Fixing white balance

How do you fix the white balance in Camera Raw by selecting an area that should be white if there are no good samples of white? Will bringing in a white swatch to white image be acceptable to white balance off?
Thanks.

Hi Stan,
You don't need a white area, if you go to http://www.peachpit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1350898 you will find a little tutorial on how to find a neutral color area in your picture.  A bit involved, but it is very useful when there is no obvious neutral srea in your picture.
Roger

Similar Messages

  • Fixing white balance when it varies during video.

    Hi there, I was shooting video for a while and I think the sensor on my Canon 5D Mark II overheated and it turned the white balance from my manual setting to green (gradually).  Then it turned back.  This happened a few times in the video.  Is there a way to correct the overall white balance by setting a degrees kalvin that is followed throughout?  Help is much appreciated thanks.

    Broken monitor profile, affects only Lr and other color managed applications. Run your calibrator again, or if you don't have a calibrator use sRGB for now.
    Go to Control Panel > Color Management > Devices:
    EDIT: unless of course you have a preset applied on import.

  • 808 flashlight = white balance red?

    Dear friends,
    I just buy a pureview 808. When I take photo indoor with daylight lamp at night, the flashlight is on. However, the photo is incredibly a red one, nothing like the scene. I believe it is a wrong white balance.  I do not find an option for "flash light" in the white balance selections.  All options result in a red colored photo with the coldest one (bluest one) as weaker.
    Any walkthrough or walk arounds?
    Thank you!

    Cheers for replying
    Being a long term DLSR photographer I always use creative mode and started out using AWB. Even in AWB mode there shouldn't be so much variation as in my sample pics, so I decided to use fixed white balance with the intent of forcing the colour balance ot be the same.  but you're right, often with a dynamic scene there's not time or place to mess about trying different settings to correct waht a fixed AWB shoudl get right in the first place
    I think there's a bug, but it's not an easy thing to get manufacturers to always admit this.   I will soon twitter Damian Dinning, the guy who was heavily involved with the development of the 808's camera and see if he has some comment. 
    I appreciate the 808 is the first Pureview model, but that shouldn't mean a lack of after-release updates to fix problems.
    Another weird scarnio I've come across is that when setting manual ISO to something higher in order to force a faster shutter speed, the 808 still choose s toexpose with lower shutter speeds. For example on my DSLRs if I use auto mode and it selects something like. ISO 100 / 1/50s. For the same scene, if I preset ISO400 the speed jumps to 1/200s as it should. This doesn't happen on the 808. The speedwill remain at 1/50 on many shots, and unwanted motion blur remains
    There's some weird stuff going on
    When the 808 getr's it right it takes amazing pics for a phone, and in fact that's the reason I bought it. I still ahven't put a SIM card in it :

  • Bug Fix for White Balance Issue (When ?)

    Dear Apple:
    When can users expect a patch for the bug that "crept" into Aperture late in the development cycle that seriously effects the white balance tool?
    This bug is obviously a major concern and issue for most professional-level photographers; and, quite frankly, prevents Aperture from being used in a professional capacity with regard to RAW decoding.
    Cheers

    Excuse me, John:
    But, quite frankly I don't think you are in any position to tell the users of this form how they should feel. Most users, who happen to be high-end prosumers or professionals such as myself, have paid a great deal of money on a piece of software that was supposed to live up to certain, basic expectations. Unfortunately, that software did not. As such it cannot be used in a professional environment.
    Subsequently, an update was provided to address all the concerns that users expressed. Unfortunately, that update created a major issue with regard to the white balance of RAW images. Yet again, this expensive piece of software is nearly useless in a professional environment.
    Let me ask you this: "if you were a gardner and paid several hundred dollars for a lawn mower, only to discover that it cut your clients' grass unevenly, would you continue to use it? Would you continue to be patient after taking it into the repair shop only to have it still screw up your lawns? Would you not be on the phone with the repair shop constantly until it was fixed?"
    Unfortunately, Aperture is a good idea that has a flawed implementation and that NEEDS to be addressed! So, I will continue to ask Joe and Steve and the others at Apple when will this piece of software actually live up to the expectations set forth by the company that produced it!

