You guys are gonna slaughter me for asking this...

[e.rose]

I'm shooting my first wedding this weekend... what equipment should I take?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
JUST KIDDING! TOOOOOOTALLY KIDDING! But... see... now that you got all angry and then it turns out that's NOT what I want to know... my ACTUAL question won't make you want to come after me as bad because it's mild in comparison... right?

So I've been thinking about this all day...

I keep reading things in books and on sites like strobist.com where the photographer talks about setting the camera's white balance to a specific preset...

But this kind of confuses me.

If you're shooting in RAW, doesn't it *not* matter what your WB is on the camera because you can always change it around?

I mean, I understand changing it in camera so you don't have to change it later... and so you can also see an immediate result of the effect it has... but if I used the "Daylight" WB in my camera... it can still be changed around in post as if I had shot it on Auto white balance the whole time, right?

I feel like this is such a friggin newbie question, but I've been overcomplicating things (are any of you really surprised?) in my brain for the past couple of hours thinking about this.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

You can't have slaughter, without a little laughter.

 

[marmots]

i never change my white blalance on camera... i think its a waste of time

 

[e.rose]

i never change my white blalance on camera... i think its a waste of time

The question isn't *do* you change it though. It was, what happens if I do? And then wanna change it again later? I've never changed mine either, but all these photographers with MUCH more experience than little ol' me keep talking about doing so, so there has to be something I'm missing. :lmao:

 

[analog.universe]

I only set the white balance in camera so that my RGB histogram comes out roughly accurate. I'm gonna tweak it during RAW conversion no matter what, but if I can get it close, then I'll know if I'm gonna run out of top end on a particular channel when it comes time to pp.

 

[e.rose]

I only set the white balance in camera so that my RGB histogram comes out roughly accurate. I'm gonna tweak it during RAW conversion no matter what, but if I can get it close, then I'll know if I'm gonna run out of top end on a particular channel when it comes time to pp.

So the purpose of changing it in camera is pretty much just to get a better idea of what you're looking at for post then? Or did I interpret your response incorrectly?

 

[kasperjd4]

I think it really depends on the person you ask. Some are going to say it's best to get it right in camera, some are going to say fix it in post. Shooting RAW you can fix it in post, unless it's really, really far off. Like, if your shot comes out all yellow and you can't bring the colors back because everything is no matter what. I'd say if you're shooting raw and don't mind fixing it afterwords than just choose whatever you feel works best.

My boss only uses the Kelvin scale for his white balance, but he's like a god. Another photographer I work with always keeps his on Auto no matter what.

 

[analog.universe]

I only set the white balance in camera so that my RGB histogram comes out roughly accurate. I'm gonna tweak it during RAW conversion no matter what, but if I can get it close, then I'll know if I'm gonna run out of top end on a particular channel when it comes time to pp.

So the purpose of changing it in camera is pretty much just to get a better idea of what you're looking at for post then? Or did I interpret your response incorrectly?

Yeah, that about sums it up. It's entirely for feedback to make shooting decisions, and does not in itself affect the final output directly.

 

[e.rose]

Gotchya. That's what I *thought*... but then I started second guessing myself and you all know how THAT always goes.

As always, thanks for your help! :sillysmi: :hug::

 

[Josh66]

If you're shooting in RAW, doesn't it *not* matter what your WB is on the camera because you can always change it around?

I mean, I understand changing it in camera so you don't have to change it later... and so you can also see an immediate result of the effect it has... but if I used the "Daylight" WB in my camera... it can still be changed around in post as if I had shot it on Auto white balance the whole time, right?

The difference is that it's faster to do it right in camera.

From the kind of shooting I do, anyway - 95% of the time, Daylight is right. Auto is not very reliable on some cameras too. And if consistency matters to you - auto will be all over the place.


You can either use the setting that won't have to be fixed in PP, or the one that will have to be. ...I know which one I would use.

 

[kundalini]

I rarely..... no wait, I never use auto WB. Not anything wrong if someone does, but I like to believe I get more consistant WB by using a preset. Flash when I flash and cloudy when outside (I have a preference for warmer tones). Otherwise, I usually have it set to 5500K. But you're right, I also tweak in post to suit my tastes.

 

[Kerbouchard]

The one camera setting/decision that can't be recovered from the RAW data is what the auto-white balance would have came up with. Sharpness, contrast, picture controls, etc, etc, etc, can all be applied after the fact with the appropriate software. White balance cannot. If you pick a custom or preset white balance, the camera does not record what it thought was the correct white balance and that is information you will never be able to recover.

Now, some have pointed out that the auto white balance is not always accurate, and I would agree...but then again, when you are looking at an image a week, or a year later, sometimes it's nice to be able to see what kind of tint the camera thought was present.

We don't always have something neutral in our photos to base things on. I'm not so great at distinguishing 3,000 different shades of white like some women. For me, I need all the information I can get, so I will typically take a shot of a calibration target and still shoot auto white balance. That way, at the end of the day, I get the camera's best guess, my best guess, and a theoretically perfect one...sometimes I like the camera's guess better than the perfect one or my guess. Just my .02.

Oh, and as far as saving time...it takes all of about 3 seconds to sync an entire shoot to a preset/custom white balance in ACR. Doing it in camera just doesn't save any time at all and doesn't make one photo any more 'right' than another.

As far as the exposure/histogram goes, a proper white balance will not give you an accurate histogram...setting a unibal will, but then all your photos will look green on the review screen and you still have to adjust everything afterwards.

 

[Ronaldo]

The basic question on this topic:

Does adjusting the white balance (or using auto) have ANY impact on the raw file???


​

 

[Kerbouchard]

The basic question on this topic:

Does adjusting the white balance (or using auto) have ANY impact on the raw file???


​

Yes, it impacts how the RAW File is displayed and it directly effects what white balance is recorded as part of the RAW data. Both parts of the RAW file since a JPEG preview and metadata are encoded in the RAW data.

 

[Ronaldo]

So there are four basic elements that effect the exposure of the raw file??
- ISO
- aperature
- shutter speed
- and white balance