Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2011 3:38 pm Post subject: workflow issues with white balance
Hi there I am a working professional who is always working on my workflow. It gets kind of deep, so I hope you folks can keep up.
I download my images with Photomechanic, this is a very fast browser that has considerable options, I do my first and second culling and move the keepers onto a different folder. This folder is processed into TIFFs using the camera manufactures software, as it does considerably better than Adobe products with noise and some detail. From there, I open the Tiff folder with Bridge, and then to Adobe Camera Raw. I consider ACR a very powerful program and can do amazing things, but raw conversion is not its best suit. From there on its not important.
My problem is white balance, I can no longer change the white balance using known temperatures i.e. 5000k in ACR. The program goes into dummy mode and just gives a slider with no apparent meaning. I can use the white balance dropper, but that does not give me consistency when I know exactly what temp I am looking for. Changing the slider and just eyeing it is a poor solution for prowork where consistency is the name of the game. If I just set the balance with the camera manufactures software, it has issues, for one its lowest point is 2600k, useless for very warm lighting like candles, which could dip down to 2300k. All this stuff is usually not an issue, but I shoot events sometimes, and I'll be dammed if they don't always turn the lights way down. I am forced to bump up the ISO and if I don't use the camera makers software, the images are unusable with noise. Adobe is poor with noise, conversion, and 3rd party software does no better i.e. Noise Ninja. Even if I can get a proper white, I need to usually warm it up a little so the end viewer won't be shocked at the massive color change, but it needs to consistent.
Any thoughts would be appreciated, and don't bother telling me about LR, I would rather chop my arm off. _________________ All I do is photography, well that and laundry.
Joined: 26 Nov 2010
Posts: 368
Location: Australia
Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2011 4:12 pm Post subject:
Sorry if I've got the wrong end of the stick - are you saying that your tif files don't provide the Kelvin temperature scale that you are used to having with raw files? If so:
"Note: The range and units for the Temperature and Tint controls are different when you are adjusting a non-camera raw image, such as a TIFF or JPEG image. For example, Camera Raw provides a true-temperature adjustment slider for raw files from 2,000 Kelvin to 50,000 Kelvin. For JPEG or TIFF files, Camera Raw attempts to approximate a different color temperature or white balance, but because the original value was already used to alter the pixel data in the file, Camera Raw does not provide the true Kelvin temperature scale. In these instances, an approximate scale of -100 to 100 is used in place of the temperature scale."
Sorry if I've got the wrong end of the stick - are you saying that your tif files don't provide the Kelvin temperature scale that you are used to having with raw files? If so:
"Note: The range and units for the Temperature and Tint controls are different when you are adjusting a non-camera raw image, such as a TIFF or JPEG image. For example, Camera Raw provides a true-temperature adjustment slider for raw files from 2,000 Kelvin to 50,000 Kelvin. For JPEG or TIFF files, Camera Raw attempts to approximate a different color temperature or white balance, but because the original value was already used to alter the pixel data in the file, Camera Raw does not provide the true Kelvin temperature scale. In these instances, an approximate scale of -100 to 100 is used in place of the temperature scale."
You did a great job in wording my issue, arbitrary numbers like -100 to 100 are a poor excuse to get consistent results. I believe that it may be possible to use mireds in place of a ridiculous scale such as -100 to 100. Thank you for helping, but I still have no solution. It is interesting to note that no white balance adjustment is made prior to the TIFF conversion. I really have no terrible issues with the camera makers software, but it doesn't go deep enough and is a hassle to use. I hate to spend hundreds of dollars on software for only one purpose, adjusting white balance, in such poor capacity. _________________ All I do is photography, well that and laundry.
Joined: 05 Mar 2003
Posts: 3987
Location: Cheltenham, UK
Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2011 5:47 pm Post subject:
I use Adobe Camera RAW, but I know many other professionals that swear by Capture One and the superior RAW handling (particularly in relation to noise). I can't testify to this and so is just hearsay, but it could be worth investigating.
On the other hand, I would not consider myself a 'poweruser' of Adobe RAW, but I can get pretty good results with the noise reduction in that program. It's no secret but leaving the sharpening controls alone and working on the luminence and colour/detail sliders even before you get to Photoshop can produce fairly predictable results.
From working with photographers though, I would say that ultimately they would want the 'out of the camera' to be the best it could be. This is where it gets tricky - you failed to mention your camera make or model and whilst you mention colour temperatures you don't say whether you shoot by using a grey card or any other suitable/preferred calibration device.
Oh and welcome to the forum.
Sorry for being a little bland on the photography stuff, but primarily I'm a retoucher not a photographer. _________________ If life serves you lemons, make lemonade!
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
