[BruceBanner]

How do I show an image I posted for the Nov contest here? It doesn't let me upload it again...

I rarely upload direct to PF, I tend to embed the image from Flickr. Does your image exist somewhere on the web? If so you could perhaps do the same?

[ggascay]

No, I uploaded it to the November contest submission, but now can't upload it here and can't link to it, so... I don't know...

---------- Post added 11-21-19 at 01:27 PM ----------

I think I figured out a work around - uploading it to my gallery, and then linking to my gallery...

[ggascay]

Pentax K-3 and Takumar 50 1.4 in a very dark Vegas lounge. The LED lighting was minimal along with ambient light from a projected low level backdrop image.

[ChristianRock]

Pentax K-3 and Takumar 50 1.4 in a very dark Vegas lounge. The LED lighting was minimal along with ambient light from a projected low level backdrop image.

Very nice, very vintage looking!

This is the Takumar Bayonet 135mm f/2.8 on the K-50, wide open.

[Aaron28]

da 50-200...k-3ii....wansen radio triggers....dx-400 manual flashes

[Aaron28]

soligor 35/f2.8 m42....k-50

[aslyfox]

the male orangutan at the Topeka Zoo and Conservation Center

SOOC

one of my first photos with my newly acquired " experienced FA 77mm F1.8

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[Aaron28]

Aubell 35/f2.8 t-mount preset....K-50

[aslyfox]

cougar under ledge

SOOC

K 3 Ii + SMC Pentax-A 135mm F2.8

[ChristianRock]

Gotta have that afternoon coffee. K-50 and K 50 1.2.

[ChristianRock]

K-50 can give nice B&W tones right out of camera. With K 50 1.2.

[BruceBanner]

I find my opinion has diverged from the mission of this thread - see, I regard processing done by a semiautonomous algorithm in the camera as "post-processing", too. I wish I could get the camera to simply record what I see. My latest beef is with in-camera white-balance modifications made to my pictures against my will. And I can't find any way to shut the derned thing off! I drove up into the mountains this morning in order to get sunrise pictures. I was there, the sun came up, spectacular color in the sky, but the camera changed it from orange to blue. Stupid, stupid, stupid. And, yes, I can fix it in post-processing, but that requires me to remember what I saw, when the whole purpose of taking the picture is to record what I'm seeing.

Why is it that people are increasingly demanding to be protected from themselves, to have machines make decisions for them, and to get "offended" if someone says something they don't agree with. The ancestors who built this world we live in for our benefit didn't do it that way.

Cameras are fantastic, they can be as automated or manual as you wish. From what you describe from your sunrise experience above is that you still left one thing in automation... White Balance. It's always funny that during the times White Balance 'gets it wrong' we get cross or upset, but all the other times it does a fair dinkum job we give it a free pass (or worse and not even give it due credit for getting a semi decent white balance)

There's a lot more to photography than just the exposure triangle, and for some reason the White Balance is the last variable that any (even seasoned veterans) consider something to learn and get their head around. If you're shooting in Manual mode but still using Auto WB then you are still using Automation. Luckily for us we can toggle out of Auto WB and choose either a defined and fixed preset or dial in something ourselves that is specifically more accurate to what the eye is seeing at the time.
Typically for a lot of RAW shooters we just leave it in Auto, because when post processing time comes around we can fully adjust the sliders around and get something semi quick that represents what we want to achieve. Jpg shooters not so much, the manoeuvrability is far less and more care should be taken at the time of the shot to have a White Balance that reflects what the user wants.

White Balance is notorious for getting certain conditions 'wrong', it tries its best but still it will produce something indifferent from what you want. Snow scenes, Autumn/Fall, Golden hour to name a few instances where you will be left unimpressed with your shots even if you are controlling the exposure triangle perfectly. It just sounds to me like you're missing that one last learning curve with your gear, taming White Balance. A professional Landscaper will typically use Manual mode for the exposure triangle settings and also take control over the White Balance (they'll even dig out a Colour Checker Passport for preshots and use later in PP). Yes you can get things right at the time of the shot, but sometimes even dawn and dusk shots can be hurried so we tend to worry more about other aspects of the shot such as focus, exposure triangle factors and then worry about temperature of the shot back at base, with a hot cup of tea

