Auto White Balance - bad when trying to get it right in camera?

fret_wimp2

Ive been working a lot on getting more of my images right "in camera.
Ive made great strides in sharpness, composition and a little improvement in exposure.
But one area that Im still struggling with is when i take an image, and i bring it into PS raw editor, i always end up doing quite a bit adjustment to the temperature and tint of the image.
e.g i was out last night in the SallyGap at sunset. I got some images im happy with but most came out much blue’er than my eyes picked up and required a temperature and tint adjustment to give them a more golden sunset feel.

I want to start fixing this in camera but im not sure how. From your experience, is my issue white balance or something else? How do you think I should rectify this?

squareballoon

I always take a custom white balance with a Lasolite eazybalance Calibration Card that I keep in my camera bag. It's so much easier to get it right that way.

pullandbang

Don't worry too much about it if you're shooting RAW. Handier to leave it in auto wb and make any adjustments afterwards although if you have a situation where you know what the WB should be for a whole shoot then by all means change it. Just don't forget to change it to the next setting when the situation changes.

ScumLord

The problem as I would see it is I don't know how trustworthy the screens on the camera are with regards reproducing the image. If your monitor is calibrated that's ultimately going to be the screen that you would want to do colour correction on.

fret_wimp2

Thànks guys. I don't think it comes down to e camera screen. I only use the screen to judge exposure and composition, so I can retake if its not fundamentally right.

But the white balance difference between what I saw with my eye, and what appears on my pc screen are usually a bit different, requiring some adjustment and playing with setting. I want to get it so that I have minimal changes to make on my pic in post processing.

Il start with a using a grey calibration card and see how that goes.

Thanks for the advice folks.

ScumLord

I assume your monitor is calibrated? It's going to be difficult to judge whether it's camera settings or monitor settings unless you have a calibrated device to work off.

When I calibrated my monitor it became much warmer, and switching back and forth between calibrated and uncalibrated it was clear both my monitor at home and at work were very cool and blue before calibration.

Farmlife

squareballoon wrote: »

I always take a custom white balance with a Lasolite eazybalance Calibration Card that I keep in my camera bag. It's so much easier to get it right that way.

do you use the grey or white side?

Promac

Taking a white-balance every time you go out shooting is gonna be a pain in the rear before long. Take PullAndBang's advice and shoot in RAW and do your wb later.

If you did colour work on film and did your own darkroom work then there'd be 3 dials on the enlarger for the 3 separate colours that you'd have to work out for each shot/shoot anyway. Another case of the myth of "right in camera" tbh.

squareballoon

Farmlife wrote: »

do you use the grey or white side?

I use the white side

Farmlife

Promac wrote: »

Taking a white-balance every time you go out shooting is gonna be a pain in the rear before long. Take PullAndBang's advice and shoot in RAW and do your wb later.

If you did colour work on film and did your own darkroom work then there'd be 3 dials on the enlarger for the 3 separate colours that you'd have to work out for each shot/shoot anyway. Another case of the myth of "right in camera" tbh.

i use it for event work where there's no hope of shooting raw and don't get time to post process, just photo to print, so the quick starter snap of it before hand tends to get me sorted

fret_wimp2

Promac wrote: »

Taking a white-balance every time you go out shooting is gonna be a pain in the rear before long. Take PullAndBang's advice and shoot in RAW and do your wb later.

If you did colour work on film and did your own darkroom work then there'd be 3 dials on the enlarger for the 3 separate colours that you'd have to work out for each shot/shoot anyway. Another case of the myth of "right in camera" tbh.

That's quite interesting.i didn't know you 'adjusted' the white balance during film processing also.

I always shoot raw, as it gives me the most range for adjustment.

Thanks for the info.

OldGoat

Farmlife wrote: »

do you use the grey or white side?

Grey side for metering. White side for white balance in PP if required.

fret_wimp2

Think I need to reign in this mad desire to get everything right in camera.i had this opinion that with film you had to get it all correct in camera, so you got good, or you wasted lots of money on developing bad shots.

Bit of reading has shown me that film photography had loads of post processing tricks also, just a lot more effort than photoshop, so it's not necessarily a measure of a bad photographer to not get it all correct in camera, and only require minor tweaking in PS.

I think also it depends on your definition of tweaking.

Tanks for the help folks.

Rew

fret_wimp2 wrote: »

Think I need to reign in this mad desire to get everything right in camera.i had this opinion that with film you had to get it all correct in camera, so you got good, or you wasted lots of money on developing bad shots.

Bit of reading has shown me that film photography had loads of post processing tricks also, just a lot more effort than photoshop, so it's not necessarily a measure of a bad photographer to not get it all correct in camera, and only require minor tweaking in PS.

I think also it depends on your definition of tweaking.

Tanks for the help folks.

Adobe Lightroom may help you if your finding the postprocessing a bit of a burden, you can do batch corrections across multiple similar shots.

ScumLord

fret_wimp2 wrote: »

Think I need to reign in this mad desire to get everything right in camera.i had this opinion that with film you had to get it all correct in camera, so you got good, or you wasted lots of money on developing bad shots.

When you compare professional level digital photography to film the process is actually quite similar as with RAW you have to process the images off the camera. You've just got more control and options with digital, so to me it is the much better format.

You have many, many options depending on what you want to achieve.

pixbyjohn

fret_wimp2 wrote: »

Think I need to reign in this mad desire to get everything right in camera.i had this opinion that with film you had to get it all correct in camera, so you got good, or you wasted lots of money on developing bad shots.

Bit of reading has shown me that film photography had loads of post processing tricks also, just a lot more effort than photoshop, so it's not necessarily a measure of a bad photographer to not get it all correct in camera, and only require minor tweaking in PS.

I think also it depends on your definition of tweaking.

Tanks for the help folks.

The most important part is to get your composition right "in camera" :eek:

Promac

fret_wimp2 wrote: »

Think I need to reign in this mad desire to get everything right in camera.i had this opinion that with film you had to get it all correct in camera, so you got good, or you wasted lots of money on developing bad shots.

Bit of reading has shown me that film photography had loads of post processing tricks also, just a lot more effort than photoshop, so it's not necessarily a measure of a bad photographer to not get it all correct in camera, and only require minor tweaking in PS.

I think also it depends on your definition of tweaking.

Tanks for the help folks.

As John said, work on composition and things like focus and depth-of-field. Otherwise, assume you'll be processing all images on your computer and think of it more like finishing touches rather than adjustments or tweaks or fixes.

ditpaintball

Its already been said, that shooting in raw is the way to go.

But for consistency, take WB off auto auto and leave it in Flash or Day light setting all the time ( even when shooting raw). That way when you import all your images into your raw converter, they are all the same temperature and tint and you have a level playing field when editing down the shoot and picking your favourites.

If you leave it in auto, then the camera is making a decision and every picture could have tiny differences in temp or tint.