Digital Cameras and White Balance
A friend was asking about white balance on digital cameras on their blog and I took a moment to respond. Here are some general thoughts on using white balance on digital cameras…
I’ve not had much need for a color-based filter for any of my digital cameras. I always use an UV/haze filter for protection of the front element and take that off to use a circular polarizer when shooting outside or against glass.
From my first digital camera forward I have found it very important to experiment with white balance settings and know how the camera behaves in differently light sources. On some cameras auto works very well in many light sources, on others, not so many, or only specific light sources. One thing has rung true for me across all my cameras, though: using the direct sun white balance preset for sunsets yields colors in the picture that look like the real thing to my eyes.
My general recommendation is to shoot RAW with auto (or preset based on light source). Change the white balance in post processing later if the white balance chosen does not properly capture colors. With RAW the camera’s white balance setting does not effect your final output because you can adjust it with software without incurring any color sampling loss. Conversely, with JPEG you can also adjust it with software, but you will have some color sampling loss in the conversion as well as JPEG compression generational loss if your ultimate output format is JPEG.
If you’re really interested in a “filter” for a specific setting, get a grey card and take a white-balance reference photo in the lighting where you’ll be shooting. You can use that to later adjust white balance in post processing by using software to examine the white balance the camera chose based on its exposure of the grey card. You may be able to tell the camera itself (through its menu) to use the shot of the grey card to preset its white balance (often called custom or reference white balance). Then it should be spot on for the lighting as long as the lighting conditions don’t change while you’re shooting.
May 15th, 2007 at 1:00 pm
Good review and thanks for the comments. This would be helpful to play around with. Unfortunately, I don’t have much at my disposal for post-processing (GIMP is just not going to happen) and so I’m starting to go more into the filter route (Circular Polarizer). I tried to set a custom WB with some outdoor shots for a party a few weeks ago and didn’t like the way they were turning out (at least, on the LCD) so I went back to AUTO.
Once the new camera comes in, I have promised myself a babysitter on a Saturday where I could shoot in several modes and do WB testing, make notes, and then review to see what works best — and just generally get a sense of the options. Bummer we didn’t get a chance to do this together while you all were here!
May 15th, 2007 at 1:20 pm
I’ve been considering Photoshop CS3. I currently use Adobe Lightroom for nondestructive editing, but for things like heavy clone brushing, adding grain to B&W conversions, etc., GIMP and PS Elements are starting to get in my way.
Again, if you’re shooting RAW, your WB setting doesn’t make any difference to your final output. You can change it in your RAW to JPG workflow on the computer.