Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

One shot - 3 White Balance
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Digital Gallery MF
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2010 3:48 pm    Post subject: One shot - 3 White Balance Reply with quote
My skill in White Balance (WB) is minimum. Any advice will be much appreciated. C & C is welcome for the photos.

Photo #1, WB @ 5618


Photo #2. WB @ 7500


Photo #3. WB @ 4800


Which photo (WB) so you prefer and how do you usually set your WB?

Last edited by my_photography on Sun May 23, 2010 10:15 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2010 3:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I would vote for the first one, the second is too warm and the third too cold...

Regards.
Jes.


PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2010 4:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I agree with Jes about the first one, 5600 is about standard. But in this picture I think the colour balance might be wrong and adjusting the WB doesn't affect this. The red in the skin colours and the girl's top is on the intense side but the blue in the sky looks a little faded. I tried adjusting the saturation of each colour using the Hue/Saturation tool in PS and it looks better to my eyes.

I normally use Auto WB.

Last edited by peterqd on Sat May 22, 2010 5:06 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2010 5:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Somewhere between the 1st and 3rd would be right. I do like a slightly warmer look, so if I had to pick, I'd say #1.


PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2010 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Imho, this image is too complex for white balance setting alone to 'correct'.

Understanding White Balance

Although the following refer specifically to Photoshop, other PP programs are similar.

Levels and for when you want even more control Curves

The Complete List of Tutorials


PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2010 6:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The first two are just fine. The right WB depends on what you want from the image - different WB gives different feel. Of course going beyong what is reaasonable isn't necessarily good - I think #3 is way too cold. #1 IMHO is good, and the best of these three, but #2 can be nice if you want too get a warmer feel.


PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2010 9:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
peterqd wrote:


I normally use Auto WB.


Me too. Always Auto WB and shooting in RAW.
No trouble warranty.

Regards.
Jes.


PostPosted: Sun May 23, 2010 3:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Jesito wrote:
peterqd wrote:


I normally use Auto WB.


Me too. Always Auto WB and shooting in RAW.
No trouble warranty.

Regards.
Jes.


Unfortunately auto white balance for Sony A700 is not great.


PostPosted: Sun May 23, 2010 3:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
siriusdogstar wrote:

Understanding White Balance

Although the following refer specifically to Photoshop, other PP programs are similar.

Levels and for when you want even more control Curves

The Complete List of Tutorials


Thanks for the link. Very informative and straight to the point.


PostPosted: Sun May 23, 2010 5:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here's the alterations I made with the Hue/Saturation tool, what do you think of it now? Beautiful building by the way, thanks for letting us see it. I'd like to see some bigger shots if poss.



Last edited by peterqd on Sun May 23, 2010 6:13 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun May 23, 2010 6:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
peterqd wrote:
Here's the alterations I made with the Hue/Saturation tool, what do you think of it now? Beautiful building by the way, thanks for letting us see it. I'd like to see some bigger shots if poss.


For my taste is it too cold, too blue.


PostPosted: Sun May 23, 2010 10:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Anu wrote:
For my taste is it too cold, too blue.

Maybe your eyes are too accustomed to watching red squirrels! Wink


PostPosted: Sun May 23, 2010 10:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
peterqd wrote:
Beautiful building by the way, thanks for letting us see it. I'd like to see some bigger shots if poss.


I shot in raw (actually compress raw) so the file is big 13M. Even after saving in JPEG, the file is still 6.4M. I am using a resize program which reduces the file to 56k or so. Thanks for the effort. I know I did not give you much to play with.

I know the reduction definitely means a lot of info is loss. Unfortunately, from my eye, I don't see a lot of loss. Actually, is there a file size we should limit ourselves when uploading to the forum?


PostPosted: Sun May 23, 2010 10:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have done a bit of hue and saturation adjustment for blue & red myself. What do you think about this one?

#4. With Hue & Saturation adjustment.


PostPosted: Sun May 23, 2010 10:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think this is the best so far...


PostPosted: Sun May 23, 2010 10:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
my_photography wrote:
I have done a bit of hue and saturation adjustment for blue & red myself. What do you think about this one?

That looks a whole lot better than any of the first three, much better balance now. Smile

56k is a very small file, it means you've lost much more information than necessary using that resizing program. There isn't any limit on file size for uploading as far as I know, only the image size (same thing really). I'm not fully up to speed with the changes made recently, but you can post images up to max 1024px wide, the height is not so critical. I *think* you can upload an image up to 3000px wide using the Upload Image button and it resizes for you automatically.

Last edited by peterqd on Mon May 24, 2010 9:31 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2010 2:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
[quote="peterqd"]
my_photography wrote:


56k is a very small file, it means you've lost much more information than necessary using that resizing program. There isn't any limit on file size for uploading as far as I know, only the image size (same thing really). I'm not fully up to speed with the changes made recently, but you can post images up to max 1024px wide, the height is not so critical. I *think* you can upload an image up to 3000px wide using the Upload Image button and it resizes for you automatically.


I wrote something two days ago but apparently it never gone through the forum.

Any idea what is the max dpi for posting? Or does it not matter? My photos are usually 8''x12'' before the frame. I have really no idea what the resizing software is doing to the dpi.


PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2010 9:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi, yes, I read your question so it did get through OK. I think by accident I clicked on the the wrong button when I was replying and I deleted it, sincere apologies for that. It's very easy to do when you're not concentrating. Rolling Eyes

Your image above is only 96 DPI, which makes a small image for printing and a small filesize suitable for fast emailing etc. For viewing on a PC screen, the software has to enlarge the image and remap every pixel to a number of your screen pixels. This drastically reduces the image quality. On the other hand, using a high resolution for better quality creates huge unmanageable filesizes, so a compromise has to found. I generally use 300, sometimes 350. It's usual to use the actual pixel count along each side to describe the size of an image for screen viewing, for example 900 x 600 pixels, rather than the DPI.


PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2010 11:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
peterqd wrote:
Hi, yes, I read your question so it did get through OK. I think by accident I clicked on the the wrong button when I was replying and I deleted it, sincere apologies for that. It's very easy to do when you're not concentrating. Rolling Eyes

ROTFL! If Peter was a boxer, he'd knock himself out! Laughing


PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2010 2:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
martinsmith99 wrote:
peterqd wrote:
Hi, yes, I read your question so it did get through OK. I think by accident I clicked on the the wrong button when I was replying and I deleted it, sincere apologies for that. It's very easy to do when you're not concentrating. Rolling Eyes

ROTFL! If Peter was a boxer, he'd knock himself out! Laughing

We are human after all. Smile


PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2010 3:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
martinsmith99 wrote:
peterqd wrote:
Hi, yes, I read your question so it did get through OK. I think by accident I clicked on the the wrong button when I was replying and I deleted it, sincere apologies for that. It's very easy to do when you're not concentrating. Rolling Eyes

ROTFL! If Peter was a boxer, he'd knock himself out! Laughing

I've actually done that! Laughing
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Digital Gallery MF
Page 1 of 1