Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS General Gear Talk Flash and Studio Lighting 
Thread started 19 Apr 2011 (Tuesday) 12:01
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

X-Rite ColorChecker Passport

 
sigma ­ pi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,204 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Los Angeles
     
Apr 30, 2011 21:38 |  #61

digital paradise wrote in post #12323580 (external link)
Actually I started having the same problem again. I'll call Xrite on Monday.

Bummer :/ good luck :)


Don't try to confuse me with the facts, my mind is already made up.
http://www.flickr.com …6850267535/in/p​hotostream (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Saxi
Goldmember
Avatar
2,781 posts
Joined Mar 2008
Location: NH, USA
     
May 02, 2011 10:47 |  #62

Has anyone tried the Data Color SpyderCheckr? I would really love to know if they are truly lighting neutral as they claim. Data Color says you just need to shoot and create a profile once, and use it for all lighting. They also say they have 4 times the control points using Presets rather than Calibration Profile.


5D III, 24-105mm f/4 L, 135mm f/2 L, 70-200mm f/4 IS L, 580EX II
Full Gear List
Flickr Photostream (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ben_r_
-POTN's Three legged Support-
Avatar
15,894 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
     
May 02, 2011 11:10 |  #63

malow wrote in post #12285830 (external link)
ive joined a mini colorchecker with WhiBal. can't live without it. ;)

QUOTED IMAGE

Thats a great idea, the only problem I have with that is buy the time you buy all that youre at about the same price as the passport!


[Gear List | Flickr (external link) | My Reviews] /|\ Tripod Leg Protection (external link) /|\
GIVE a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. TEACH a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
malow
Member
Avatar
169 posts
Likes: 2
Joined May 2009
Location: Brazil
     
May 02, 2011 14:21 |  #64

ben_r_ wrote in post #12332867 (external link)
Thats a great idea, the only problem I have with that is buy the time you buy all that youre at about the same price as the passport!

correct, but i got the mini colorchecker before CC Passport existed, so, i really didn't have a choice ;P

also, mine is smaller, and whibal is more neutral than the neutral patches in CC.

also, the mini CC looks like its "discontinued" :(


mods: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/malow/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TMR ­ Design
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
23,883 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Huntington Station, NY
     
May 02, 2011 14:33 |  #65

malow wrote in post #12333978 (external link)
correct, but i got the mini colorchecker before CC Passport existed, so, i really didn't have a choice ;P

also, mine is smaller, and whibal is more neutral than the neutral patches in CC.

also, the mini CC looks like its "discontinued" :(

More Neutral? Sorry, not possible. Neutral is neutral.


Robert
RobertMitchellPhotogra​phy (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PhilF
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,737 posts
Likes: 511
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Valencia, CA
     
May 02, 2011 16:33 |  #66

I was about to get one when I got gigs for doing fashion catalogs... they hire me to push the shutter button ONLY and use their in-house retouchers.... so didn't really bother buying one.


http://philfernandezph​otography.com (external link)
http://www.philfashion​photography.com (external link)
https://www.instagram.​com/philfernimagery/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/philfphotography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
malow
Member
Avatar
169 posts
Likes: 2
Joined May 2009
Location: Brazil
     
May 02, 2011 17:34 |  #67

TMR Design wrote in post #12334031 (external link)
More Neutral? Sorry, not possible. Neutral is neutral.

mmmm.. not quite. "neutral" its a term used to specify "neutral enough", meaning "it reflect the same as bounced on it". but even the most neutral objects shift a little bit.

a spectrophotometer readings tell that whibal its the most neutral, also, they do reading and only ship those below 0.5 in "a" and "b" in LAB color space.

the colorchecker have lower neutrality and lower linearity thought the entire spectrum.

the difference is small, but i like the best i can get in some things ;)

more info: http://www.babelcolor.​com/main_level/ColorCh​ecker.htm (external link)


mods: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/malow/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TMR ­ Design
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
23,883 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Huntington Station, NY
     
May 02, 2011 17:41 |  #68

malow wrote in post #12334969 (external link)
mmmm.. not quite. "neutral" its a term used to specify "neutral enough", meaning "it reflect the same as bounced on it". but even the most neutral objects shift a little bit.

a spectrophotometer readings tell that whibal its the most neutral, also, they do reading and only ship those below 0.5 in "a" and "b" in LAB color space.

the colorchecker have lower neutrality and lower linearity thought the entire spectrum.

the difference is small, but i like the best i can get in some things ;)

more info: http://www.babelcolor.​com/main_level/ColorCh​ecker.htm (external link)

Absolutely incorrect. A neutral gray card, regardless of reflectivity, has equal amounts of red, green and blue. If something is neutral then you can't have something more neutral.

