What Jim said as well as the "benefits" section of the Wiki article that
Jez pointed you too. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAW_format#Benefits>
With a raw file you can change the color balance to anything you
want... as well as multiple times if you so desire. Auto color balance
means only that the desired color balance will never be (quite) correct.
First I should state that I believe people are too hung up on color
balance. During all the time that you used film did you ever use
anything but daylight or incandescent (Type B) balanced film? I'd be
surprised if you ever even used Type B let alone an incandescent,
fluorescent or any other type of color compensating (CC) filter.
Advertising photogs might own a $5,000 color meter and a set of dozens
of Kodak Wratten CC filters to create a true white color balance for
product colors but we ordinary folks didn't venture there. But we can
go there today with raw files if we so desire. But usually we don't
desire such things.
If you set your camera on "daylight" it is the same as using daylight
film. If you use daylight film you will get accurate white balance
between about 10:00 am and 2:00 pm (1400) when the sun is high and the
atmosphere has little influence on the color of the sunlight. Whites
will be bluish white. Earlier or later than that you will get
red/orange/gold tints the closer you are to sunrise or sunset. If you
put your color balance on "auto" it will (with varying degrees of
success) attempt to make your 7:00 pm (1900) sunset look like noon time
by turning all that luscious looking gold color into blue so it looks
like noon. Whether done by accurate auto white balance or more accurate
deliberate white balancing using a white/gray target you are attempting
to always make white look like noon-time white. That is probably *not*
what you really want to do.
Therefore, I would suggest that your first change in modus operandi is
to set you camera on "daylight" and leave it there except for special
occasions. The special occasions are being in very reddish incandescent
light where you *might* choose "incandescent" or being under largely
fluorescent light where you might choose "fluorescent". If you are
under very cloudy skies or very heavy (and complete) shade you might
choose cloudy or shade balance. But not necessarily. The problem with
all of these when shooting JPEG is that it's not perfectly clear what's
going to emerge on the completed image and the color of our little LCD
screens is often not to be completely believed.
The solution is to *always* shoot in raw. If you shoot with a daylight
color balance setting you will probably be pleased with 90% of your
shots regardless of time of day. But if you have raw files you can
readily manipulate the final color balance of those you don't like (even
though they may be actually correct). I shoot only raw on my Canon 5D.
Canon raw files also contain a small embedded JPEG file which shows
what the image will look like if processed according to the cameras
settings when the shot was made. The size of this JPEG varies by camera
model but on the 5D it's 4MP... enough for a very high quality 6x9"
print. These embedded JPEGs can be extracted and used with very little
processing overhead. I don't believe Oly raw files contain an embedded
JPEG but you could choose raw + JPEG and choose the size image you want
that would cover most of your print requirements. You can then turn to
the raw file if you need larger prints or decide to adjust color
balance, exposure, shadows, high lights, contrast, etc. The raw file
for your 510 is probably at least 10 bits per pixel and maybe 12 bits
per pixel which is a lot more info to work with than the 8 compressed
bits of a JPEG. You can usually count on your raw file to provide an
additional stop of shadow and highlight controls for final exposure
adjustments. Such are more likely to be required with digital due to
the linear response of the sensor to light. The sensor's output does
not have the asymptotic response of film to extreme light and dark.
Although the Canon raw files contain a small JPEG I never use this image
except in previews. I always fully process my raw files into full
resolution JPEGs which are complete except for cropping and sharpening.
Cropping is only done to make a specific print and I may make more
than one of different sizes and aspect ratios. Sharpening is only ever
done right before printing since the degree of sharpening is related to
the size and pixel density of the printed image. Also, sharpening for a
print is different than sharpening for a web image. Prints made on an
ink jet printer need to be slightly over sharpened since the ink
droplets flow on the paper and slightly re-soften the image. If you
make JPEGs the camera has already sharpened the image and has made an
assumption about how large that image will be when it's printed. It's
just good luck if it's right.
So, set the camera for daylight but also set it for raw. You might also
add a small JPEG with appropriate print level sharpening and find that
it suits you 90% of the time. When it doesn't suit go get the raw files
and fix, adjust, crop, resize and sharpen just those that need it.
Chuck Norcutt
Jim Nichols wrote:
> Hi Olaf,
>
> I use an E-510 and shoot a combination of RAW+JPEG. I import the images into
> Photoshop Elements 6.0, which has a RAW converter included. I use the JPEG
> images to give me a rough "proof look" at my images, and jot down the
> numbers of the ones that are worthy of further work.
>
> I then open each of the ORF files using the converter. It allows me to
> crop, if necessary, then adjust exposure, color balance, and other options
> before sending the adjusted image into the PSE 6.0 editor. From there, I
> make final adjustments, resize, and decide on a final format for saving the
> image.
>
> One can also go back to the original RAW image and start over, if such a
> choice is desirable.
>
> Jim Nichols
> Tullahoma, TN USA
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Olaf Greve" <ogreve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Olympus Camera Discussion" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 1:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [OM] White-balance / colour balance issues... What to do?
>
>
>> Hi C.H. and Philippe,
>>
>>
>> Thanks for your aswers!
>> It looks like when shooting in JPEG WB balance setting is required for
>> each situation then... All clear.
>> One thing I'm wondering about, however, is the RAW format. I had never
>> looked into it and thought it would be just a lossless format, such as
>> TIFF, however, the remarks from the both of you suggest there are more
>> advantages, like not having to set the WB???
>> Can you (or anyone else) give a quick run-down on the format and its
>> advantages? I'm getting curious to this...:)
>>
>>
>> Thx and cheers!
>> Olafo
>>
>> On 30 Sep 2009, at 16:59, "C.H.Ling" <ch_photo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> Olaf, if you don't like RAW then the only way is to set color temp.
>>> before
>>> shooting. For flash just use "Flash" or "Daylight" WB. For outdoor,
>>> bring a
>>> grey card, lock the white balance by using "One-touch white balance"
>>> at page
>>> 85 of E500 PDF manual.
>>>
>>> C.H.Ling
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Olaf Greve"
>>>
>>>> Hi Philippe,
>>>>
>>>>> Sounds like JPEG to me, do you also shoot RAW?
>>>> Nope, I shoot in (the) high(est?) quality JPEG, never RAW.
>>>>
>>>>> If so, this is kind of non-issue - get the WB dropper (in PS or LR)
>>>>> where you think the white should be, that's it.
>>>> Ehmmm, I don't think I get it... With 'PS' I guess you mean
>>>> PhotoShop?
>>>> If so, wouldn't that just give me an indication of the WB mismatch in
>>>> that particular picture, or will it give me information that can be
>>>> used
>>>> to make global adjustments in the camera in order to compensate for
>>>> the
>>>> mismatch?
>>>>
>>>> What I'm trying to prevent, is to have to do this as post-processing
>>>> step for each picture, and instead try to figure out a global camera
>>>> setting that alleviates these issues as much as possible...
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Olafo
>>>> --
>>> --
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>>> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
>>> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
>> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>>
>>
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|