Custom White Balance compared to AWB

[SteveF]

I believe that the best answer is a formal showing to the Client of the finished product (the disc) and also a considered mention of how different monitors (especially the home TV) will affect a viewing change.

I sell few "files on disc only": but when I do, the Client signs off on the Product, at the Showing.


WW

Bill, good point of signing off the product. I do show them the images prepped before they are burnt to disk.

[William W]

For clarity of my meaning: any formal showing and the subsequent sign off, is from viewing the disc which they have purchased.

WW

[RustBeltRaw]

It seems to me that the best way to get "correct," white balance is edit on a calibrated monitor. I know that makes no sense in the context of camera settings, but I'm defining "correct" much like Andre does. The correct white balance creates the mood, emphases, and colors you want. Sometimes, it might be totally independent of the illuminant. I don't think "this was lit by 5600K LEDs, so this must be the right WB" is the right approach. The right white balance is what you think looks right (assuming you aren't doing engineering or scientific work that requires dead-on colors).

All that said, I think an illuminant-accurate white balance is the best place to start editing from. I may be the only person here who uses the fully manual white balance setting much of the time. Nothing high and mighty about that, and it's kind of a pain. I do it to force myself to become familiar with the characteristics of various light sources. Before most shoots, and if the light is reasonably consistent, I'll spend a minute or two dialing in a white balance I like, usually shooting my own hand. I use K mode in white balance, and twiddle the temperature until I like it (generally setting skin tones a touch warm).

However, I don't think anyone's mentioned white balance shift/bracket settings yet. In addition to the usual yellow/blue balance, which covers most light sources, there are also pink/green and red/cyan balances which can be adjusted in-camera through a separate menu. AWB twiddles these shift/bracket settings automatically (though less often than the basic WB setting), and so do the presets. But the presets aren't always perfect. For instance, I find that the fluorescent balance under-compensates for the strong green output of your average fluorescent bulb.

I shot derby at a new arena last weekend, and got this shot with a 3200K manual balance with maxed-out green compensation (add pink) set in the white balance shift/bracket menu. Had to pop double gels on my main lights (one 1/2 CTO, one CTG for each of two flashes) to match the ambient light, which was quite warm, and massively green. I was also using a teal-gelled manual flash for rim light, which would have severely screwed with AWB. Manual balance was a good way to avoid that. This is one of my results. Added 4 points of pink tint in ACR (went from +48 to +52), and dropped from 3200K to 3100K. So I didn't quite nail it to the wall, but I got close.



White balance gets really fun in mixed light or with multiple subjects who have significantly different skin tones. I've done some B&W conversions when I just can't nail the color balance, or it's too variable across the scene (shooting near colored walls, illuminated displays, shade/direct sun mixes, etc.). But I still feel like that's cheating.

[xpatUSA]

However, I don't think anyone's mentioned white balance shift/bracket settings yet. In addition to the usual yellow/blue balance, which covers most light sources, there are also pink/green and red/cyan balances which can be adjusted in-camera through a separate menu. AWB twiddles these shift/bracket settings automatically (though less often than the basic WB setting), and so do the presets.

Help, can't find those up-market settings on any of my cameras . . .

White balance gets really fun in mixed light or with multiple subjects who have significantly different skin tones. I've done some B&W conversions when I just can't nail the color balance, or it's too variable across the scene (shooting near colored walls, illuminated displays, shade/direct sun mixes, etc.). But I still feel like that's cheating.

At the bench, I habitually shoot under mixed lighting (two 5000K LED floods, an overhead Philips TL950 tube plus some slightly green-tinged daylight coming in through a small window). Usually I use a custom (Kodak gray card) setting on the SD9 for watches and stuff. Often her eBay stuff is shot AWB with the Panasonic.

Since my old eyes are so forgiving, hue-wise, about the only thing that bothers me is a color cast in whites/neutrals - usually fixed with the eye-dropper in post while gazing at my cheap uncalibrated NEC 1990SX (please no tut-tuts, I'm the only person who looks at it).

Should I ever start printing stuff, I'll calibrate the monitor, I promise . . .

[pnodrog]

Since my old eyes are so forgiving, hue-wise, about the only thing that bothers me is a color cast in whites/neutrals - usually fixed with the eye-dropper in post while gazing at my cheap uncalibrated NEC 1990SX (please no tut-tuts, I'm the only person who looks at it).

Should I ever start printing stuff, I'll calibrate the monitor, I promise . . .

You are obviously such a delinquent senior we will need to have a signed, dated and witnessed declaration rather than the above vague promise..