  • FIX THE WHITE BALANCE FOR IPHONE 4!

    Taken under fluorescent lighting. This camera is not useable like the 3GS was. If no fix is coming soon, then I will not be able to return the iphone for the 30 day period....
    Message was edited by: Jack Oak

    I would say that white balance presets is a missing feature rather than a broken one (although I can't vouch for 3GS quality).
    I don't think it would be too difficult however for either apple or a third party app to implement and I fully expect one of the many camera apps to address this in a future update. This camera is so much more useable than the one in my previous first gen iPhone, and this feature of the camera that I believe is missing more than anything else. Even my old SE K750i had white balance!

  • I have iMove 11 and photos turn very dark when I drag  them into the project. Changing colour white balance does not fix the problem.

    I have iMove 11 and photos turn very dark when I drag  them into the project. Changing colour white balance does not fix the problem.

    Thanks for your no help line.

  • Nokia Lumia 900 Camera White Balance "Fix"

    I'm not sure if other people have posted about this but I figured out a pain in the @$$ way of coping with the atrocious white balance on the Nokia Lumia 900.  I found that each time you change the white balance setting it will take the first picture with the white balance you choose.  After that it resets itself to whatever it wants.  It doesn't matter what white balance setting you have saved.  So eact picture I have to go into the menu and switch the white balance to something else and then back to the whtie balance I actually want.  It's totally unbelievable.  C'mon Nokia!  Flagship phone?!  Really?!  Do the engineers actually use the device or do they design it and ship the plans off to Asia and just assume everything turned out okay?  The White Balance is malpractice.  And before anyone asks I am on Tango with the latest Nokia update installed.

    Hi. We are sorry to hear this. Try doing the troubleshooting steps provided on the below link:
    http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/mobile/support/product/lumia900/troubleshooter/?categories=Phone%20me...
    Let us know if this helps or not.

  • Can you remove the camera white balance setting in Aperture

    I have a Canon 7D and use Aperture for processing and storing my images.
    With the Canon I shoot both video and still and frequently adjust the white balance in the camera.  I make a frequent mistake in leaving the wrong white balance setting on - eg when taking video indoors in the evening  I set the white balance to indoors (the Canon seems poor at white balance decision making on video) and then I forget I'm not using auto white balance and switch to taking a photo with flash.  The result is a horrible blue photo - which if I don't spot the problem at the time seems very hard to correct afterwards.
    I use the Aperture white balance adjustments frequently but unless there is a patch or white or grey I an use the dropper on, I find this particular situation seems to be right off the scale of what I can fix in Aperture.  I end up with sliders at the extremes of the scales and no intuitive sense of what numbers to type in manually to try and get realistic colour - so I often end up discarding these photos even if the shot itself is something I'd like to use.
    So my question is given I'm importing RAW, is there a way to show the phoo without the (wrong) white balance setting I applied in the camera, to let me choose white balance from scratch?
    Or if not, do you have any advice about how to adjust from this very bluey unrealistic colour of image?

    Kirkby - thanks for the quick reply.
    Didn't know you could drag inside a value field - that's helpful.
    But being able to get different numbers on the slider isn't the root of my problem.
    In a specific example I have two photos - one taken with white balance set to flash and the photo was with flash, where after a bit of tweaking to get the colour I want the temp slider is at 5000K (and tint 0).  The second photo has my shooting error with interior lighting white balance but taken with flash.  The two shots were taken from almost the same point of the same view (but different people in frame).  The shot with the white balance error comes off camera horribly blue coloured. I can fiddle with the two sliders - I take temperature to 20000K and tint to 40 to do the best with it I can, and with those settings one of the two faces is approaching flesh colour but the wall behind the subjects (which is a light blue in reality) is now appearing light yellow in places.  I just can't get a good looking colour effect no matter ow extreme the slider settings.
    I may have phrased my question badly - as I totally agree you can't show a raw without a colour setting - so maybe I'm better asking to be able to use a different colour setting on the raw data rather than having to start with adjustments on top of my white balance mistake.
    Given the two shots were in the same place against the same background and the same lighting (both with flash) it seems to me I ought to be able to get a similar colour effect on both and I just can't.  To illustrate here are the two photos (the one on the left was shot with flash wb and in Aperture I'm viewing it with 5000K and 0 tint, the one on the right was shot with indoor wb and in Aperture I'm viewing it with 20000K and 40 tint and it looks terrible!)
    https://www.box.com/shared/qle3t6ovyhrd1egez3vc

