the first thing he mentioned was an instruction he'd read that recommended setting a custom WB on the camera. That can't be done with a colorchecker at all.

The OP stated. "leaves me unable to complete this task successfully"

He can complete the task being colorblind using the method I mentioned and this answer the question how to complete a the task of making sure color and white balance are correct, it may not be the exact answer he was looking for but. The method is used by many photographers and you don't know what you are talking about in answering questions.
The reason I mentioned a color checker is because it is in a case and if exposed to light it does not degrade the card because it is in a case, you could have a card that is in a sleeve and that would work too. The are reasons for having a color checker adjust things like skin tone which photographers use that method as well. Oh look, I can actually mention something outside the confines of the OP's question.. Wow, called free speech.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

r1ch wrote:

The OP stated. "leaves me unable to complete this task successfully"

He can complete the task being colorblind using the method I mentioned

That being the same method I noted in the beginning of the thread here: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-739174-1.html#13151665

r1ch wrote:

and this answer the question how to complete a the task of making sure color and white balance are correct, it may not be the exact answer he was looking for but. The method is used by many photographers and you don't know what you are talking about in answering questions.

Funny how I came up with the same solution then for use with raw files in post if I don't know what I'm talking about: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-739174-1.html#13151665

r1ch wrote:

The reason I mentioned a color checker is because it is in a case and if exposed to light it does not degrade the card because it is in a case,

But you posted a link to a bogus product: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-739174-1.html#13152620

If all you want to do is set WB then a WB card will let you do both: 1. Set WB in camera or 2. Set WB in post. A color checker will only let you set WB in post and they are expensive.

r1ch Loc: Colorado

Ysarex wrote:

But you posted a link to a bogus product: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-739174-1.html#13152620

If all you want to do is set WB then a WB card will let you do both: 1. Set WB in camera or 2. Set WB in post. A color checker will only let you set WB in post and they are expensive.

You can do what you want and buy whatever products you want. I answered the question for someone who is color blind. I do not care about your product suggestions or links because I was not talking to you or answering any of your questions.. You can suggest whatever suggestions to the OP. I do not care. I am not talking with you and if you continue I will add you to my ignore list. My suggestion is valid, it answers the question, it is an acceptable practice with photographers, it is an easy solution, I offered up a video the gives detailed instructions and is easy to follow. If the OP wants to listen to you fine, he can do that. My suggestion also has the advantage for more advanced methods of correcting or adjusting skin tones which may or may not be of interest to the OP or any other reader.

Don, the 2nd son Loc: Crowded Florida

CHG_CANON wrote:

I think setting a custom i in-camera /i WB is a ... (show quote)

Yes, I also shoot RAW so the answer lies in post processing.

Don, the 2nd son Loc: Crowded Florida

Thank you ALL for considering this issue. I have a new perspective on it now and will see what may work for my odd eyes.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

r1ch wrote:

You can do what you want and buy whatever products you want. I answered the question for someone who is color blind. I do not care about your product suggestions or links

But I care about your product suggestion and link. I care when I see bad recommendations made for poor quality junk. So heads up! For your benefit assuming you don't know that you recommended junk as well as for everyone else that may read your post, the Pixel Perfect Camera Color Correction Card is a junk knock off colorchecker. The price alone should clue you in that there's something very wrong. It was linked in this post: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-739174-1.html#13152620 and it's a bogus product.

r1ch Loc: Colorado

Ysarex wrote:

But I care about your product suggestion and link.The price alone should clue you in that there's something very wrong.

I know someone who uses the checker and likes them because they are disposable but I know they work but if he wants the OP can choose a $400 color checker, I assume he has a brain and understands that either one will work and he can look at the amazon reviews himself or do a google search for the best one for the money and make his own decision. I believe the video made a recommendation as well. In the end each person must decide how much they want to spend and which product is "good enough"

YOU on the other hand suggest a Styrofoam sippy cup to the OP, yet you "care" that I suggest a product that was designed to color check and you suggest a product designed to hold coffee to do white balance. It is an idiotic suggestion to choose a coffee cup over a purpose built product in my opinion. Have you tested a styrofoam cup? I know you haven't because if you did you would not make such and idiotic claim but I know there are people on the internet who have. I think it is you giving out bad advise.. "use something that has no quality control for whiteness that was designed to hold hot coffee" LOL. Now I am done with idiotic discussions with you. You bring up this topic again and you are on my ignore list.

https://www.nikoncafe.com/threads/white-balance-and-styrofoam.65/

"Styrofoam cups have non-linear response to different sources of light. The colour temperature measured for different kinds of light sources with and without Styrofoam cap can deviate as much as 600K from direct measurement; typical value for daylight is 270K. Equipment used: Gretag Spectrolino spectrophotometer to see resulting spectral power distribution; Gretag EyeOne colormeter; Minolta Colormeter IIIF.
Miscellaneous equipment - Sun, clouds, different lamps, Nikon and studio flash, colour compensating filters from Lee Filters."

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

r1ch wrote:

I know someone who uses the checker and likes them because they are disposable but I know they work but if he wants the OP can choose a $400 color checker,

A colorchecker passport is $119 and the colorchecker mini is $69.

r1ch wrote:

YOU on the other hand suggest a Styrofoam sippy cup to the OP, yet you "care" that I suggest a product that was designed to color check and you suggest a product designed to hold coffee to do white balance. It is an idiotic suggestion to choose a coffee cup over a purpose built product in my opinion. Have you tested a styrofoam cup?

Yes I have. And I have an acquaintance who teaches at RIT and has also tested white Styrofoam to be spectrally neutral and an ideal WB target.

r1ch wrote:

I know you haven't

You do!? Seems you don't know much. The first image below is a screen shot from another forum. Note the date of 2013. That's me testing white Styrofoam 9 years ago, many years after I had previously tested it and determined that it makes an ideal WB target.

The second image below is from today and I just completed that test for you. The Styrofoam food tray was from Wednesday's hamburgers -- I washed it and saved it. The RGB values in the ColorPicker verify that the white Styrofoam is equally as accurate as the (not bogus) colorchecker.

(Download)

r1ch Loc: Colorado

Ysarex wrote:

You do!? Seems you don't know much.

And you do. LOL
Good bye and may God help anyone ignorant enough to listen to anything you have to say LOL

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

r1ch wrote:

And you do.

I have supporting facts:

All you have is juvenile insults.

Hip Coyote

I think when we have these squabble there should be a UHH virtual boxing ring where people have to post their five top images and we get to vote who wins. Loser leaves town (UHHville) for a month.

r1ch Loc: Colorado

Hip Coyote wrote:

I think when we have these squabble there should be a UHH virtual boxing ring where people have to post their five top images and we get to vote who wins. Loser leaves town (UHHville) for a month.

Good idea. I put this guy on my ignore list yet I see his posts still. It appears the ignore list only works on private messages? If so I will have to put him on mental ignore. Oh well.

scsdesphotography Loc: Southeastern Michigan

Don, the 2nd son wrote:

I've read about this numerous times and think one ... (show quote)

Hi Don. I have used a white balance lens cap for years. They work as well as any other method including Styrofoam cups. Some WB lens caps are quite expensive, $100+. I use ones made by Dot Line, only a few bucks each. I have one for each of my different lenses. They give a correct WB 90% of the time. Since you are color challenged I suggest you try a WB lens cap and trust the resulting camera setting.

Hip Coyote

scsdesphotography wrote:

Hi Don. I have used a white balance lens cap for years. They work as well as any other method including Styrofoam cups. Some WB lens caps are quite expensive, $100+. I use ones made by Dot Line, only a few bucks each. I have one for each of my different lenses. They give a correct WB 90% of the time. Since you are color challenged I suggest you try a WB lens cap and trust the resulting camera setting.

I am wondering if wb is only part of the issue with someone who is colorblind...of course wb is important, but what about the colors that people mix up...greens, grays, blues? A color chart of some sort would probably be needed lest the user would have proper wb but goof up the rest of the shot. Taking a pic of the color card would allow the user to use the color picker? But how would they know the color they picked is actually the right color? Say they pick green for the sky? Im not quite sure...

The intelligent thing to do, perhaps, is get a point and shoot, shoot in P, and spend money on fishing tackle, like most intelligent folks.

r1ch Loc: Colorado

scsdesphotography wrote:

including Styrofoam cups.

I question this because of my link but even common sense states that styromfoam makers do not test for white purity, you can buy yellow styromfoam. Styrofoam we know for a fact yellows over time. How do you know the cups have been sitting for a long time and have been degraded. Brand new Styrofoam may be "good enough" but if it yellows over time I don't think it would be good enough. But as I said, everyone must decide what they think good enough is.
I have never heard of white balanced lens caps but if there is some control to make sure the cap is white, that seems to me to be a reasonable solution, but to then include a styrofoam cup as in equal does makes sense to me.