White Balance problem or camera problem... please help

[KhronoS]

Ok people, i understand. First of all I WASN'T PAID, the primary photographer didn't even used my photos )
Second off all when i'm paid i usually shoot raw. In this case i was 350km away from home, i didn't have even a way to recharge my batteries, but i managed to have backup batteries.

My aim was to get used to the settings and make the photos as good as i can in camera, so using raw or jpg was a little irrelevant to me.

I just wanted a solution to make the photos better white balanced in camera. I didn't wanted to edit the photos, although i have to thank JerryPH for the HUE tip, didn't knew that

I am perfectly aware of the RAW pros and the jpeg cons. More than 50% of my photos are made in RAW so i know how to work with it.

I feel like i'm being judged because i went to a wedding for which i wasn't paid, and shot in jpg instead of RAW.

Just needed some tips in how to work with WB so i obtain my best result, and i wanted to be sure that maybe it's something with my camera (yeah sounds weird but that what the primary photographer kept saying to me).
Thanks guys for the tips
I will definitly buy another card so that i can play with 750 RAW images

P.S. Ohh and JerryPH, i dind't mean to say that every nikonian is anti canon just wanted to say that the fellow photographer was a nikonian which hates canon )

 

[Big Mike]

It takes big kahuna's to shoot a wedding in jpeg.... If I could rise to that level I'd be a superhero.....

I don't see it that way. Shooting JPEG is just throwing away a lot of information that could be useful to the image. It's choosing to use a lesser quality in favor of file size.

With the software avaliable (Lightroom for example) batch editing RAW files is not much slower than JPEG.

If you don't want to edit RAW files, then I'd suggest shooting in RAW and setting your software to batch convert them to JPEG, while you do something else. You still end up with JPEG files to play with, but at least you have the RAW files when you want them.

Negative film has a greater latitude than digital, there was more leeway for error and the lab/printer was a more important part of the process.

 

[Bifurcator]

Yep, Mike, that's how I see it too. It's like purposely downgrading and eliminating the professional opportunities afforded in the RAW format.

@ KhronoS,

Yeah, you might not have actually been paid but you were taking the time of the newlyweds for which I guess they expected a photo or two as a payoff. You were there in a "professional capacity" other than that you weren't paid - or so I gather. I'm not trying to nail you to the wall here but you asked - the answer was 'shoot RAW' and the 'professional assistant' was the reasoning behind it.