  • White balance field to metadata panel

    There's a lot of info available in the metadata/EXIF panel but the preset/program used for white balance is missing, eg. Auto, Cloudy, Tungsten, Custom, etc. Interestingly though, LR can read the actual values in the Develop module, unless I'm wrong and it is actually working it out, not reading it.

    Is there any way to get detailed info of White Balance setting in Bridge Metadata ?  I'm getting only "custom" ; my instructor in College needs more detailed data in my contact sheets.
    Thanks for any imput
    You can't get this info in a contact sheet, neither is it easy to get other then look at the camera setting you have used to shoot the files. Maybe it is somewhere hidden deep down in the exif data but I can't find it with exact numbers.
    Shooting Raw those WB figures are irrelevant because you can set color temperature and tint to whatever you like. Shooting jpeg your options are limited because of the fact the Raw data is already processed and changing temperature and tint effects the whole image.
    Try shoot a Raw and jpeg together from the same scene. One with daylight and one with artificial light conditions. (personally I have set my WB in camera fixed at 5500 but with auto settings you can also see the difference) Try to correct the jpeg and the Raw file in ACR and see what I mean.
    And to be honest, if your instructor at College would like to have this he also should tell you why he wants it and how you can deliver it...

  • How to set White Balance details in Metadata Bridge Cs6 shooting with MarkIII 5D ?

    Is there any way to get detailed info of White Balance setting in Bridge Metadata ?  I'm getting only "custom" ; my instructor in College needs more detailed data in my contact sheets.
    Thanks for any imput

    Is there any way to get detailed info of White Balance setting in Bridge Metadata ?  I'm getting only "custom" ; my instructor in College needs more detailed data in my contact sheets.
    Thanks for any imput
    You can't get this info in a contact sheet, neither is it easy to get other then look at the camera setting you have used to shoot the files. Maybe it is somewhere hidden deep down in the exif data but I can't find it with exact numbers.
    Shooting Raw those WB figures are irrelevant because you can set color temperature and tint to whatever you like. Shooting jpeg your options are limited because of the fact the Raw data is already processed and changing temperature and tint effects the whole image.
    Try shoot a Raw and jpeg together from the same scene. One with daylight and one with artificial light conditions. (personally I have set my WB in camera fixed at 5500 but with auto settings you can also see the difference) Try to correct the jpeg and the Raw file in ACR and see what I mean.
    And to be honest, if your instructor at College would like to have this he also should tell you why he wants it and how you can deliver it...

  • Adobe DNG converter is corrupting NEF files. The color is way off and it's not the camera white balance.

    I was using the converter for a few months and it was working fine. Now it will convert the files, but the color is really messed. I know it is not the white balance, because the same files convert fine to TIF files through Nikon's software. I am using this converter for Nikon d610 NEF files. Here's a sample DNG and the same image in TIF. Can anyone help? Thanks!

