[MSL]

My apologies for the need to vent. I'm just so ##*$@#(*)@# at myself!

I bought a couple of used lenses last week and I've been desperate to try them out, but we've had nothing but cloudy, grey days, and I've had little time to go out and play.

Finally I get a sunny day, so armed with my K-5, off I went.

First mistake - forgetting to tell the camera I was shooting with a 70-210 rather than a 28 so who knows how little help I was getting from the stabilization. Not a huge issue as I had plenty of light to work with.

But then, I loaded all the images onto the computer and found I'd forgotten to turn the white balance off of Fluorescent Cool White and onto Daylight! Sure my daughter's snowpants have a really nice pink coloration, but so does everything else!

Help! Can the JPG only images be reprocessed in the camera in batch format? Is it easier to do on the computer - either using the DCU that came with the camera or some other free program. (Yes, I know, Lightroom is the way to go, I'm just not there yet). What little time I've had to do any photography is massive compared to the time I have to sit down and process images, so I haven't spent much time on that angle yet.

Thanks!

[Den]

I know that making the change in DCU works quite well on RAW, (I did the same thing last week, not resetting the WB), don't know on a jpeg

[Adam]

I'm not sure how you'd do it in the DCU, but since they're not RAW files, you can't just reapply a different WB profile. In photoshop you could do a batch action for this...

[Pauld]

Yet another reason to shoot exclusively in RAW format.

[DeadJohn]

In terms of free software, Google Picasa includes Auto Color Fix, a manual Color Temperature slider, and a Neutral Color Picker. Try all 3 features to see which one works best for you. I think it can process JPEGs but can't test it because I no longer use Picasa.

And, echoing what others have said, RAW is much easier to fix after mishaps like this. Consider using RAW+JPG as your save format. Use the JPG first, and if you want to improve on a photo you can process the RAW later.

[MSL]

Well, yes, RAW would eliminate a lot of these problems, or at least make it easier to fix them... but isn't a particularly helpful answer at the moment...
I've only had the camera a few weeks so I'm still mostly just trying things out, and that often means I like to shoot in bursts or with exposure bracketing.

After some playing around. I found that the DCU that came with the camera should be able to change the white balance setting, but I couldn't figure out how to do it in batch mode. On the other hand, Irfanview was able to auto adjust the colors and do a pretty good job of it, and is dead easy to use.

[UnknownVT]

I'm not sure how you'd do it in the DCU, but since they're not RAW files, you can't just reapply a different WB profile. In photoshop you could do a batch action for this...

Yet another reason to shoot exclusively in RAW format.

First I fully acknowledge RAW is technically superior, and can allow more flexibility for correcting errors.

However JPG is not quite as inflexible as one might assume.

Parameters for a JPG can be saved in PDCU (v.4.3.4)
- even a JPG that had been cropped and processed previously -
(I just did it) - as long as (I think) it still has the original EXIF metadata attached.

File>Save Parameter
and correspondingly
File>Open Parameter File
both work on a JPG

This is the photo I just tried:

using Grey-Point selection to correct the Magenta balance - I saved the Parameter (IMGP4490HOrig.ini)-
backed out of the correction, then PDCU
re-opened PDCU - selected that uncorrected magenta photo -
then Opened the parameter file -
this was the end result:


- since the parameter file is so small I'll attach it in a Zip.

I haven't tried batch processing in PDCU
but it seems that almost any processing in RAW probably can be applied to JPG in PDCU

Attached Files

IMGP4490HOrig.zip (671 Bytes, 27 views)

[SpecialK]

If you open many files and highlight them all, I believe PDCU will apply the changes to all at the same time. Been awhile since I used it for any of that.

[UnknownVT]

If you open many files and highlight them all, I believe PDCU will apply the changes to all at the same time. Been awhile since I used it for any of that.

Thanks - that's the thing I tried - highlighting multiple files after having saved a parameter file
- once more than one image/file is highlighted -
the File>Open Parameter File is grayed out and not operable
(it is active on any single file/image).

I also tried using the check method
and again with multiple checked photos highlighted in the custom checked pane
the File>Open Parameter File is grayed out and not active.

This is for both JPG and RAW files.

On my quick look-see/trial it seems I could only apply a parameter file to images/files one at a time.

Be very interested in how one might be able to apply a parameter file in batch mode.

[MSL]

Yup, that's the same barrier I'm hitting...

[Marc Sabatella]

However JPG is not quite as inflexible as one might assume.

While this is true, one thing about your example is a bit different from the OP's case: your light really was magenta. The camera was probably recording the scene with a relatively neutral WB, so the colors you see are the result of the camera accurately recording the color of the light refleced off the scene, without throwing away any data. Whereas the color cast that results from a wrong WB setting often involves throwing away data that otherwise would have preserved. That is to say, there are probably a couple of bits more color information buried in your color cast that in the OP's, so you've more to work with. Eyedropper tools can be useful to gauge this. If you are seeing on or more if the color channels being clipped - values of 0 or 255 - then you,ve lost information aren't getting back. The results you got are remarkable, I agree, but I'mbetting if you took an eyedropper to it, you'd find relatively little actual clipping of any color channels. That isn't always the case when the camera shoots with a WB at the far end of the scale.

BTW, another piece of advice to the OP that is too late now, but could be useful for the future: get in the habit of turning the camera off when you change lenses. Then you will see the prompt to enter focal length when you turn it back on. Havingthe camera off while changing lenses is also recommended as a way of avoiding attracting too much dust. Also diminshes whatever tony risk there might have been of a static discharge damaging something.

