[mcgregni]

I think good colour balance setting recording at the time of capture is important, including RAW. I have found it eases the workload to at least get it as near as possible on the camera (so long as your lcd colours are ok you have a fair chance of matching up the subject with screen).

The white balance manual setting, or a fine-adjusted preset, is just an electronic recording of a numerical setting, and this is stored in the RAW file and acted upon when opening .

So I see accurate in-camera WB 'recording' for RAW as a great way to transfer an accurate ' what you saw' colour balance from scene to screen.

[wildman]

Does natural color cast even matter?

"matter" to what end for what purpose?

I'm not being purposely dense, I really don't understand the question.

[Na Horuk]

Good responses so far. The main problems I see are:
1) Not getting the full spectrum. Sometimes a selectively desaturated photo can look great, don't get me wrong. And colour filters can be fun. But usually you want to capture a wide range of light, colours. You can still take a daylight photo raw, and then try to desaturate the warm colours to make it look overcast (anyone care to try? )
2) Flowers are radiant. This is a big problem. Some parts of the flower reflect a lot of light, especially certain hues. This is what makes them attractive. But at the same time, this is what causes problems for the camera, because the petals will be brighter, very saturated, and so on. This is why flower photos often end up looking better if you desaturate certain colour channels (like red) - but there is a very fine line that you don't want to cross.
3) White balance is not objective. White balance is something our brain does, and cameras try to imitate. Light out there is one thing, but seen and captured light gets interpreted one way or another. Two different interpretations can get into conflict, easily. Ultimately, both are wrong, both can be beautiful, but we tend to care about our own more than that of the camera (silly thing, its just a machine, who cares about its "opinion")

[vagabond79]

"matter" to what end for what purpose?

I'm not being purposely dense, I really don't understand the question.

What I was getting at is does environmental light color matter when you can just change the white balance in post? Is it possible to fully fix an undesirable color cast with the white balance slider?

---------- Post added 08-28-15 at 10:02 PM ----------

Good responses so far. The main problems I see are:
1) Not getting the full spectrum.

This may sound stupid, but I was reading that full-spectrum implies sunlight. Does that mean I would have to take my flower images in direct sunlight? As you probably know, that is typically not very good lighting for flowers (other than the golden hours) and most people that I hear talk about flower photography prefer good old overcast days.

[stevebrot]

What I was getting at is does environmental light color matter when you can just change the white balance in post?

Yes.

You cannot capture what is not there. Shifting WB does not fill in the blanks, it takes "2" and calls it "10", but that does not create the range of tones that should be there.

I was reading that full-spectrum implies sunlight. Does that mean I would have to take my flower images in direct sunlight?

No, full spectrum may be found in fog or bright overcast. You can also use a diffusion panel in full sunlight. "Golden Hour" means less blue relative to the warm end of the spectrum. "Blue Hour" means more blue relative to the warm end of the spectrum. Both the blue and golden hours have less light total than full daylight. This is true for both cloudy and sunny weather.

Steve

[clackers]

What I was getting at is does environmental light color matter when you can just change the white balance in post?

If you have red light all over a blue flower, there is little you can do about the dark mess that results.

[wildman]

does environmental light color matter when you can just change the white balance in post?

Within limits no.
Limits - full spectrum light (RGB channels all present at least to some degree - some artificial light has a missing channel) and powerful well implemented color software.

Is it possible to fully fix an undesirable color cast with the white balance slider?

In my experience no if you mean only with a simple color temp slider - it will take more than that. The operative word here is "fully".

Note:
We are really getting into an almost philosophical area when we are talking about human color perception.
Arguably the first pic is the more accurate because the camera saw tungsten light while human perception usually remembers the scene after the fact as daylight.
So for me I usually don't hesitate to change artificial light to daylight because to me it just seems more "natural".and "real".

---

Last edited by wildman; 09-02-2015 at 07:31 PM.

[Na Horuk]

This may sound stupid, but I was reading that full-spectrum implies sunlight. Does that mean I would have to take my flower images in direct sunlight? As you probably know, that is typically not very good lighting for flowers (other than the golden hours) and most people that I hear talk about flower photography prefer good old overcast days.

Oh, I meant especially for PP and such purposes. If you want to shift WB in PP, then you need a recorded full spectrum, or the photo will turn really odd. I take a fair amount of flower photos in direct sunlight and.. well, I make sure they are as sharp as possible, I try to achieve interesting compositions, I try to get good colours without any clipped colour channels. I don't want to say my photos are "good", that is for any viewer to decide themselves (I've posted plenty on these forums and in the 500px gallery).
But definitely - if you prefer a look at a certain time, a certain light quality, then go for it. Take good photos, share them, and feel free to share helpful hints Because of this thread I am already thinking about mounting a tinted filter for flower shots to simulate certain light conditions.

[stevebrot]

What I was getting at is does environmental light color matter when you can just change the white balance in post?

Yes.

You cannot capture what is not there. Shifting WB does not fill in the blanks, it takes "2" and calls it "10", but that does not create the range of tones that should be there.

My explanation above was not accurate. White balance correction is actually fairly complicated and involves remapping a pixel to a different hue. Think of it as taking green and calling it yellowish green. You can see the action in programs such as Lightroom by watching the histogram change as you move the WB slider. Again, doing so does not create color that is not there.

If the light striking the subject has little or no energy at the red end of the spectrum, the reflected light from that subject will be similarly deficient. If the subject is a bright red shirt, it will appear less red, darker, and more gray than it would if subjected to a more balanced light source. You can attempt to correct with WB and the hue/luminance/saturation sliders, but the potential for artifact is huge and the desired color may be impossible to attain.


Steve

[stevebrot]

If you have red light all over a blue flower, there is little you can do about the dark mess that results.

Yep.


Steve

[stevebrot]

Because of this thread I am already thinking about mounting a tinted filter for flower shots to simulate certain light conditions.

That is an interesting and time-honored approach. Most color films have relatively poor red sensitivity and easily slide to a bluish cast in the shadows. To counter, a photographer might slip a mild warming filter on the lens. This works by subtracting a little of the blue from the light reaching the film. The TTL metering compensates by adding a touch more exposure and the end result is equivalent to shooting in warmer light. I still have an 81A and 81B somewhere.* Of course, if the light is pure blue all the warming filters in the world would have no affect.


Steve


* Both are also useful for portraits where the subject is very pale and a bluish cast would make them look a little less than alive. As with today's PP software, it is possible to adjust color balance during the darkroom printing process, but providing warm light to the film at exposure time is much more effective.

[mcgregni]

Certainly I have found it time well spent when setting up a shot to fine tune white balance on the camera, EVEN FOR RAW. I have not found good consistent results in PP software by changing the supposed camera WB preset or fine tuning on the computer after the event. The images always seem to end up better if I didn't have to adjust WB in post .... Small colour balance tweaks are usually ok though.

The camera stores a numerical interpretation of your chosen WB temp and hue and software can re-construct this, giving you the best chance of accurate 'what I saw' colours.

[clackers]

Certainly I have found it time well spent when setting up a shot to fine tune white balance on the camera, EVEN FOR RAW.

Your WB settings (preset or custom) don't affect RAW, McGregni.

Remember the thing you see in the viewfinder when reviewing isn't the RAW file, it's a JPG preview incorporating your settings.

It gets embedded in the RAW file for convenience but is ignored when you import into Lightroom or whatever.

Shoot in B&W if you like. The RAW is still colour.

[wildman]

EVEN FOR RAW. I have not found good consistent results in PP software by changing the supposed camera WB preset or fine tuning on the computer after the event.

I'm exactly the opposite.
I shot only RAW and consider tone (luminosity) and WB the absolute foundation for a perceptually correct final image. If tone and WB are wrong you are dead in the water.

It's for this reason that my work flow is always - spend at least a few minutes just looking at what the unprocessed (as displayed on my calibrated monitor and processed through a default ACR) file needs, then tone, then WB, then a final tweaking of tone again, then whatever else the file might need. I never use presets or auto anything and always manually adjust tone and WB and trust my eye to tell me when the image is right or wrong.

Not for everyone but it is for me. When it comes to PP I'm old school. Ansel would understand where I'm coming from.

[clackers]

and trust my eye to tell me when the image is right or wrong.

Holding the mouse over a 'white' pixel and checking its RGB values can quickly point to what's wrong.