bobobird wrote in post #12192009
I am not sure about the uselessness of AWB, in most day situations it does provide a true representation of the colours ...
So why Cloudy ?
Bobobird, I agree with you, and have 10.000+ photos to prove I thought just like that. I just recently changed my mind, perhaps you weren't still around when we discussed this with David.
Here's what I wrote in post #8864 of the previous T2i thread:
---------------
During our last job, I shot a single image with the 50mm f1.8 because conditions allowed for a controlled environment, and, upon reviewing those images, that particular shot had some characteristics all the images with the Kit lens lacked. It had a particular feel I loved.
I commented this to my father and he agreed. In our last family gathering he used the 50mm (which by the way is his!) for all the shots while I kept the kit lens on for the family pictures. He uses a Rebel XT. Upon reviewing the images, I was blown away by what he had produced and seriously disappointed with my own pictures. Certainly the T2i is the better camera against the XT, so what was at hand? (besides photographer skills, which, of course, are the most important factor! 
).
For one, the lens was clearly better! Focus may be lacking, range is not ideal, but when range is wide enough and focus clicks, the rendition is superb! But, also, I had used Auto White Balance while my father had set his camera to Daylight.
For me, each picture had a different WB, both in temperature and tint, while he had a consistent look and warmth to all the images. Since that day I have not set the camera to Auto White Balance again. I always shoot RAW, so this can be changed in LR, but, I now think that it is better to have a consistent measurable WB setting. So, I set it as close as the conditions I am allow: outside either Daylight or Cloudy (Shade is too much for almost all the conditions I shoot at), and indoors I set it to either Tungsten or Fluorescent. If I am shooting flash, I set it to flash.
Now, since this is very new to me, the first image is always off, as I am not yet accustomed to changing the WB, but the second image is always certain to have a good WB.
Now, the ideal would be to custom set the WB for each shooting scenario, and I have my eye set on those Lastolite EzyBalance charts, but only for work related issues. For everyday shoots, setting the WB as close as possible should be enough.
---------------
Since then, I have never shot another shot with AWB. I think it better to have a known set value and change in post, because every image of a same group share the common WB. With AWB you get slight variations from one picture to the next even in the same environment, and that makes batch post-process much more difficult. I know am accustomed to setting the WB and don't miss the first shot as I did two months ago 
Of course that is just my approach, I don't think AWB is bad and I believe its very accurate most of the time. This is just MY approach to WB, not THE approach .
Rafa.
