vuk_vuksanovic Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 please forgive this novice question, but i am trying to figure out if it's best to spend hours reading the manual and testing various white balance options the camera offers (pentax istDS) or simply adjusting colour temperature when doing a photoshop conversion of the raw file. the location will be lit mostly by ridiculously large windows, but some shots will require the boost of a 600W hot-light or two. just to cut off one potential line of responses, let me note up front that i don't use (believe in) flash. thanks in advance! vuk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_sokal___dallas__tx Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Can you custom white balance with the Pentax? With the d-70 you can shoot a white or gray card and get the actual wb balance for your conditions. That's what I do in your situation. You can convert your raw file of course, but if you can get it right when you expose it, it's one less thing you need to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken_hughes4 Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 ok Vuk, I have to ask, what do you have against flash? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 you can either gel the windows or gel the hot lights...its the only way to truly balance the light... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vuk_vuksanovic Posted February 23, 2005 Author Share Posted February 23, 2005 i think i should clarify a bit. first, i don't really care about "true" colours and i don;t mind doing the RAW colour temp adjustment in photoshop--it's certainly easier than fussing around with white balance on the camera: you see, i will be moving the model around and the degree of light mixing is going to vary from spot to spot. if RAW is RAW and the camera's white balance effort is summed up by the value it assigns to the colour temp, then photoshop is the answer. if something else is going on and i'm going to lose capture quality, then it's another matter. grant, gel the windows? yes, of course, i'll have my butler take care of it. as for flash, i don't like the look, i don't like the violence of it going off and i don't like guessing at what exactly i am shooting. vuk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 you sound like you didnt need us after all....carry on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobatkins Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 You can't balance mixed lighting using color temperature. Mixed light doesn't have a color temperature by definition. If it did, it wouldn't be mixed. Color temperature implies a continuous black body spectrum. In mixed light, whatever overall correction you apply will be wrong in some areas if it's right in others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vuk_vuksanovic Posted February 23, 2005 Author Share Posted February 23, 2005 grant. i do still need you. does one get better resolution/quality somehow by getting the white balance right on the spot as opposed to doing it during RAW conversion? while i don't care abour perfect colour, i certainly want something in the ballpark. vuk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjmurray Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 I agree with Bob. Here's an example of early morning light mixed with tungsten lamps. As you can see, correcting for one just exaggerates the other. The less yellow I make the tungsten, the more blue the outdoor light becomes.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 <I>does one get better resolution/quality somehow by getting the white balance right on the spot as opposed to doing it during RAW conversion?</I><P>No you don't get better by doing it on the spot. End of story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vuk_vuksanovic Posted February 23, 2005 Author Share Posted February 23, 2005 bob. good point. things like this make indoor colour photography of people very annoying. (btw: this is the final shoot for my review, should have a draft for you in about a week or so; i won't let the cat out of the bag, but let's just say i'm keeping the camera) vuk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 thats why you change the color of one of the light sources, hence the gel.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprouty Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Grant's solution would have solved Steve J. Murray's problem. You might want to think about it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vuk_vuksanovic Posted February 23, 2005 Author Share Posted February 23, 2005 grant. sorry if it came across the wrong way, but i was making a little joke. if you saw how big the windows were in this million-dollar house i'll be shooting in, you'd understand. as for affordable gels on the lights, they would melt--is there something i don't know about? vuk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 you get gels made for hot lights....its either that or gel the windows....thats how they do it in the movies....what can i say... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vuk_vuksanovic Posted February 23, 2005 Author Share Posted February 23, 2005 grant. a shop here sold me a gel made for a hot light and it melted in under half a second. i was very pissed off. vuk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 well you got the wrong one. its either that or go use some strobes....thats the best way to shoot this stuff anyway... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearhead Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 If it's a million dollar house, they should have enough money for the right gels. It's not that difficult. Music and Portraits Blog: Life in Portugal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhooru Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Vuk, your asking the wrong question, its not a matter of "balancing the white balance" in camera or in the file. You can't "balance" it because there will be no one source to balance. You will have one tempeture on one side and another on the other side. Grant's right, even though you seem resistant to hearing it. Hmmm maybe you can, if its a static scene, take two or more images, changing the white balance to cover each light source, than trying to mask and erase/blend in PS. Or something like that. If you don't want to use strobes instead of hot lights than you have to deal with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitmstr Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 mixed lighting is the same on film as it is on DSRL or movies or whatever they will invent next. (and WE know who THEY are...) Because it is mixed lighting (and that's what your heading speaks of) it has more than one K value. The *only* way to deal with mixed lighting is with gels, in which case you would have to decide which light source will become the main one. Then, you would correct the other so that both match to your likings. You don't have to match them perfectly, if you want a little shift you can have a difference of 100-300 K. It's a matter of personal taste, desired mood, etc... If you don't want the gels then, you will have to decide which part of the picture you want to let shift, the tungsten source or the daylight. If you balance your camera to tungsten (around 3200-3400k) the light from the outside will shift to blue. Conversly, if you balance for daylight, the hot light will shift to red. I rarely use RAW but, if you feel unsure it's a good way to remedy a possible problem. Otherwise, use a colormeter or the rule of film (daylight/tungsten). OF course, you will have to compensate for the hour of the day as you progress in the shoot. Also, direct sunlight thru the window will measure differently than indirect light (say shaded from a tree). The windows themselves may have some tint on them. It's hard to say without those details available. So, there you have it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rj Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 With your scenario, I would white balance for the light coming in the windows and color correct the hotlights. It seems much easier to do it this way instead of pulling huge sheets of color correct gell all over the house. If you get good hot light color correction gels, try a supply shop that caters to video production, it should take them quite a while to burn (they will actually start to change color first), that is if you are putting the gels far enough away from the bulbs. If you are using a light like a tota light or even a 600w fresnel, put the gel far enough away from the source that it wont burn, you could use a barndoor or that contraption that tota lights seem to come with (gel holder) that is a huge pain in the butt. I like to use clothespins to hold the gel to the barndoors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sf_photo1 Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Hi Vuk- I deal with mixed lighting all the time. I find if I am shooting with a constant setup setting the CWB is terrific. I palce a McBeth chart in the scene and then RAW conversion is easy using the eyedropper. However if I am moving from room to room and each one has different ratios of incandescent - florescant - daylight then I let the camera select it's own white balance. It does a pretty good job and as long as there is a neutral grey in the scene they can all be adjusted. Just remember how easy it can be to clone out a small grey card in the corner! Hope this helps- Andrew San Francisco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_de_luna Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Convert your RAW twice - once for each type of lighting, combine the images in Pshop and blend the layers in whatever manner works best for you. Pretty easy and lots of flexibility. I've done exactly what you plan to do and it worked well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vuk_vuksanovic Posted February 23, 2005 Author Share Posted February 23, 2005 paul de luna.<br><br>excellent advice. i will try a few that way and then have my girl stay still for that extra fraction of a second for some critical frames without light mixing. i shall finish off, worry-free, by pulling out the leica loaded with tri-x. the wonders of technology...<br><br>thanks to everyone.<br><br>cheers,<br>vuk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jean_. Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 For the lights, I see filmcrews taping a filter (some sort of thin polyester film) over the lamp. Of course not direectly against the glass, they use barn doors and the filter is some 10cm away from the heat. Occasionally the filter gets to close to the heat and melts, but they are cheap and in general, the lighting guy told me, there is no problem unless it's turned on for a very long time or gets to glose to the hot glass. They don't use gels because it's to much hassle. I guess with a blue filter you could get the lights quite close to the daylight, so that the difference will be easier to fix afterwards, if you don't like the mixed look. Converting the raw twice is an excellent idea! Tri-x and the leica, now that is so unfair ;-) Have fun! Have fun! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now