[MSL]

BTW, another piece of advice to the OP that is too late now, but could be useful for the future: get in the habit of turning the camera off when you change lenses. Then you will see the prompt to enter focal length when you turn it back on. Havingthe camera off while changing lenses is also recommended as a way of avoiding attracting too much dust. Also diminshes whatever tony risk there might have been of a static discharge damaging something.

Marc - I do turn the camera off to switch lenses - but I probably hit the shutter button after I turned it on before setting the focal length or just forgot to pay attention to that alert. Call it a combination of being in a rush to finally get out to some sunshine, the fact that I've only had the K-5 for a month, and the manual focus lenses for half that, and a normal case of sleep deprived daddy brain.

[UnknownVT]

While this is true, one thing about your example is a bit different from the OP's case: your light really was magenta. The camera was probably recording the scene with a relatively neutral WB, so the colors you see are the result of the camera accurately recording the color of the light refleced off the scene, without throwing away any data. Whereas the color cast that results from a wrong WB setting often involves throwing away data that otherwise would have preserved. That is to say, there are probably a couple of bits more color information buried in your color cast that in the OP's, so you've more to work with. Eyedropper tools can be useful to gauge this. If you are seeing on or more if the color channels being clipped - values of 0 or 255 - then you,ve lost information aren't getting back. The results you got are remarkable, I agree, but I'mbetting if you took an eyedropper to it, you'd find relatively little actual clipping of any color channels. That isn't always the case when the camera shoots with a WB at the far end of the scale.

Thank you very much for the informative post.

My original intention wasn't to show how the WB could be corrected - merely to show that PDCU can do RAW type manipulation on a JPG - not only that, a cropped, resized processed JPG - as long as it retained the Pentax EXIF meta data.

However your informative post inspired me to go try out if RAW can do better in a WB type situation - I used what I thought was a demanding test - shooting Tungsten balance outside in daylight - the typical thing I might do.

I actually shot DNG/RAW+JPG so it is the same shot paired.

Uncorrected JPG - shot with Tungsten WB out in daylight - original Resized Only:


Resized JPG image opened in PDCU - set Daylight WB - saved Parameters -
backed out of correction and PDCU -
reopened PDCU selected uncorrected resized JPG and Opened Parameter file -
gave this:

Note the WB adjustment tinted the white notation letters on the pic - evidence that the adjustment/correction was done on this resized JPG.
I attach the parameter (ini) file as a zip

RAW/DNG processed in PDCU set WB to daylight:


It would seem that PDCU can correct a pretty drastic but typical mistake of shooting Tungsten balance outside in Daylight on a JPG that is at least comparable to the correction on a RAW/DNG

all the small pics should still have EXIF attached (caveat: PhotoBucket can mysteriously drop metadata)

[MSL]

Thanks all for the very thoughtful replies. I agree DCU can do a lot - and merely by switching the WB from whatever wrong setting I had to Daylight. (My biggest problem now is to get it to do it in batch mode). Here's an example of what can be done. The first is the raw image, the second using DCU to change the white balance and the third using Irfanview's auto adjust colors.
Original - cool white fluorescent


DCU Corrected white balance to daylight


Irfanview auto adjust colors

[UnknownVT]

Just a follow up on this issue with WB on JPGs

It would seem that PDCU can correct a pretty drastic but typical mistake of shooting Tungsten balance outside in Daylight on a JPG that is at least comparable to the correction on a RAW/DNG

The JPG of Tungsten WB in daylight did not look as blue as I expected -
I am more used to the pic looking as if shot through a strong blue filter.

Re-reading what Marc wrote:

While this is true, one thing about your example is a bit different from the OP's case: your light really was magenta. The camera was probably recording the scene with a relatively neutral WB, so the colors you see are the result of the camera accurately recording the color of the light refleced off the scene, without throwing away any data. Whereas the color cast that results from a wrong WB setting often involves throwing away data that otherwise would have preserved. That is to say, there are probably a couple of bits more color information buried in your color cast that in the OP's, so you've more to work with. Eyedropper tools can be useful to gauge this. If you are seeing on or more if the color channels being clipped - values of 0 or 255 - then you,ve lost information aren't getting back. The results you got are remarkable, I agree, but I'mbetting if you took an eyedropper to it, you'd find relatively little actual clipping of any color channels. That isn't always the case when the camera shoots with a WB at the far end of the scale.

Although the setting was Tungsten WB - I am beginning to suspect the K-x may do some AWB against the set "fixed" Tungsten WB.

To check that I dropped back to my old K100D and took outdoor pics with Tungsten WB - this time the results were more in line with what I was expecting:

The K100D does not do RAW+JPG - so I have to use separate shots.

To set the scene as a reference - JPG of daylight scene using Daylight WB:


JPG Tungsten WB - Original resize only:

this is more like what I was expecting
(compare with the K-x shot in my previous post #13)

The above resized JPG in PDCU - changing WB to Daylight:

this time that PDCU WB adjustment setting did not do much.

The same resized JPG this time using PDCU Grey-Point on middle of the lower white border of Macbeth chart:

improved but not that great......

Now a RAW/PEF shot with Tungsten WB - camera settings:


using PDCU WB set to daylight:

much better correction.

Same RAW/PEF file this time using the Grey-Point on approx the same spot as I did on the JPG

again better balance correction.

All the pics should have the EXIF still attached.