Still Trying to Convince Myself on RAW

Started Jun 29, 2013 | Photos thread
Atgard
Regular MemberPosts: 427Gear list
Like?
Re: Still Trying to Convince Myself on RAW
In reply to Gary Eickmeier, Jun 30, 2013

Gary Eickmeier wrote:

OK, the majority opinion is that WB is completely correctable in RAW. I am just thinking of an RGB histogram and having one of the colors not recoverable in post. I must try shooting a grey card with the full gamut of WB settings and see if it is correctable.

I know there are shots in JPG that cannot be white balanced in post if you screw them up. If RAW can overcome that, then that alone makes it worth it.

With all due respect, it's not a majority opinion, it is a provable fact.

As someone pointed out above, Lightroom (and I assume other RAW converters) default to setting WB "as shot." But you can change it to whatever you want, before you "process" the RAW data and save it as a JPG. It's like how sharpness defaults to +25, but you can change it before applying that and exporting your JPG.

To test it, simply shoot a scene in RAW + JPG at 2500K, then Auto WB, then 9900K. All 3 RAW files will be identical once you tweak the WB slider to the same place -- they will just be "pre-set" at different values to start with. Meanwhile, the 2500K and 9900K JPGs will probably be unsalvageable.

So yes, it is a good reason all in itself to shoot RAW: just stick it in Auto WB and never worry about having a shot ruined due to the wrong WB.

 Atgard's gear list:Atgard's gear list
Sony SLT-A37
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
+1New
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow