Raw processing and White Balance

[karjar]

I am just starting to work with RAW files from my 300D. I have looked at pics in Raw shooter Essentials, DPP, and Bridge (PS CS2). The pictures I was working with were in a stage theatre (dark lighting, dark backgrounds, and lit players. This was my sons Drum Recital. As I tinker with settings, I wrestle with what "looks" right, and I am sure this develops with experience, but my question is, if I *know* that a certain logo is white, and I use the WB colorpicker/eyedropper, does that give me the "best" representation of the color balance? I ask because it seems to make the picture brighter/cooler, as compared to "as shot" white balance (no I didn't set a custom white balance), which tends to be warmer. Neither is essentially bad, just different, and I guess in trying to train myself, I am looking for some tips that help teach me what the "right" light/color for a picture is. I also notice, that depending on what software I use for RAW conversion, the pictures open up looking different in color/light, so maybe there is no such thing as "right" only "better" ?
Any suggestions to mentor a person to good color is appreciated.

[tim]

I use CS2, and I correct color until it "looks right" to me. A calibrated monitor would help a lot. Without it get a few pics printed at a lab, and ask them to do no correction on the photos, from there you can tweak the photos and your monitor.

For exposure I hold down alt (or control, I forget), and move the exposure slider until the most important details (usually the face) starts to clip pixels in the red channel.

Also, read this book (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/032127878X/qid=1107482395/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/102-9127707-6895351?v=glance&s=books&n=507846).

[karjar]

Thanks, I have that book listed in my wish list (I think I give up on the hints to the wife and will have to get my own wishes!).
I agree about the calibrated monitor, but I guess even without it, my problem is looking at a picture on the screen and adjusting and wondering when good enough is good enough. (Perfectionism can really clash with creativity, but when harnessed is great).
I also can do an adjustment, and think yeah thats good, but gee the other was good too, and then wonder if any of it is good. Keep practicing I guess, and watching these forums.
I just wanted to confirm if using the whitebalance eyedropper on something you know is white, will that give the best lighting white balance?

[PhotosGuy]

I *know* that a certain logo is white, and I use the WB colorpicker/eyedropper, does that give me the "best" representation of the color balance? Maybe. Some eyedroppers only read 1 pixel which may not be representative of the average white. In PS you can read an average up to 5 pixels.
I agree about the calibrated monitor, but I guess even without it, my problem is looking at a picture on the screen and adjusting and wondering when good enough is good enough. Even a rough by eye calibration is better than what you're doing.
http://www.normankoren.com/makingfineprints1A.html

[karjar]

Thanks will check out that site. I did do the Adobe Gamma adjustment for the monitor does that help?

[Curtis N]

Hold on a minute here, folks...

karjar asked about adjusting white balance in a theatre. Theatre lights are full of different color gels which are used in various combinations. Now they probably don't get too artistic when lighting a drum recital, but there's a fair chance that at least some of the light hitting the performers has gone through a red, blue or amber gel.

The result of this is that something that you know is white, isn't white anymore, and it's intentional. Now I'm no white balance expert so correct me if my logic is flawed, but it seems to me that using the eyedropper to set the white balance in this situation will not generate an accurate color reproduction.

Consider the "cyc" drop used in many theatres. It's a white curtain that generally covers the back of the stage. I've seen these turned into brilliant reds or deep blues by flooding them with gelled lights (see attached image). I don't think you would want to hit it with your eyedropper, even though you know it's white. A drummer's white shirt at a recital is likely to be influenced the same way, albeit to a lesser degree.

I'm really interested in what the more learned folks here have to say about this, because I have done a little theatre photography and hope to do more. So far my technique is to use the tungsten setting and hope it's close. Is there a better way?

What say you, light temperature gurus?

[jimsolt]

Hold on a minute here, folks...

karjar asked about adjusting white balance in a theatre. Theatre lights are full of different color gels which are used in various combinations. Now they probably don't get too artistic when lighting a drum recital, but there's a fair chance that at least some of the light hitting the performers has gone through a red, blue or amber gel.

The result of this is that something that you know is white, isn't white anymore, and it's intentional. Now I'm no white balance expert so correct me if my logic is flawed, but it seems to me that using the eyedropper to set the white balance in this situation will not generate an accurate color reproduction.

Consider the "cyc" drop used in many theatres. It's a white curtain that generally covers the back of the stage. I've seen these turned into brilliant reds or deep blues by flooding them with gelled lights (see attached image). I don't think you would want to hit it with your eyedropper, even though you know it's white. A drummer's white shirt at a recital is likely to be influenced the same way, albeit to a lesser degree.

I'm really interested in what the more learned folks here have to say about this, because I have done a little theatre photography and hope to do more. So far my technique is to use the tungsten setting and hope it's close. Is there a better way?

What say you, light temperature gurus?

Worked in theatre and in television. White balance is done differently in TV, but when possible we went to "TV lights" -- both brighter and whiter. Not only are the stage lights gelled, they are often dimmed which further changes the color temp.

If you are shooting in stage lighting, incandescent is a good bet. Automatic might work well also. I would assume you are trying to accurately record the stage look, and I agree that if you try to make a non-white white, you are looking for trouble or perhaps a different look. That's in the White Balance category where you are defining the color temperature of the light for your camera.

I'm not aware of any eye droppers in my RAW white balance conversion and I'm not aware of any white balance ajustments in Photoshop Elements after the RAW conversion is made. There are eye droppers for ajustments in other areas -- brightness, levels, etc., but that isn't white balance. If at that point you wish to select a "white" or a "black" that might work out OK.

Jim

[Curtis N]

If you are shooting in stage lighting, incandescent is a good bet. Automatic might work well also.
Incandescent (tungsten) gives acceptable results generally. Automatic doesn't even come close, at least on the 300D. With all those gels and dimmers I'm guessing the color temperature varies quite a bit across the stage. Probably confuses the camera's algorithms, not to mention the fact that the camera erroneously assumes the light isn't intentionally colored.

See this thread for an example of auto white balance in the theatre (not pretty).
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=75523

Thanks for the insights.

[karjar]

Thanks for the input so far guys, very interesting. Curtis you did say something that got me thinking. I had been trying to find a color balance that made skin tones what I think they should be, plus I knew the logo on the base drum front skin was white. so I used those two things to trigger from. what I wasn't thinking was, how should this have looked based on what I saw. that is, I think I am trying to create an image with "good outdoor" light, as opposed to a good image, based on how I saw it on stage.