Shooting RAW is super in this regard, because you can manipulate the tones however you see fit, in the comfort of your own home, however it still will use your camera settings used at the time as a starting point. I tend to value that so even as a RAW shooter I would urge you to do everything that you can at the time of the shot to get things right as long as those things don't compromise the taking of the shot itself. It is possible to take a shot with your camera with absolutely no automation whatsoever, it's just sometimes it takes time to set things up right and get things done the way you see it/want it. That's your job, we can't hate on the camera for offering automation and then get upset when it takes more steps to remove the automation or the automation doesn't go in your favour in this particular instance. I shoot professionally, and its my job to know the limitations of what some of the automatic features impose, I don't get upset with them, I learn when to apply them and when not. I use Av, Tv, TAv, Manual and X mode all in a single day/event sometimes, they all have their pros and cons and WB is just another 'auto' mode that somehow often gets left out of the equation when taking a shot.

Shooting RAW and toggling out of Auto WB is as close to pure Manual driving as you can get with a camera, it just sounds as if you have one last piece of automation to master.

[BruceBanner]

I appreciate all that, @BruceBanner, and while I can use one of (or all three) custom settings, I can't turn the derned thing OFF. I'd like the light that comes in through the lens to be recorded as-is, all the time, without ever doing any adjustment in the camera. I suppose what I've got to do is buy an 18% gray card and use it to set one of the custom settings and just leave it like that.

You can't turn off WB anymore than turn off aperture, its required to take a shot, the light that comes through the lens is recorded as is, all the time but you have to adjust the exposure triangle to take the shot and you also have to choose a WB, that's how it is. Think of photography as four variables to control and not three if it makes you feel better, its a mentality to the approach of photography that I think you're having issues with.

Here in Australia, 5000k (Daylight) is pretty much my go to for any outdoor shots if I want to get off Auto WB and take more control over what is happening (we have lots of blue sky sunny days), whereas in my motherland (Scotland) Cloudy would be my go to.

Leaving White Balance in Auto is like being in Av mode, setting a specific WB for every shot is like being in Manual Mode and can be very tedious and slows the process of shooting down, hence Auto WB and many people opting to fix the WB in post. For example, you might shoot an Autumn scene, see that you need to shoot at 9000K to capture the wonderful gold tones that you see, otherwise your image will fall flat at 3000K or something that the Auto WB might choose. You then walk into the cafe and order a nice piece of cake and coffee, now you want to take a shot of the food and drink but 9000K is all wrong, you now have to choose a new WB that more accurately represents what you see.
This is no way different than being in Manual mode and having to adjust the aperture, iso and shutter speed for the two differing environments. WB is the fourth variable, its as simple as that. Photography is hard, there's a lot to think about, so I often choose to have a more pleasant experience at the time of taking the shots, and do the more headache stuff back at base in front of a computer in the comforts of my own home.

I cannot use Manual Mode all day long at an event, there are too many variables, too many changing light scenarios and quick candid shots that I must use Av mode to first and foremost nail the shot/capture the moment with exposures that are safe to work with in PP. If I have time I will be in Manual Mode, and the same goes for WB choice.

I own a Grey transparent lens cap that's quite neat that I think you might like, you can set your self up for the scene (take the lens cap off to frame right etc), and then you can get a custom WB by sticking the lens cap back on the lens, take the shot and WB off that, actually works pretty well and is one less thing to have to carry around. I reckon that would probably solve your frustration and place you back in the driving seat.

[BruceBanner]

Good idea, that lens cap, @BruceBanner, but for now (seeing as how I'd have to go out and buy a bunch of those otherwise), I'm going to try to do what I want using the custom "K" white balance settings. I reckon you could use a neutral density filter to accomplish the same thing, do you suppose?

I noticed that it's pretty overcast today, so I went out and used the sky directly above to load data into "K1" in both the KP and the K-1. Took some test shots of stuff in the yard, and everything looks perfect. Now, let's see what it does in bright daylight, etc.

See, the thing is, if I take a picture indoors with artificial light, I want the picture to look like it was taken indoors with artificial light. I can change that later if I want to, but an accurate representation is what I'm after. I decide to take a picture because something looks interesting to me - and when it does, it looks the way it looks, and I want the real thing exactly as it interested me to begin with, to appear in the resultant picture.

Thanks for the comments and suggestions, by the way.

