WB Before and After shooting - RAW

Started Feb 25, 2007 | Discussions
The Developer Senior Member • Posts: 1,615
WB Before and After shooting - RAW

Setting correct WB before and after shooting (RAW) - does it matter? Why?
I shoot with D200 and D1H (if that makes a difference)....
--
-thedeveloper

mitsosmitsou Regular Member • Posts: 329
Re: WB Before and After shooting - RAW

I've heard that it matters but personally I cannot see any difference

Barry McLaurin Regular Member • Posts: 211
Re: WB Before and After shooting - RAW

It matters if you use the histogram to nail exposure in camera rather than tweaking in post. The in-camera histograms are affected by the WB setting at the time the shot is captured. You must use UniWB in order to view histograms that reflect the actual data recorded by the sensor.

Barry

 Barry McLaurin's gear list:Barry McLaurin's gear list
Sony Alpha 7R II Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D Rokinon 14mm F2.8 IF ED MC Sony FE 35mm F2.8 Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +4 more
LeungPhotos
LeungPhotos Forum Pro • Posts: 11,757
Re: WB Before and After shooting - RAW

I would think so, since when you convert from raw it will come in as shot. Then you will need to select the correct wb for each photo, it might become a big pain or annoyance.

-- hide signature --
 LeungPhotos's gear list:LeungPhotos's gear list
Nikon D80 Nikon D3S Nikon D7000 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +7 more
Kallel00 Senior Member • Posts: 1,043
Re: WB Before and After shooting - RAW

The Developer wrote:

Setting correct WB before and after shooting (RAW) - does it
matter? Why?
I shoot with D200 and D1H (if that makes a difference)....
--
-thedeveloper

for whats it's worth I usually use AUTO + 1 , as often suggest on these forums, and most of my shots end up okay, except night photos which are often screwed up (too much orange)

aclo Regular Member • Posts: 480
Re: WB Before and After shooting - RAW

The Developer wrote:

Setting correct WB before and after shooting (RAW) - does it
matter? Why?
I shoot with D200 and D1H (if that makes a difference)....

If your question is whether the raw data is affected by the choice of WB, you can easily answer it by downloading IRIS:
http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/us/iris/iris.htm

which is meant for astronomical applications. It allows you to view the raw data before any interpolation (as grayscale).

Shoot two photographs with different WBs and the camera on a tripod (and exposure etc constant), load them into IRIS and see for yourself whether the raw data has changed or not.

DaveHutch Senior Member • Posts: 1,975
Re: WB Before and After shooting - RAW

I did a quick test yesterday afetr someone alse commented on this a few days ago.
Definitely more noise if the WB is way out.
If it's reasonably close, doesn't seem to make much difference
--
Dave H
I can only help one person each day...
...and today is not your day!

(tomorrow doesn't look good either!)

 DaveHutch's gear list:DaveHutch's gear list
Fujifilm X-T1 Canon PowerShot G15 Fujifilm X70 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +1 more
Julia Borg Veteran Member • Posts: 7,280
Re: WB Before and After shooting - RAW

DaveHutch wrote:

I did a quick test yesterday afetr someone alse commented on this a
few days ago.
Definitely more noise if the WB is way out.

that is a very strong statement. please let's see raw files.

-- hide signature --

Julia

OP The Developer Senior Member • Posts: 1,615
What is UniWB

and how do you use it?

Barry McLaurin wrote:

It matters if you use the histogram to nail exposure in camera
rather than tweaking in post. The in-camera histograms are affected
by the WB setting at the time the shot is captured. You must use
UniWB in order to view histograms that reflect the actual data
recorded by the sensor.

Barry

-- hide signature --

-thedeveloper

tpf1952 Regular Member • Posts: 266
Re: WB Before and After shooting - RAW

It's a very correct statement as well.

Post production can help, but proper exposure and white balance in the field will almost always produce a cleaner, less noisy image.

-- hide signature --

Tom F.
Raleigh, NC

Julia Borg Veteran Member • Posts: 7,280
Re: WB Before and After shooting - RAW

tpf1952 wrote:

It's a very correct statement as well.

I'm afraid it is absolutely incorrect.

are you saying that in 2 raw files equally exposed (same shutter speed, same aperture) - but with different white balance settings - there is any difference in raw data?

proper exposure is another interesting subject, but let's leave it for another thread, shall we?

-- hide signature --

Julia

Julia Borg Veteran Member • Posts: 7,280
Re: What is UniWB

it is a special white balance setting that disables white balance

the idea is as following. white balance is essentially 2 multipliers which are used to equalise sensitivity of red and blue channels to the sensitivity of green channel. those multipliers are dependent on the light spectrum (color of light), so they are variable. because they are applied to raw data after conversion to digital, there is no point in using them in camera. application of this coefficients in raw conversion through click-grey method or by copying white balance from a setup shot provides same result.

on the other hand, in camera those coefficients seriously distort histogram display in red and blue channels, preventing good exposure judgement.

you need Nikon Capture NC to load UniWB into the camera.

http://www.pochtar.com/UniWB.zip

NearUniWB is very close to UniWB, but works better with some converters due to some "feature" of those converters

Linear custom curve in the archive further prevents any histogram distortions. cleanest (as far as histogram showing actual data distribution) settings are Adobe RGB, Mode II, hue 0, saturation normal, sharpening none.

-- hide signature --

Julia

uwe_r Veteran Member • Posts: 3,429
Re: WB Before and After shooting - RAW

tpf1952 wrote:

It's a very correct statement as well.

AFAIK the in-camera whitebalance setting is only effecting JPEGs (and RAW previews). RAW data is raw, with no processing instructions (WB, sharpening, saturation, tone curves, yaddah...) applied. Of course opening a RAW in NX will respect all in-camera settings, but they can be adjusted. 3rd party converters will only read the WB data (some incorrectly due to Nikon's encryption) and ignore all other processing instructions - so the default conversion you see will vary by converter. Still the data part of the RAW file will be identical in all cases, the processing instructions in the header may differ.

Cheers,
Uwe

 uwe_r's gear list:uwe_r's gear list
Canon PowerShot G15 Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 70D Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM +10 more
Julia Borg Veteran Member • Posts: 7,280
Re: WB Before and After shooting - RAW

3rd party converters will only
read the WB data

that's a little too blanket statement

-- hide signature --

Julia

Ray Ritchie Veteran Member • Posts: 4,012
But...

Isn't it true that it depends on how you determine "correct exposure"? If, for example, you use the histogram, which is based on a JPEG file, not RAW, won't WB affect your judgment of what exposure is "correct"? In that case, even if you're shooting RAW, you may not choose the "optimum" exposure if you use the wrong WB.

Just trying to learn here...

Ray

 Ray Ritchie's gear list:Ray Ritchie's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Sigma 24-105mm F4 DG OS HSM +1 more
uwe_r Veteran Member • Posts: 3,429
Re: WB Before and After shooting - RAW

Julia Borg wrote:

3rd party converters will only
read the WB data

that's a little too blanket statement

Ooops Should maybe have said "the ones I have tried"... I regularly use CaptureOne Pro, Aperture, Raw Developer and Lightzone, very seldomly ACR, played with Silkypix for a while, but did not like it - none of them picked up e.g. sharpening or saturation settings from the camera. As all of them would interpret the instructions differently, I am rather glad they ignore it. Did I miss something?

Cheers,
Uwe

 uwe_r's gear list:uwe_r's gear list
Canon PowerShot G15 Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 70D Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM +10 more
Julia Borg Veteran Member • Posts: 7,280
Re: But...

if you're shooting RAW,
you may not choose the "optimum" exposure if you use the wrong WB.

any white balance but no white balance is the wrong white balance

why to want white balance multipliers to distort histogram? why not to set those multipliers to "1", effectively cancelling them? if they are set to "1", then they will not affect histograms.

-- hide signature --

Julia

williams-pics Contributing Member • Posts: 874
Re: WB Before and After shooting - RAW

Barry McLaurin wrote:

It matters if you use the histogram to nail exposure in camera
rather than tweaking in post. The in-camera histograms are affected
by the WB setting at the time the shot is captured. You must use
UniWB in order to view histograms that reflect the actual data
recorded by the sensor.

Barry

This sounds extremely complicated, so your saying that shooting everything on AWB and adjusting the WB in a raw converter as I have been doing for over 200,000 images in the last 7 years is not going to give me good quality images, have I got news for you it works great and I have dozens of framed prints in my clients office's and literally hundreds of images published in newspapers, brochures and magazines to prove it.
Regards,
Bruce.

P.S. I only have 50 years experience in photography, processing film and making colour and b/w prints and shooting digital for the last 7 years, what do i know !!!!

Julia Borg Veteran Member • Posts: 7,280
Re: WB Before and After shooting - RAW

shooting
everything on AWB and adjusting the WB in a raw converter as I have
been doing for over 200,000 images in the last 7 years is not going
to give me good quality images,

replace "good" for "best possible" and you are good to go.

-- hide signature --

Julia

Ray Ritchie Veteran Member • Posts: 4,012
Re: But...

OK, sorry for the interruption - I see you had already answered the question earlier in the thread, and I just jumped in the middle.

I assume the UniWB file you linked earlier is only for D200, since that's what the OP mentioned, is that right? Is there a D100 equivalent process?

Ray

 Ray Ritchie's gear list:Ray Ritchie's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Sigma 24-105mm F4 DG OS HSM +1 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads