White Balance Question

[Tinpanva]

I have a T3i and I've picked up some water proof balance cards. It came with a white and a grey, anyone have better success with one over the other? I thought I read somewhere that the grey one was better but I can't find that post now. Even with the card, more than likely I'll still need to tweak it during editing correct?

I'm not sure if it matters, but I'm shooting under 150w 14K phoenix bulbs. (lots of blue)

TIA

 

[Misled]

Shoot in RAW and adjust the white balance in post processing.

 

[jroovers]

If I'm not mistaken, the best in camera WB setting you'll get with the T3i is Shade (7,000k). If you can't get a custom setting to work, I'd start with that setting and try and further balance in post. What program are you using? DPP? While not the easiest IMO, DPP will allow you further adjustment of WB in post, and as noted above, is easier if you shoot in RAW. I never had luck shooting white under my aquarium lighting and custom setting WB on my 7D - I'd try the 18% grey card, you'll likely get better results. I'd try it both ways and see what gets you closer. If you use WB bracketing, I think you can maybe get an additional 500k from the presets (e.g. three shots, one at 6500, on at 7000, and one at 7500).

 

[Tinpanva]

Yeah, I always shoot in RAW and use the programs that came with the camera. I watched a demo on the smaller version of photoshop yesterday. I think it was called essentials. I also have GIMP, but not very good with it. Im going to be shooting the tank this weekend and will try the grey card. Ive read that although not perfect, I should try to get as close as I can with the camera to minimize the alterations post. What is dpp?

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[jroovers]

DPP = Digital Photo Professional. It is the PP software that comes with your Canon camera.

 

[IslandCrow]

As others have stated, definitely shoot in raw, but using the white balance card is still a good idea. Either side will probably work. You can get a white balance setting from any shade between white and grey as long as there's no color cast. Chances are, the white side was made specifically for white balance and the grey side was made for exposure, so if it doesn't specify that the grey can be used for color balance, I'd personally default to the white.

So, take a shot of your white balance card in the tank. Angle it a bit towards the light. From here, set a custom white balance in the camera. You're probably still going to have to tweak it in post processing, but this should at least get you close. Once you're done, bring one of the photos up in your favorite raw photo editing program (DPP, Lightroom, Adobe Camera Raw (ACR), etc), and tweak the color temp and tint as necessary. What I've found is that even with a correctly white balanced photo, what is technically "correct" color isn't always quite what you want.
Once you have the color right, you can apply those color temp and tint settings across the rest of your pictures. It is very important that you shot all of the pictures in the same color balance mode on your camera (shade, sunlight, etc.) and not in auto white balance (AWB). Each mode uses a different baseline, so the same color temp and tint settings won't look the same between different modes. AWB potentially uses a different baseline for each photo, and it makes global adjustments across photos impossible.

 

[Tinpanva]

I'm going to assume its also a good idea to shoot the WB card each time I do a photo session of the tank, correct? I mean I would think the color of the bulb would change slightly as it ages.

 

[Reef Bass]

Shoot raw. WB cards are a pain and less accurate.

Camera white balance setting has no impact on image data when shooting raw.

 

[Misled]

Camera white balance setting has no impact on image data when shooting raw.

This^^^^^^!!!!!!

:deadhorse:

 

[Tinpanva]

This is why people tend to beat the dang dead horse, if you read above, you will see i ALWAYS shoot in RAW. That being said, folks are still pointing to a WB card. I thought I read somewhere shooting in RAW bypassed the WB (and other) settings and everything was corrected post. Then someone said no, you want to minimize the corrections post and try and set the WB close as you can. Dont get me wrong, im not mad at anyone, just seems like most folks post without reading and push inaccuate info.

To be clear, since I DO shoot in RAW (always), theres no need to set or adjust WB as its all adjusted post. Correct? :banghead:

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[Misled]

To be clear, since I DO shoot in RAW (always), theres no need to set or adjust WB as its all adjusted post. Correct? :banghead:

By jove I think he's got it!!!!

You should also understand though, it doesn't bypass the settings. When the photo is first brought up, it displays it in the "as shot" in PS. So it does still record that info. Shooting in RAW just collects a buttload more info that gives you the ability to adjust the exposure, WB and tint in post. If you shoot in jpeg, the window for adjusting them doesn't open.

 

[jroovers]

I think you'll get more true to life colours if you try and get the white balance as close to balanced as you can in camera. That way when you're shooting, you are already close or in the vicinity of a balanced shot. If you rely on PP and do it all in your computer, you may find the final colour of your images isn't as close to what you are seeing in the aquarium when working from memory. This is particullary important when shooting a friend's tank IMO where the subject matter isn't constantly in front of you. Also, depending on what PP program you are using, which I don't think is a problem in your case, shooting auto WB and then doing all WB correction in post isn't always that easy. I did not find DPP a very helpful program in this regard. Programs like lightroom, and I'm assuming ACR or Gimp that you are using, that have a custom WB slider where you can set the "k" temperature of light, are incredibly useful in this regard. For some people who don't have such a program, I think they would be better served to get the WB as close as possible in camera first, then try and tweak in post if possible.

Anyhow, why don't you try some shots doing using both methods (custom balance vs. auto WB) and post back here so we can see how you made out?

 

[IslandCrow]

Shoot raw. WB cards are a pain and less accurate.

Camera white balance setting has no impact on image data when shooting raw.

True, but not the point. First of all, if you set a custom white balance, when you open the raw file in ACR, Lightroom, etc. those white balance settings will automatically be set, so assuming you did everything correctly (and you a true white balance is what you really want), you don't have to adjust the white balance settings in post. Second, if you don't shoot a white balance card or some other reference, now you have nothing to truly judge what your white balance should be. Is that the end of the world when taking a picture of a coral. . .no, not really, but if you are in fact trying to replicate the true color of what you're shooting, just eyeballing it is seldom the best method.