    When you use the DNG Converter to make a DNG from an NEF, the DNG Converter applies the default Camera Raw settings.  When I open your DNG it looks fine, but when you open it, it looks off.  That is because you've some how set your Camera Raw defaults to have a bunch of customized settings specific to a particular picture, instead of having them all be normal settings.  Below you'll see what Photoshop is saying the settings of the DNG-Converted-JPG are, with the non-defaults marked in bold.  The main problems are the WB being custom and a bunch of HSL setting changes.
    Here is what Photoshop reports that the JPG was created using:
          <rdf:Description rdf:about=""
                xmlns:crs="http://ns.adobe.com/camera-raw-settings/1.0/">
             <crs:RawFileName>hug_8290_0215_1.dng</crs:RawFileName>
             <crs:Version>6.0</crs:Version>
             <crs:ProcessVersion>5.7</crs:ProcessVersion>
             <crs:WhiteBalance>Custom</crs:WhiteBalance>
             <crs:Temperature>5732</crs:Temperature>
             <crs:Tint>+26</crs:Tint>
             <crs:Exposure>0.00</crs:Exposure>
             <crs:Shadows>5</crs:Shadows>
             <crs:Brightness>+50</crs:Brightness>
             <crs:Contrast>+25</crs:Contrast>
             <crs:Saturation>-4</crs:Saturation>
             <crs:Sharpness>90</crs:Sharpness>
             <crs:LuminanceSmoothing>0</crs:LuminanceSmoothing>
             <crs:ColorNoiseReduction>25</crs:ColorNoiseReduction>
             <crs:ChromaticAberrationR>0</crs:ChromaticAberrationR>
             <crs:ChromaticAberrationB>0</crs:ChromaticAberrationB>
             <crs:VignetteAmount>0</crs:VignetteAmount>
             <crs:ShadowTint>0</crs:ShadowTint>
             <crs:RedHue>0</crs:RedHue>
             <crs:RedSaturation>+11</crs:RedSaturation>
             <crs:GreenHue>0</crs:GreenHue>
             <crs:GreenSaturation>0</crs:GreenSaturation>
             <crs:BlueHue>+12</crs:BlueHue>
             <crs:BlueSaturation>+2</crs:BlueSaturation>
             <crs:FillLight>0</crs:FillLight>
             <crs:Vibrance>-6</crs:Vibrance>
             <crs:HighlightRecovery>0</crs:HighlightRecovery>
             <crs:Clarity>0</crs:Clarity>
             <crs:Defringe>0</crs:Defringe>
             <crs:HueAdjustmentRed>0</crs:HueAdjustmentRed>
             <crs:HueAdjustmentOrange>0</crs:HueAdjustmentOrange>
             <crs:HueAdjustmentYellow>+1</crs:HueAdjustmentYellow>
             <crs:HueAdjustmentGreen>+5</crs:HueAdjustmentGreen>
             <crs:HueAdjustmentAqua>0</crs:HueAdjustmentAqua>
             <crs:HueAdjustmentBlue>-9</crs:HueAdjustmentBlue>
             <crs:HueAdjustmentPurple>0</crs:HueAdjustmentPurple>
             <crs:HueAdjustmentMagenta>0</crs:HueAdjustmentMagenta>
             <crs:SaturationAdjustmentRed>-2</crs:SaturationAdjustmentRed>
             <crs:SaturationAdjustmentOrange>+14</crs:SaturationAdjustmentOrange>
             <crs:SaturationAdjustmentYellow>+25</crs:SaturationAdjustmentYellow>
             <crs:SaturationAdjustmentGreen>+26</crs:SaturationAdjustmentGreen>
             <crs:SaturationAdjustmentAqua>0</crs:SaturationAdjustmentAqua>
             <crs:SaturationAdjustmentBlue>+32</crs:SaturationAdjustmentBlue>
             <crs:SaturationAdjustmentPurple>0</crs:SaturationAdjustmentPurple>
             <crs:SaturationAdjustmentMagenta>0</crs:SaturationAdjustmentMagenta>
             <crs:LuminanceAdjustmentRed>+40</crs:LuminanceAdjustmentRed>
             <crs:LuminanceAdjustmentOrange>+13</crs:LuminanceAdjustmentOrange>
             <crs:LuminanceAdjustmentYellow>+3</crs:LuminanceAdjustmentYellow>
             <crs:LuminanceAdjustmentGreen>+15</crs:LuminanceAdjustmentGreen>
             <crs:LuminanceAdjustmentAqua>+3</crs:LuminanceAdjustmentAqua>
             <crs:LuminanceAdjustmentBlue>+4</crs:LuminanceAdjustmentBlue>
             <crs:LuminanceAdjustmentPurple>0</crs:LuminanceAdjustmentPurple>
             <crs:LuminanceAdjustmentMagenta>0</crs:LuminanceAdjustmentMagenta>
             <crs:SplitToningShadowHue>231</crs:SplitToningShadowHue>
             <crs:SplitToningShadowSaturation>32</crs:SplitToningShadowSaturation>
             <crs:SplitToningHighlightHue>45</crs:SplitToningHighlightHue>
             <crs:SplitToningHighlightSaturation>33</crs:SplitToningHighlightSaturation>
             <crs:SplitToningBalance>+74</crs:SplitToningBalance>
             <crs:ParametricShadows>-39</crs:ParametricShadows>
             <crs:ParametricDarks>-7</crs:ParametricDarks>
             <crs:ParametricLights>-15</crs:ParametricLights>
             <crs:ParametricHighlights>+14</crs:ParametricHighlights>
             <crs:ParametricShadowSplit>25</crs:ParametricShadowSplit>
             <crs:ParametricMidtoneSplit>50</crs:ParametricMidtoneSplit>
             <crs:ParametricHighlightSplit>75</crs:ParametricHighlightSplit>
             <crs:SharpenRadius>+1.0</crs:SharpenRadius>
             <crs:SharpenDetail>25</crs:SharpenDetail>
             <crs:SharpenEdgeMasking>0</crs:SharpenEdgeMasking>
             <crs:PostCropVignetteAmount>-24</crs:PostCropVignetteAmount>
             <crs:PostCropVignetteMidpoint>50</crs:PostCropVignetteMidpoint>
             <crs:PostCropVignetteFeather>97</crs:PostCropVignetteFeather>
             <crs:PostCropVignetteRoundness>0</crs:PostCropVignetteRoundness>
             <crs:PostCropVignetteStyle>1</crs:PostCropVignetteStyle>
             <crs:PostCropVignetteHighlightContrast>0</crs:PostCropVignetteHighlightContrast>
             <crs:GrainAmount>0</crs:GrainAmount>
             <crs:ColorNoiseReductionDetail>50</crs:ColorNoiseReductionDetail>
             <crs:ConvertToGrayscale>False</crs:ConvertToGrayscale>
             <crs:ToneCurveName>Medium Contrast</crs:ToneCurveName>
             <crs:CameraProfile>Adobe Standard</crs:CameraProfile>
             <crs:CameraProfileDigest>51B4314CF8312BA027EF3FC60481FB35</crs:CameraProfileDigest>
             <crs:HasSettings>True</crs:HasSettings>
    To fix the problem you're gonna need to reset your camera raw defaults:
    And then be careful when saving new camera raw defaults with the menu item just above, that your image has the camera raw defaults applied to it, except whatever small change you want to be the new default.

