Thank you.

Here is a shot from the road just south of the entrance to the plantation.

At 1/1000s, there is no bright white in the scene

(Download)

Today I went to the Kingsley Plantation for some B&W shots.

The surface of the tabby walls is highly reflective. I had to be careful not to overexpose them in direct sunlight.

They are overwhelmingly white in a relatively colorless setting. Color would not do them justice.

I used an A7 II converted to monochrome by removing the Bayer array, ISO 200 behaves like ISO 400.

Large circle of slave dwellings made from tabby

(Download)

Both images captured at 1/2000s f/8 ISO 200

(Download)

Two snapshots effectively doubles the exposure. We know that increasing the exposure will reduce noise.

One exposure twice as long might overexpose the highlights. The remedy is to reduce the ISO.

You get the same result in a single image with no additional post processing.

It's actually in the right place.

It’s not even grammar. It’s just spelling, maybe a typo.

You are welcome.

Almost everyone leaves their camera's WB set to Auto and they are not wrong to do that. It usually comes up with something very close to the right WB setting, often so close that they don't see any need to adjust it on the computer.

My preference is to leave it on Daylight whenever I am out of doors, regardless of the weather, day or night. It is a reminder of the actual color of the light and I seldom see any need to second guess it on the computer.

Inside, artificial light and mixed lighting can vary so much that I just resort to Auto WB.

If I find that the camera setting looks wrong, the first thing I try is Capture One's auto adjustment to the WB. I assume Lightroom has the same feature. That will at least get the tint sorted out. If it's still not right, I'll move the temperature slider. Looking for a neutral target to click on is my last resort because it's usually the least precise way to get where I want to be.

The biggest mistake that people make is to assume that a gray target will lead them to an "accurate" WB. Since the most difficult cases involve different light sources, "accurate" is an unattainable goal.

Those who know the least about white balance are more likely to be nervous about what it's all about.

The more you learn about white balance the more likely you will be to agree with me.

Take a look at this paper on Basic White Balance. You might find something that will make your approach to photograaaphy easier.

Most of us seldom deal with images where the white balance is critical. For the most part we just need to get it to the point of not being noticeably wrong.

The attached images were taken Monday in the shade of a screened porch.

The first image is how the JPEG SOOC probably would have looked. The second is how Capture One thought it should look. The third is how it would look if we are convinced that the white blossom should be exactly white and the fourth if we think the white paint is neutral. It's only when you compare the three images that you will clearly see the difference.

You can see from the temperature and tint numbers that there is no consensus on which WB is correct. They all have their place and they all could make a decent print.

Z7 Auto WB (As shot): 5436k 3.8 tint


WB Capture one Auto WB: 6447k 3.4 tint


WB set with eyedropper on a white portion of the blossom: 6004k 3.2 tint


WB set with eyedropper on a white wall on right: 5645k 5.4 tint

It's actually not very good at either task. The only thing it is clearly good at is to separate someone who did not give it much thought from $50.

The Datacolor Spyder Cube is available new from your favorite supplier for $54 including a pouch and instructions. The more innocent buyer can get it for $67 used on ebay.

If all you give it initially is a quick glance you might miss the fact that it is hanging from a loop that gives you no control of the orientation of the planes. For control, it must be sitting on a flat surface or attached to a tripod.

I have a lot of respect for Datacolor when it comes to calibrating my monitor, but this device does not pass the sniff test. There are much easier ways to get the color right. There are also more reliable ways to measure lighting ratios including incident light meters.

If you care about white balance you will be shooting raw. Auto WB on your camera does exactly the same thing more precisely.

The only place you can remedy an imbalance is on your computer. In your raw editor, you can read the temperature and tint your camera selected. You can apply the camera's WB by selecting "As shot" from the choice of standard WB settings as you develop the raw file.

But any way it is measured it is very likely to be wrong, especially if there are multiple light sources.

It looks like a really dumb idea.

Think about what different colors coming from different directions will to do it.

You can only white balance on a single target.

The only thing that will come remotely close is a white or gray card facing the camera. Don't put it near to a strongly colored object.

Anything else is going to drive you nuts.

As I predicted, "I am sure we will see a camera using this sensor within the next 12 months. Likely from Hasselblad and Phase One...but my dream is to see a fixed lens Sony camera using this sensor!"

At least Hasselblad and Phase One have a range of lenses available.

Consider the implications of a fixed Sony prime lens body that has to be cropped. A 2x crop will drop to 62MP. If you want a different focal length, you will need more than one body. Would you (or anyone here) pay more than $20-30,000 each for that setup?

At least you can change lenses on your 24MP A9 III. At 24MP you won't be quibbling over the quality of the lens.

The fiction that a Foveon sensor had 3x as much resolution as their final RGB image never made sense. Eventually Sigma withdrew that claim and admitted that skipping the demosaicing process got them a little less than double the resolution.

I only brought up the Sigma Foveon to illustrate that what may seem initially like a good idea can turn out to be a bust in the marketplace. Foveon tried to compete in a market with technology that could not be scaled up.

Failing to meet market expectations is recipe for disaster.

When you push film by extending development it increases the contrast which allows you to assume a higher ISO. It also reduces the dynamic range (DR). Pulling does the opposite.

Chromogenic film has an inherently wide DR so you can adjust the contrast during the scanning/post processing stage.