You're using incorrect terminology to express what you're really trying to say but to say that something is more neutral is incorrect and impossible.


Robert
RobertMitchellPhotogra​phy (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sigma ­ pi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,204 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Los Angeles
     
May 02, 2011 17:49 |  #69

malow wrote in post #12334969 (external link)
a spectrophotometer readings tell that whibal its the most neutral, also, they do reading and only ship those below 0.5 in "a" and "b" in LAB color space.

Is that strait from the Whibal website? Some times the "perfect" white balance is not perfect. A photo may need to be warmed up or cooled down depending on the mood. I usually let them get me in the ball park but make my own decision from there. Being within .00002% does not matter to me.

That only sets white balance and does not do any kind of color management.


Don't try to confuse me with the facts, my mind is already made up.
http://www.flickr.com …6850267535/in/p​hotostream (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
malow
Member
Avatar
169 posts
Likes: 2
Joined May 2009
Location: Brazil
     
May 02, 2011 18:32 |  #70

TMR Design wrote in post #12335008 (external link)
Absolutely incorrect. A neutral gray card, regardless of reflectivity, has equal amounts of red, green and blue. If something is neutral then you can't have something more neutral.

You're using incorrect terminology to express what you're really trying to say but to say that something is more neutral is incorrect and impossible.

well, i think its the correct terminology. if i say something is "white" does not mean "perfect white", or that all whites are the same.

"more neutral" only depend how precise you measure the neutrality. may be irrelevant to most, bu not to me.

sigma pi wrote in post #12335063 (external link)
Some times the "perfect" white balance is not perfect. A photo may need to be warmed up or cooled down depending on the mood. I usually let them get me in the ball park but make my own decision from there. Being within .00002% does not matter to me.

all correct. perfect white balance/profiling means "correct color", not "better image". warming, cooling, etc, its all personal taste. everyone have their own.

the whibal its just "the close to absolute neutral i found" for WB, nothing more.

and by my calculations, its more like 0.2% ;P


mods: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/malow/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TMR ­ Design
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
23,883 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Huntington Station, NY
     
May 02, 2011 18:45 |  #71

malow wrote in post #12335307 (external link)
well, i think its the correct terminology. if i say something is "white" does not mean "perfect white", or that all whites are the same.

"more neutral" only depend how precise you measure the neutrality. may be irrelevant to most, bu not to me.


all correct. perfect white balance/profiling means "correct color", not "better image". warming, cooling, etc, its all personal taste. everyone have their own.

the whibal its just "the close to absolute neutral i found" for WB, nothing more.

and by my calculations, its more like 0.2% ;P

Comparing the word neutral to a family of colors doesn't work. You're missing the point. If you understand neutrality then you wouldn't be using the term 'more neutral'. There aren't degrees of neutrality. Neutral, in it's simplest form means unbiased and neither positive or negative. The word has meaning and can't be interpreted as you would like. In color management and white balance a neutral target is just that. It's neutral.

More neutral seems to be a term you've created. It doesn't exist anywhere in the link you provided and it doesn't appear anywhere on the WhiBal site or the X-Rite site or the ExpoImaging site, etc..

I'm not sure why you're insisting it could be otherwise but please consult a dictionary and some other resources. Neutral is neutral. You can't change that no matter how much you try.


Robert
RobertMitchellPhotogra​phy (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
malow
Member
Avatar
169 posts
Likes: 2
Joined May 2009
Location: Brazil
     
May 02, 2011 19:51 |  #72

TMR Design wrote in post #12335379 (external link)
If you understand neutrality then you wouldn't be using the term 'more neutral'. There aren't degrees of neutrality. Neutral, in it's simplest form means unbiased and neither positive or negative.

TMR Design wrote in post #12335379 (external link)
In color management and white balance a neutral target is just that. It's neutral.

if neutral is "unbiased and neither positive or negative" none white balance cards are neutral. none have a and b in LAB = 0

so if you don't like the word, sorry.

Expodisc use the term "extremely neutral" (does not exist in your dictionary i believe), and they say it have a 0.28, b -0.15, or, "not neutral" by your definition.
http://www.expoimaging​.com …keywords=ExpoDi​sc_Neutral (external link)

Ultra Digital Grey Kard, says "the most spectrally neutral white balance card available". "most" neutral? WTF? if i recall, there's no such thing, as you say. also, one user measured a -1.6, b -0.4. NOT neutral (i mean, your neutral).
http://www.digitalimag​eflow.com …page/productinf​o_DGKU.htm (external link)

X-Rite ColorChecker White Balance, says it is "spectrally neutral", and "absolute neutral". also, it is a -0,7 and b 1,1. how many neutrals are?
http://xritephoto.com …duct_overview.a​spx?ID=944 (external link)

Opteka Premium Reference Color & White Balance Grey Card, have "high degree of spectral neutrality". Holy mother. not even in RGB Space it is neutral (162, 162, 160). again, this is "neutral" or not?
http://opteka.com …ordigitalphotog​raphy.aspx (external link)

SO, looks like there's something more than just "neutral"

TMR Design wrote in post #12335379 (external link)
More neutral seems to be a term you've created. It doesn't exist anywhere in the link you provided and it doesn't appear anywhere on the WhiBal site or the X-Rite site or the ExpoImaging site, etc..
I'm not sure why you're insisting it could be otherwise but please consult a dictionary and some other resources. Neutral is neutral. You can't change that no matter how much you try.

looks like i don't create the "variations" of neutral, they exist. so my firts post about it was ok.

im not insisting, im just trying to make my point, you started all this "mess", and you should do more research before say that someone is wrong, and avoid say something stupid like "You can't change that no matter how much you try" WTF?.....


mods: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/malow/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TMR ­ Design
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
23,883 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Huntington Station, NY
     
May 02, 2011 19:57 |  #73

malow wrote in post #12335762 (external link)
if neutral is "unbiased and neither positive or negative" none white balance cards are neutral. none have a and b in LAB = 0

so if you don't like the word, sorry.

Expodisc use the term "extremely neutral" (does not exist in your dictionary i believe), and they say it have a 0.28, b -0.15, or, "not neutral" by your definition.
http://www.expoimaging​.com …keywords=ExpoDi​sc_Neutral (external link)

Ultra Digital Grey Kard, says "the most spectrally neutral white balance card available". "most" neutral? WTF? if i recall, there's no such thing, as you say. also, one user measured a -1.6, b -0.4. NOT neutral (i mean, your neutral).
http://www.digitalimag​eflow.com …page/productinf​o_DGKU.htm (external link)

X-Rite ColorChecker White Balance, says it is "spectrally neutral", and "absolute neutral". also, it is a -0,7 and b 1,1. how many neutrals are?
http://xritephoto.com …duct_overview.a​spx?ID=944 (external link)

Opteka Premium Reference Color & White Balance Grey Card, have "high degree of spectral neutrality". Holy mother. not even in RGB Space it is neutral (162, 162, 160). again, this is "neutral" or not?
http://opteka.com …ordigitalphotog​raphy.aspx (external link)

SO, looks like there's something more than just "neutral"

looks like i don't create the "variations" of neutral, they exist. so my firts post about it was ok.

im not insisting, im just trying to make my point, you started all this "mess", and you should do more research before say that someone is wrong, and avoid say something stupid like "You can't change that no matter how much you try" WTF?.....

I didn't start this mess. I believe it was you, but that's ok.

I'm just trying to prevent others from picking up your incorrect terminology.

You can believe what you want but you haven't proven anything.

You can use whatever terms you like. Personally, I don't care but you're misinterpreting everything and twisting it into what you would like it to be.

We can now agree to disagree. At this point I have no intention of trying to convince you otherwise.

BTW, I didn't insult you but you seem to have to go that route.

If you want to be accurate, try the term "closer to neutral". That is what you're saying and that's what those sites are saying but they are not saying more neutral. Once again, neutral is neutral, my friend.


Robert
RobertMitchellPhotogra​phy (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
k.CHU
Goldmember
1,115 posts
Joined Mar 2008
Location: City of Angels
     
May 02, 2011 21:02 |  #74

Neutral is Neutral.

"extremely" "absolute" "high degree" are all but marketing terms. And lets just say that the manufacturers are true, who can really see a 0.28 difference? Unless you can see pixels at print size level...


Kevin Chu Photography (external link)
Canon 5DII | 85 1.8 | 50 1.8 | B800(x3)
Flickr (external link) (Jan 2011) | Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pbelarge
Goldmember
Avatar
2,835 posts
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Westchester County, NY
     
May 02, 2011 21:18 as a reply to  @ k.CHU's post |  #75

Would it make sense to try an use the Xrite Passport when shooting:
1. landscape images?
2. Architectural images?

Thanks


just a few of my thoughts...
Pierre

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

18,380 views & 0 likes for this thread
X-Rite ColorChecker Passport
FORUMS General Gear Talk Flash and Studio Lighting 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Carlosmq
923 guests, 290 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.