Trying to understand white balance

[Dr PR]

Since this is a discussion of white balance, I thought I would post some examples.

 

I recently bought a cheap LED ring light. It does produce "white" light, plus all sorts of silly color effects for kids taking selfies. I just wanted to see how it would do.

 

The camera (Nikon D5200) has several white balance settings for incandescent, fluorescent, direct sunlight, flash, cloudy, shade, auto and preset manual. I turned the ring light on and positioned a white card in front of it. I selected the Preset Manual option and set the white balance. The lens was a Nikon AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm  f/2.8G IF-ED macro lens (unfortunately it isn't a "Turbo" lens). It is an excellent macro lens! Actually, maybe a bit too good. Every time I look at model photos made with it I see a lot of imperfections in my work!

 

 

 

 

The photo on the left was shot with the "AUTO" white balance setting. The camera had to guess the colors and there were no white objects in the photo. The colors are awful! The shot on the right was with the preset white balance, and these colors are very close to the light brown bulwark interiors, black cap rail and wood tones of the deck - about what I see (with both eyes open) in diffused sunlight.

 

 

 

 

Here are two more photos shot the same way. The AUTO white balance setting seems to have excess magenta, possibly because the cheap LED light really doesn't produce a true white light. Again, the shot on the right with the Preset white balance adjusted to the LED light produces pretty accurate colors.

 

I did no editing on all but the last photo except cropping to the same view area. The one above right is a photo stacked image of six shots to get a good depth of field.  But I did nothing to change the colors from what the camera captured.

 

I hope this shows that you should use a custom white balance for any "non-standard" light source (and cheap LEDs are not a "standard") if you want to get good color rendition.

 

Edited November 22, 2021 by Dr PR

[wefalck]

I have replace in our home almost everywhere the traditional incandescent bulbs with warm-white (3600 K) LED-bulbs, including the lighting in my workshop area.

 

Currently, there are no LEDs that emit light of this temperature, so 'white' LEDs that emit at around 5550 K are covered with a yellow lacquer.

Although this results in about 10% absorption losses, from the psychological point of view I find their light more pleasing and less factory- or hospital-like.

 

In consequence, I also take my workshop photographs at this light and did not experience any problems with the white balance. However, different LED-bulbs or -lights (I also have a 3600 K indoor LED-floodlight in my workshop) may have slightly different light temperatures.

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

Photography can be a very capricious subject.

Some days I prefer  the first photo and some other days I prefer the other one.

One is at 3100 and the other one is at 4300 degrees Kelvin. 

The color I see with my eyes is closer to only one of these 2.

 

I often had that dilemma when taking photos of model ship building with neon lighting depending of the color correction given in the camera.

This model ship is 100% cherry wood. When I cut cherry wood it is white and after aging it becomes more red. Tung oil has also the same effect as aging the wood on its color. So, I could say if I want a recent construction, I will go white and if I want  an older one I will add some red. There are so many way to change the colors...

 

Actually, I did upgrade the neon lighting and added LED lights and the degrees Kelvin are always set at 4300.

 

Which photo is which is not important,  if I can find one that I like!

Edited November 22, 2021 by Gaetan Bordeleau

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

9 hours ago, wefalck said:

I have replace in our home almost everywhere the traditional incandescent bulbs with warm-white (3600 K) LED-bulbs, including the lighting in my workshop area.

In the workshop, if I want to see the color as the eye sees it, I will use around 4500 Kelvin but most importantly, if I want to be able to see all the details, I will use LED lights with high lumens.

[wefalck]

Yes, a lot of lumen are important, in particular when one's eyes get older ... As I said in an earlier post I prefer to build in a light colour in which my models are likely to be seen in the future and this is likely around 3600 K. A temperature of 4500 K might be a good compromise between incandescent light temperature and daylight.

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

On 11/22/2021 at 3:53 PM, wefalck said:

A temperature of 4500 K might be a good compromise between incandescent light temperature and daylight

 

Roughly, I chose 4300 Kelvin because 5500 is too "clear". Also, it is not because you buy a light rated at 6500 Kelvin that it will measure really 6500 Kelvin. They often take measure in ideal conditions and this is usually not the case at home.

 

I did a simple test to try to verify if there are advantages to work with the correct color range:

 

2 identical photos, except one at 4300 Kelvin (left) and one at 3400 (right side).. One parameter is also different the speed: 1/60 sec  and 1/20. Lower degrees needs a longer shutter speed.

 

Are there advantages to work and see more accurate colors? I would say that the answer is yes. More accurate colors also means more accurate details. The same way the more light the more details we can see, there is also another variable which can increase the amount of details,: the color range.

 

Here is another example: During the construction stage, I shoot some photos. At the end, I also shoot some global views. Then I examine the photos results on a computer screen. By having more accurate color, I can see more accurately the details and easily see where corrections are needed.

 

Strangely enough, the first tool a new model maker will buy is probably some kind of saws. There are many ways to make the task much easier for the aspiring model maker and they are not all tools. Before beginning to work, there are 2 tools that I would absolutely want to have: an electric height table "to work at the good height". and few LED light to easily see what I am doing.

[Nirvana]

So here is the rhetorical question:
How important is that the white balance is perfect when taking pictures of their models for our members?
More important: Is the viewer monitor set properly?

How do you know? - Probably not!

This is me:
I use dual monitor with my computer - one is an Asus the other a HP, when set to same all settings - my screens are showing details and different colors.
Both running same resolution/frame rate/ color and from one and the same video card and using same type of output!

 

Take your picture being out-door with clouded sealing will create the best scenario without any hard shadow or highlight.
Many pro-photographers of cars and other models has been doing it this way.
Even better having a grey/white cloth hanging over the photographer along with the model to create an almost balanced light.

There are so many aspects to consider in this matter.
So, bottom line the white balance in the digital age can be thrown out - still today a proper white balance reference card set beside with the "model", is needed to will create the right setting.

 

As for us here at MSW, take your pictures and upload the one you are most happy with - it's not a competition.
If the white balance is slightly off, I don't care - it's the details of your model that is more interesting.
 

 

[Nirvana]

On 11/28/2021 at 1:09 PM, Gaetan Bordeleau said:

 

Roughly, I chose 4300 Kelvin because 5500 is too "clear". Also, it is not because you buy a light rated at 6500 Kelvin that it will measure really 6500 Kelvin. They often take measure in ideal conditions and this is usually not the case at home.

 

I did a simple test to try to verify if there are advantages to work with the correct color range:

 

2 identical photos, except one at 4300 Kelvin (left) and one at 3400 (right side).. One parameter is also different the speed: 1/60 sec  and 1/20. Lower degrees needs a longer shutter speed.

 

Are there advantages to work and see more accurate colors? I would say that the answer is yes. More accurate colors also means more accurate details. The same way the more light the more details we can see, there is also another variable which can increase the amount of details,: the color range.

 

Here is another example: During the construction stage, I shoot some photos. At the end, I also shoot some global views. Then I examine the photos results on a computer screen. By having more accurate color, I can see more accurately the details and easily see where corrections are needed.

 

Strangely enough, the first tool a new model maker will buy is probably some kind of saws. There are many ways to make the task much easier for the aspiring model maker and they are not all tools. Before beginning to work, there are 2 tools that I would absolutely want to have: an electric height table "to work at the good height". and few LED light to easily see what I am doing.

Using a tripod with cable release is very important if you want to create a steady picture.

Having the lights at the same setting and placing even more important.
Something I learned to be very helpful.

This along with press release or timer.
Never touch the camera trigger to shoot your picture! It will be become blurry!
 

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

3 hours ago, Nirvana said:

Using a tripod with cable release is very important if you want to create a steady picture.

 

By example, when I use the Go pro inside a model ship, the camera rest anywhere it can stands well and the trigger is made by a phone.

Inside, I never use a cable release. Mainly, I use Canon cameras. Canon delivers a program to control the camera at distance. There are also other programs which do it even better like ON1 photo raw, Capture one and so on and you can change many parameters directly from the Laptop. When taking a photo directly from the camera, it is hard to see the details of the photos because of the very small screen of the camera, it is easier to control the photos from the laptop screen or even better from a desktop computer. When I take photos during the construction, I hold the camera and try to adjust ISO as much as possible without going too far and increase the speed as fast as possible for the lens opening.

[wefalck]

Many cameras and mobile phones have either an infra-red or a Bluetooth connection, allowing to 'fire' them without touching them. The respective remote controls can be bought on ebay for a few Euros/Dollars/etc. My came together with a 'selfie-stick', which I hasten to add, I bought because it converts into a light tripod for the mobile phone. 

[64Pacific]

A few years ago I was playing with custom white balance, I wanted to see what would happen if I used some colour that wasn't white.Tthe idea was to drastically see the effect as I wasn't sure what was going on. I had a burgundy box in front of me, I found something with a green or cyan tint to it, the greenish colour was used as the white balance set point, it just happened that the colours were roughly opposite one another on the colour wheel. The camera is now trying to adjust for what it thinks is green light removing the green to get to white. With this custom cyan / green white balance I snapped a photo of the burgundy box. The burgundy sections of the box were nearly converted to grey while the colours with less green stayed a little closer to their actual but were tinted with a green hue. It seemed to me that the colour opposite that of the white balance on the colour wheel was essentially removed from the image. It was a really long time ago that I did this so maybe I will try again and post some tests...

[Dr PR]

Here are some examples of white balance options and their effect under the same lighting conditions.

 

First, here is the white balance menu in the camera. The idea is to select the option closest to the type of light you are using. This will change the way the camera processes the colors to try to produce a realistic color.

 

There is another option scrolled off the bottom of the screen, CUSTOM WHITE BALANCE. For this option you place a white card in front of the lens, close enough that nothing else is visible in the picture. Then you take a shot of the card to set the proper color correction for the light being used.

 

The camera will also let you use an existing photo for the white reference.

 

 

Direct sunlight is the "standard" white light. While the different White Balance selections usually work to create reasonably good colors, not all lights of the same type (incandescent or fluorescent) produce the same color light, so at best you get an approximation of the color.

 

Here are four pictures taken under an incandescent light bulb, using different white balance settings. The background was a white towel.

 

 

The Incandescent White Balance picture is pretty true to the actual colors, and the towel does look "white." Auto White Balance is also pretty close but the  towel has a bit of color. The Auto setting samples all the pixels in the image, looking for what it thinks is white (the lightest objects in the picture). But if you have large bright pale colored areas in the picture the camera may choose one of these as it's "white" reference and all bets are off as to what actual "white" things may look like in the photos!

 

The Custom White Balance gave the best results. The towel is a better "white" that the previous two pictures. By comparison, the first two appear to have a somewhat pinkish towel on some monitors and my laptop.

 

When in doubt use the Custom option and set your camera for the actual light you are using.

 

If you have multiple lights of different types you must use the Custom option. But be aware that shadows will be different colors for the different lights.

 

 

 

If you have been shooting outside under direct sunlight and have your camera set for that and forget to change the white balance the colors under different lighting conditions may be very far off.

 

Incandescent lights produce a reddish color and everything will be tinted toward the red.

 

Fluorescent lights are bluish or greenish, and everything will be colored in those shades.

 

And "white" LEDs can be almost any tint (they are usually composed of red, green and blue LEDs all on at the same time.

 

If you are shooting outdoors there are other considerations to remember. While we think of direct sunlight on a clear day as the "standard" many people forget that the largest outdoor light is that big blue thing called the "sky" that stretches from horizon to horizon. Anything that is not directly illuminated by the sun (shadows) will be shaded blue. Everything photographed in shaded areas will be blue. Back in film camera days we carried a "Skylight" filter (pale rose colored) to correct for the blue light from the sky. With digital cameras we need to remember to change the white balance to "Shade."

 

The best overall lighting is on cloudy bright days. Water vapor tends to scatter sunlight nicely, producing large fuzzy white lights called clouds. Furthermore, the lighting is almost the same from all directions, producing true colors in shaded areas. In the studio photographers use bounce lights off of umbrellas, screens or just white ceilings to create this effect indoors.

 

****

 

Having said all of this I feel the need to say many people do not have an understanding of the physiology of color. When I was about five years old I realized that I see different colors in different eyes. Everything in my left eye is slightly bluish tinted, while my right eye tints everything slightly red. I have had color blindness tests and I can see all colors with both eyes. I just see two of all colors. Actually, in film camera days, my right eye served as a built in Skylight filter to show me what pictures would look like if I used a Skylight filter on the camera! Alas, with digital cameras things are no longer that simple.

 

By the time I was seven or eight I had read the encyclopedia to learn about light, and my Mother's medical texts to learn how the eyes and brain work. Since both eyes are seeing the same spectrum, I realized that one eye had to be "wrong." Then I realized that, in fact, both eyes could be "wrong" (whatever that means). And then it occurred to me I have no idea what other people are actually seeing. When I see something that I call "red" you may actually be sensing what I would call "green." But since we have both been taught to call whatever color we are seeing "red," we both look at the same thing is say it has the same color "red." But who knows what anyone else is actually seeing?

 

Throw in the fact that no two computer or cell phone screens produce the same colors, and the same is true if we print our pictures on different printers, you have to stop and ask just what "the right color" means? When I say something is red, the Admiral corrects me and says "No, dear, that is orange."

 

So pardon me if I am laughing out loud when someone goes on about getting "true colors" in photographs.

 

Edited April 4 by Dr PR

[Rik Thistle]

Phil,

 

Very interesting, particularly your two eyes.

 

I did a short photography course a few years back and remember using a grey scale card (17 or 18% greyscale?) to position where I would be pointing the camera to set the balance. Do you use a similar card for Custom?

 

Richard

[wefalck]

Colour vision is indeed a funny thing. My father was the typical red/green colour-blind, but may have had overall a limited colour vision. His view of what was 'green' was more defined by convention, than by real vision it seems: I remember that he sent me once to fetch a green book from his study, which I didn't find, because the cover was actually blue ...

 

Colour-photographers of old used a colour-temperature meter to select filters to compensate for unwanted colour tints brought about by different light temperature in the course of the day, when working in the shadow etc. The meter was used together with a 'neutral grey card'. I still own one of those meters inherited from my father, but not normally use.

 

I rarely play around with the colour-temperature setting of the digital camera, but rather compensate in Photoshop when post-processing my RAW images. In Photoshop you can either select the colour-temperature summarily or you can select an area in the image that you want to appear 'white' or 'neutral grey'. As I normally do not scientific or archival photography, the choices are based on aesthetics and not on trying to achieve a 'true' colour of an object.

 

One thing to avoid is mixing lights from technologically different sources, such as LED and incandescent or daylight. It is virtually impossible to correct such images, as the areas lit by one source will always be 'wrong', when correcting for another source.

[Rik Thistle]

One thing to avoid is mixing lights from technologically different sources, such as LED and incandescent or daylight.

 

I'm very guilty of that when taking Build images with my phone's camera.....I have daylight, ceiling LEDs, and two 'photography LED lamps' all going at the same time....plus, sometimes, Flash.

 

Richard

[wefalck]

Me too actually, but the workbench now only has LEDs and that seems to work well, althought they are different LEDs with no guarantee that they have same (warm) temperature 🫢

[Dr PR]

Rik,

 

I have been told that up to 30% of the white male population of North America has the same color perception differences in the eyes as I do. I used to know the medical term but I can't remember it now. It is very subtle - just a slight difference in colors, and it is normally not noticeable. I suspect most people with the condition are unaware of it. But under the right conditions, and it seems especially in direct sunlight, it is obvious if you open and close eyes alternately.

 

I have occasionally used mixed light sources and there is no simple correction.* Except, as wefalck has said, with a photo editing program. The software available today can change about everything. And I too just go for what looks good.

 

One of my main hobbles is photographing and drawing native plants - especially macro photos of very tiny plants and flowers. I have photos of about 650 native plants from Oregon. Decades ago (color film days) I worried about getting the "right" color, until I realized that in nature there is always some variation in color in each species. So no matter what color my photos came out there probably was a plant out there somewhere with exactly that same color. So I stopped worrying about it and learned to love whatever I got!

 

* I just got a new ring light for macro photography that should eliminate the problem of multiple light sources:

 

https://modelshipworld.com/topic/36412-ring-light/?do=findComment&comment=1040024

 

Edited April 4 by Dr PR

[Rik Thistle]

Phil,

 

Thanks for all that.

 

I found a short thread on Reddit that semed to throw some light on the subject - sorry 😉 ... https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/mx04t/my_eyes_see_colors_differently_than_the_other_is/

 

I've got an older version of Adobe CS3 that can do all the photo manipulation ever needed, not that I fully use all it's capabilities. I tend to defalult to Paint.net as it's quick and simple.

 

Yes, I saw your mention of the ring light the other day...I was almost pressing the Buy button but first checked my Panasonic micro 4/3 rd lenses ...and only one of them is covered by  the lens filter thread diameters available.  So, thinking about what Wefalck said, I'll try to make more of an effort to reduce the differing light sources falling on the subject.

 

Nature's multiple colours - yes, and people think trees are only coloured  'green'...well, about a million different shades of green and combinations thereoff.

 

When I started photography I was using B&W film and had my own darkroom.... B&W can be quite beautiful, as Ansel Adams showed us many decades ago. I have a number of his prints dotted around the house.

 

This all remins me, I am overdue an eyetest.

 

Richard

 

 

 

[wefalck]

After school I wanted to join the navy for s three-year officer‘s course. Given my father‘s colour vision isues, he arranged for me to be thoroughly tested at the university hospital. They put me through the paces, such as aligning some 30 cubes with colours ranging from purple to violett in the right order. I came out with flying colours so to speak.