Well, u just get a colour calibrated monitor, and if the colours match the actual subject then the white balance is correct. If its incorrect. the pic will be either too yellow/red (kelvin value too high) or blue. kelvin too low. fyi, the kelvin is the unit for white balance, as the volt is to potential difference. it corresponds to the colour of a flame at a certain temp.
from my point of view ... theres no such things as accurate , it all depends on what kind of colours u want and which one u " see " it as correct one . What's more important is constant WB esp for newbie photog unless u know how to use manual calculation or adjusting of WB .
just some of my comments bro , me not as pro as colour like u ... got no calibration kit nor any indepth layman science knowledge like you , i only leave it to my eyes to decide what i want ;p
actually....... i have this erking question mark when i got my calibrator. so how accurate is accurate?
there must be a certain guideline to follow since everyone can easily quote that others' photos are off for their WB. that got me quite curious and tried some research but failed to turn out results on these. dont really want everyone to tell me that my WB is wrong and yet i dont know what is accurate WB.
like most of you (the PROs :thumbsup: like s11loop ) already knew that human eyes are not the best judge in gauging WB especially when you are in room with florescent lighting for about fifteen minutes and your ability to perceive what is tungten will be highly skewed. samething likewise in a tungsten room.
just like colour perception: just when you think that the colours of the original look great, someone gives you another version of it and drastically change the way you perceive your original pic....... about how dull it looks.:sweat:
So....... it is back to my good old eyes again! YEAH! :bsmilie:
Thanks to all for the insightful explanations :sweatsm:
still welcomes anyone with a different perspective on how WB should be perceive.