Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: White balance ... does it have to be perfect?

  1. #1

    Default White balance ... does it have to be perfect?

    A quick question, when you guys do ballroom shots, do you usually choose to nailed the white balance perfectly?
    Or would you choose not to correct it 100% so as to give it realism?

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    galaxy far far away
    Posts
    1,837

    Default Re: White balance ... does it have to be perfect?

    Quote Originally Posted by DSolZ View Post
    A quick question, when you guys do ballroom shots, do you usually choose to nailed the white balance perfectly?
    Or would you choose not to correct it 100% so as to give it realism?
    im a bit confused, to me getting the white balance correct is close to realism. But you sentence seems to mean the opposite.

    Alot of factors come into play when balancing the colors, the type and temperature of the lights in the ballroom is key. Balancing different lights in any given scene is always a challenge.

    Your definition of perfect would prob also differ from mine, but with that being said i guess everyone would agree that as long as its not at the extreme ends of the color temerature wheel, it should be fine.

    Another way is to just adjust the scene while keeping an eye on skin tones and see which works best for you.

    Id like to hear the workflow of others as well.
    give me a pen, and i'll give you my signature

  3. #3
    Moderator catchlights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Punggol, Singapore
    Posts
    21,902

    Default Re: White balance ... does it have to be perfect?

    Quote Originally Posted by DSolZ View Post
    A quick question, when you guys do ballroom shots, do you usually choose to nailed the white balance perfectly?
    Or would you choose not to correct it 100% so as to give it realism?
    usually in a ballroom there are different kinds of light source, some are incandescent some are LED and some fluorescent, since lighting is mixture, so you won't able to get 100% correct white balance.

    all you can do is balance for the dominant light source, if you want to get closest to the environment.

    but that also have to depends what is your main subject,
    if it is interior, you can afford to make the place more cosier, more grand,
    if it is people, of course you need to make their skin tone more pleasing. no purple no yellow no green faces expect their under colour spot light.
    if it is event, you adjust the colour that can show off the mood.

    there is no hard and fast rule.
    Shoot to Live, Live to Shoot
    www.benjaminloo.com | iStock portfolio

  4. #4

    Default

    No need to be perfect because it all depends on who sees the photos. The audience and the pay master must like it. Most of them would prefer to see the mood of the lightings but usually they would forget how orangy it was on that day of event. Human eyes also adapt to lighting colours. Hence you strike a balance. Not too orangy but not too white. White is for photographers like us to see. Orange is for general audience. But general audience don't like to see so white. They prefer some warmth, but not too warm.
    Last edited by sin77; 22nd July 2015 at 07:58 AM.
    D7100,SB910,17-50/2.8OS,105/2.8VR,85/1.8D,2xE-M1,O60/2.8,12-40/2.8,35-100/2.8,14-42,LX100

  5. #5

    Default Re: White balance ... does it have to be perfect?

    Sorry for not being clear. Typically in a ballroom, light is abit warm .. Hence slight orangy/tungsten from a human POV. So when I mean realism I mean realism from a human eye point of view in a tungsten light source in a ballroom. So to correct 100% I mean showing true skin/object color under daylight (of course you can't correct 100% due to different temperature light being used) but I think you can get "close" if you are not in disco light.

    So the question is whether would you choose to correct for skin tonne as accurate as possible or would you leave some orangy to give it some "realism"since technically we are not shooting under daylight.

    I don't do wedding photo, but was helping my brother to shoot some during his big day. I corrected the skin tone to be as accurate as possible and looks natural enough. When I show it to a friend who does wedding photo, he suggest not to fully correct it as lighting isn't that perfect in a ballroom.

    Would love to hear what you guys usually do.
    Last edited by DSolZ; 22nd July 2015 at 08:38 AM.

  6. #6
    Moderator Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    12,388

    Default Re: White balance ... does it have to be perfect?

    You got already two big pointers to a question that has no single, simple answer:
    1) Do not correct fully, but add a wee bit warmth. In general this is considered more pleasing than the technically correct skin tone.
    2) Do what is expected (or paid for). If some people want to see the orange light then give it to them.
    RAW + Lightroom gives an easy option with creating multiple versions from the same file.
    EOS

  7. #7

    Default Re: White balance ... does it have to be perfect?

    Quote Originally Posted by DSolZ View Post
    A quick question, when you guys do ballroom shots, do you usually choose to nailed the white balance perfectly?
    Or would you choose not to correct it 100% so as to give it realism?
    Hi, Just to give you my feedback based on my experience since I shoot weddings from time to time.

    Since u r talking about ballroom shots, i will be very specific.
    It is indeed very tough to nail the white balance perfectly (especially so in the ballroom).
    So basically, even if u WANT to nail it, it is tough. So you just shoot RAW and PP it later to your liking (or ur client's liking) which links to ur 2nd question in fact.
    So during PP, try your best to correct it (to remove yellow tint in fact) but dont do it 100%. This is to keep the feel of the ballroom and atmosphere.

    At the end of the day, there is no universally agreed WB for this kind of situation bcos it depends on the mood you want to show.

    Hope it helps.

  8. #8

    Default Re: White balance ... does it have to be perfect?

    TS, maybe you can show us examples of the difference you're talking about, since we all see things slightly differently. Generally, I've found that the simple rule is that as long as the bride (and her dress) and groom look good, you're not going to get any complaints

    Just wondering if you talking about a very subtle difference or is it quite pronounced?

    Something like this?



    Not the best example since it's a jpg edit, but to me this is subtle enough that they would both be quite acceptable to the average person and it wouldn't really matter to them. If you met someone who's extra sensitive and particular about it, then like Octarine mentioned, tweak it to their preference.

    Image not mine, image via: http://365days2play.com/photos/2013/...e-Ballroom.jpg

  9. #9

    Default Re: White balance ... does it have to be perfect?

    Yea I think that is a fair example to use.So what I did is I adjust white balance to about what is shown for second pix. I think what my friend suggest is to aim for the color balance of the first pix.I am actually fine with both approach. The pix I have taken are actually candid portraits of the guests so I got too carried away geting the skin tone to be accurate.thanks for the tips guys.

    The photos are for family and relative consumption so the only complains I got is to take away some wrinkles etc . Since my friend made the comment, so was thinking to seek the opinions from the forum as well.

    This is one example of a candid portrait I did.
    https://flic.kr/p/w3UMpu
    Last edited by DSolZ; 22nd July 2015 at 06:50 PM.

  10. #10
    Moderator catchlights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Punggol, Singapore
    Posts
    21,902

    Default Re: White balance ... does it have to be perfect?

    if put both photos side be side, most people will go for first pix.

    if noting to compare, both are acceptable to lay people.

    as for remove wrinkles thingy, tell them only take picture using smart phone, there are many apps can do this stuffs.

    DSLR cameras are very lousy, don't have any apps, can only take ugly pictures.
    Shoot to Live, Live to Shoot
    www.benjaminloo.com | iStock portfolio

  11. #11
    Member Mythmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Buangkok MRT
    Posts
    1,011

    Default Re: White balance ... does it have to be perfect?

    Quote Originally Posted by incubus View Post
    im a bit confused, to me getting the white balance correct is close to realism. But you sentence seems to mean the opposite.

    Alot of factors come into play when balancing the colors, the type and temperature of the lights in the ballroom is key. Balancing different lights in any given scene is always a challenge.

    Your definition of perfect would prob also differ from mine, but with that being said i guess everyone would agree that as long as its not at the extreme ends of the color temerature wheel, it should be fine.

    Another way is to just adjust the scene while keeping an eye on skin tones and see which works best for you.

    Id like to hear the workflow of others as well.
    A perfect white balance means that white is white, no matter what lighting you are in. That's why it's called white balance... balancing for white.

  12. #12

    Default

    The first picture is more appealing. The 2nd one shows too much blue and makes the picture weird or lousy.

    Remove wrinkles? Are u paid? If not ask them to edit it themselves when they received the jpegs. Otherwise blame themselves why never go botox. If they insist, then charge them $5 per photo enhanced.
    Last edited by sin77; 23rd July 2015 at 06:51 AM.
    D7100,SB910,17-50/2.8OS,105/2.8VR,85/1.8D,2xE-M1,O60/2.8,12-40/2.8,35-100/2.8,14-42,LX100

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    galaxy far far away
    Posts
    1,837

    Default Re: White balance ... does it have to be perfect?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mythmaker View Post
    A perfect white balance means that white is white, no matter what lighting you are in. That's why it's called white balance... balancing for white.
    errrr, why are you addressing this to me?

    With that being said, somewhere along the chain of viewership, there will be a fella viewing the said picture on an screen that does not honour color space or a home monitor that has not been calibrated properly. There still are differences on how white is perceived on even similar screens of make and model.

    while its good to get it right at the get go, it still also depends alot on how anal your recepient is.
    give me a pen, and i'll give you my signature

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by incubus View Post

    errrr, why are you addressing this to me?

    With that being said, somewhere along the chain of viewership, there will be a fella viewing the said picture on an screen that does not honour color space or a home monitor that has not been calibrated properly. There still are differences on how white is perceived on even similar screens of make and model.

    while its good to get it right at the get go, it still also depends alot on how anal your recepient is.
    Yes, non calibrated monitors is a challenge.
    D7100,SB910,17-50/2.8OS,105/2.8VR,85/1.8D,2xE-M1,O60/2.8,12-40/2.8,35-100/2.8,14-42,LX100

  15. #15
    Moderator catchlights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Punggol, Singapore
    Posts
    21,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sin77 View Post

    Yes, non calibrated monitors is a challenge.
    He is refering to the viewers, not the photographer who do the editing.
    Shoot to Live, Live to Shoot
    www.benjaminloo.com | iStock portfolio

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •