WB question

[dr.noise]

We are working with RAW format.
RAW is what sensor captures, without any processing.

Therefore there should be no relation between WB setting and what sensor captures, because the sensor captures present light and WB is just a setting for post-processing.
I've been told about that many times by owners of different digital cameras.

But as I see, changing WB settings in Sigma really changes the data sensor registers.

Can you explain me how does it work?

 

[gbainbridge]

But as I see, changing WB settings in Sigma really changes the data
sensor registers.

I don't know the answer, but it's quite feasible for the chip to adjust the gain of each channel whilst recording.

If so, then it must be a technique that's unique to the Foveon, because in a Bayer sensor, the separate channels don't exist at that stage.
--
Thanks,
Gary.

 

[dr.noise]

Incadescent preset doesn't work at all.
It makes the picture even more yellow than Auto.
I don't understand why.

 

[gbainbridge]

Incadescent preset doesn't work at all.
It makes the picture even more yellow than Auto.
I don't understand why.

I think generally incandescant light comes in too many types for a single setting to match the colour properly.

Certainly I've often found that it's better to take shots on Auto or even Daylight then correct them later, than to use an incandescent setting.

On my Canon, the incandescent setting overcorrects to the point where you cannot even get the right colours by processing later.

--
Thanks,
Gary.

 

[Chunsum J Choi]

I Shoot AUTO most of the time. despite what people say, I think AUTO works quite nicely. if you really wants WB to work well, you'll have to do Custom.

Incadescent preset doesn't work at all.
It makes the picture even more yellow than Auto.
I don't understand why.

--
Chunsum

Getting ready for lots of baby pictures.

My Pages:
http://www.pbase.com/chunsum

Sigma Shoots The World:
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/a_sense_of_our_world

For Great SD9/10 Images:
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9

 

[tammons]

After doing a lot of research, asking knowledgeable people and examining different WB setting I found out the WB on the SD9 is just a tag in the raw file.

We are working with RAW format.
RAW is what sensor captures, without any processing.
Therefore there should be no relation between WB setting and what
sensor captures, because the sensor captures present light and WB
is just a setting for post-processing.
I've been told about that many times by owners of different digital
cameras.
But as I see, changing WB settings in Sigma really changes the data
sensor registers.

Can you explain me how does it work?

--
http://www.troyammons.com
http://www.pbase.com/tammons
http://www.troyammons.deviantart.com

 

[tammons]

The SD9 WB is so far off its not funny.
The SD10 is better, but still off.

The only WB settings I use are custom for everthing outdoors and Auto for incandecent.

Thats it.

I sent in a suggestion to add a custom fine tune sticky adjustment for each WB setting in SPP and they did think it was a good idea. I think it would be a great idea. Even custom is too blue.

Incadescent preset doesn't work at all.
It makes the picture even more yellow than Auto.
I don't understand why.

--
http://www.troyammons.com
http://www.pbase.com/tammons
http://www.troyammons.deviantart.com

 

[jtdesign]

After doing a lot of research, asking knowledgeable people and
examining different WB setting I found out the WB on the SD9 is
just a tag in the raw file.

Yes, the SD9 (and 10 ?) WB setting is only stored as a tag - the sensor data is not changed by the cameras WB setting. Because of this the WB can be changed in SPP2 and the X3F file re-processed with the new WB.

In addition to the tag there is a set of WB correction values stored that the camera acquires in auto or custom mode. There is a good argument to only use auto or custom in the camera since then all possible settings are available in SPP2. The only problem with setting the camera's WB wrongly is that the thumbnail pic has poor colour balance.

In some cases of dodgy colour, setting the "wrong" WB and tuning with the colour wheel in SPP2 can produce good results.

John

 

[dr.noise]

After doing a lot of research, asking knowledgeable people and
examining different WB setting I found out the WB on the SD9 is
just a tag in the raw file.

And it should be that way.

But once I did custom WB for incadescent, the pic was far better than Auto. Especially blue channel. And couldn't get the same results with Auto WB and eyedropper or color wheel.

 

[dr.noise]

In some cases of dodgy colour, setting the "wrong" WB and tuning
with the colour wheel in SPP2 can produce good results.

As you said, WB is just a tag, so I should get the same good results from any WB setting.
But I can't.

 

[Matthijs van Wees]

Incadescent preset doesn't work at all.
It makes the picture even more yellow than Auto.
I don't understand why.

--
Chunsum

Getting ready for lots of baby pictures.

My Pages:
http://www.pbase.com/chunsum

Sigma Shoots The World:
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/a_sense_of_our_world

For Great SD9/10 Images:
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9

--

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[email protected] ^ ^

 

[tammons]

It is a tag, but you will not get good results if the camera guesses wrong and applies that tag to the file.

In some cases of dodgy colour, setting the "wrong" WB and tuning
with the colour wheel in SPP2 can produce good results.

As you said, WB is just a tag, so I should get the same good
results from any WB setting.
But I can't.

--
http://www.troyammons.com
http://www.pbase.com/tammons
http://www.troyammons.deviantart.com

 

[jtdesign]

After doing a lot of research, asking knowledgeable people and
examining different WB setting I found out the WB on the SD9 is
just a tag in the raw file.

And it should be that way.
But once I did custom WB for incadescent, the pic was far better
than Auto. Especially blue channel. And couldn't get the same
results with Auto WB and eyedropper or color wheel.

The processing in SPP2 goes beyond the adjustments that can be made with the colour wheel. So altering the WB (using edit white balance) in conjunction with the colour wheel can produce better results.

I still don't think that the WB setting in the camera affects the main RAW data, only the thumbnail. SPP2 processing is greatly affected by the WB setting in the file but this can come from either the camera or from the edit menu.

 

[dr.noise]

I never opened the Edit menu in SPP!!!
And I didn't know there's WB edit dialog!!!
Now I found it, thanks alot

After doing a lot of research, asking knowledgeable people and
examining different WB setting I found out the WB on the SD9 is
just a tag in the raw file.

And it should be that way.
But once I did custom WB for incadescent, the pic was far better
than Auto. Especially blue channel. And couldn't get the same
results with Auto WB and eyedropper or color wheel.

The processing in SPP2 goes beyond the adjustments that can be made
with the colour wheel. So altering the WB (using edit white
balance) in conjunction with the colour wheel can produce better
results.

I still don't think that the WB setting in the camera affects the
main RAW data, only the thumbnail. SPP2 processing is greatly
affected by the WB setting in the file but this can come from
either the camera or from the edit menu.

 

[jtdesign]

it took me a few weeks to find that as well.

John.

I never opened the Edit menu in SPP!!!
And I didn't know there's WB edit dialog!!!
Now I found it, thanks alot

 

[Chunsum J Choi]

yeah, me too...
I knew it's there but looked for it for 2 days.
I think it should be place with the sliders.
AND add a WB temperature slider.

John.

I never opened the Edit menu in SPP!!!
And I didn't know there's WB edit dialog!!!
Now I found it, thanks alot

--
Chunsum

Getting ready for lots of baby pictures.

My Pages:
http://www.pbase.com/chunsum

Sigma Shoots The World:
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/a_sense_of_our_world

For Great SD9/10 Images:
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9