Auto WB always tries to give you an accurate representation of how things really are, that's it's whole purpose. I have for example had Auto WB selected for a bright sunny blue sky Australian day, and then shifted the WB to 'Daylight' and there was minimal to any shift in WB because Auto WB got it right. Same can be said for Cloudy days as well, toggling off from Auto WB to Cloudy and minimal shift occurs. So Auto WB can do a great job for a lot of scenarios, but there will always be those trickier scenes it struggles with and that's where you need to step in and take control. Autumn shots, Snow, Sunrise/Sunset and indoor artificial lighting to name a few. In this regard its no different than some other automation feature in a camera that needs additional control. For example, I may be in Av mode and the shutter speed that the camera has given me is too high for the lens I have on, it's given me a 1600 ISO value whereby I know can take this shot at a far lower shutter speed (there are no moving people for example), so I toggle out of Auto ISO, control/lower the ISO and watch the shutter speed drop down to a level that is going to allow me to take the shot (without blur) whilst controlling noise better. That's Auto mode for you, it works for a lot of scenarios but sometimes you need to tell it whose boss

In reality there is no 'correct White Balance' in the same way that there is no correct Exposure for a shot, it's down to you the photographer to decide what you want. I have shot a sunset before and managed to get something on the back of the screen to represent what I am seeing, perhaps a Kelvin of 7500 etc, but you know what? It looked better when I amped it up to 9000K and changed the tint slightly.

This is one of my earlier test shots with deliberately messing around with WB for a shot (in conjunction with using gels on the flash to try and combat the extreme WB shifts in an attempt to keeping semi natural skin tones);



This was a sunset at a popular spot near where I live, WB was 10,000k in camera for this shot (and blue gels on flash to help combat what would have been yellowly/orangey sickly skin tones on the subjects).

This was taken the same time, this time a WB of 3200K and warmer gel used on the flash;



If you look on the right side of my wifes face (her left cheek and forehead) you can see where the flash didn't reach and that part of the shadow is very blue and shady, proof that the warm gels were helping somewhat but my lighting angles were wrong and there is still too much magenta tint in the skin tones. But it's crazy to see how much you can change the look of the same place through WB. Neither one is correct. The blue tones in the latter image can work really well for industrial settings, the warmer tones of the former for places like beaches etc.

So basically I use AutoWB a lot, toggle out of it when I have chimped an image and can see something is not quite right. Or I just continue on and fix in post.

You might find this video helpful;

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

Not for one minute thinking you need to buy this (I don't even own one and I shoot professional events ), but you will notice that there are several shades of grey to choose from, white to black in fact, there is also another patch of squares for warming and cooling, again more quick and easy fine tuning. You can do all of this without a colour checker in post production (that's what the sliders are for), but it might take longer, so this can be a useful tool for many photographers, not just studio work (though with product photography it is really important to get accurate colours, you don't want to be selling a certain shade of lipstick and the advert colour is indifferent to the real thing etc).

I have seen landscape shooters throw one of these in the shot before they work, something that just helps them get to a starting point of WB that they can feel they can work with, but ultimately there is no right or wrong, just good starting points (like a grey lenscap or WB off grey clouds etc).

What you have to really get your head around is there is no way you can ignore WB, it's part of the camera. The Exposure triangle are the parameters you need to control for exposure, but they have nothing to do with Colour. A picture/photo is a combination of Exposure (shadow & light) + Colour (or lack-of if you go monochrome), the two are necessary and WB is the fourth variable you must deal with as a photographer. There just seems to be a bit of a mental snap in a lot of folks with cameras thinking the Exposure Triangle was all they had to worry about, if only! People can think they are controlling their camera by shooting in Manual mode with WB in Auto, that's controlling 75% of the camera, you're still leaving a variable in Auto mode, and you wouldn't get cross with Av mode for doing its automated thing, so yeah...
In terms of overall image, when you consider a photo is a combination of Exposure + Colour (or mono) then really its like leaving 50% of the final image to the camera to try and do its best for you, it just simply gets it wrong, dslrs are just not that good (you may however find WB is better with computational photography that exists in smartphones, that can better tell what you are aiming at and shooting and automatically flip a WB that is going to be more pleasing for the scene (such as sunset etc). This is where I feel dslrs need to catch up, so that certain modes like Auto WB are just better fine tuned.

Hope this helps.

[Aaron28]

K-1...da40XS...af360fgz on camera...love that this lens has FF coverage!!