  • Help with RAW files and custom white balance.

    ive long had this issue with RAW shooting and adobe photoshop and lightroom, my main subject is a saltwater reef aquarium that is lit by artificial lighting, i shoot canon and use the custom white balance setting to get everything looking proper and it works good.. to an extent.. if i shoot jpg the photos all turn out as shot, if i shoot RAW the white balance in adobe programs is totally messed up and you cant fix it.. if i use DPP by canon, its perfect and looks just as shot or just a a jpg would look.. my question is how can i get adobe lilightroom to render my RAW files correctly.
    below are all 3 images, first one was converted and exported to jpg in canon DPP without any adjustments and is what the photo should look like, second has been exported from photoshop, and 3rd i added a link to the actual RAW file. why cant my lightroom interpret these properly?
    heres a link to the actual RAW file
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/5a39ctllwgrem7a/_MG_8971.CR2
    this was a raw converted in canon dpp, and its what the aquarium looks like, and is what the photo should look like. just to note, any other editing or viewing program besides adobe products all render the image correctly.
    this is what photoshop and lightroom do to my Raw files, theres no way to adjust anything to get even remotely close to correct..

    The white-balance Temperature of this image as computed by the camera is way beyond the 50,000K upper limit as you can see when you open the file in LR or ACR, so Adobe cannot reach the As Shot WB temperature number and stops at 50,000K which is still too blue -- although EXIFtool says:  Color Temp As Shot : 10900, so maybe Adobe's wildly high 50,000K number is based on a faulty camera profile that exaggerates blues:
    However, using the Camera Standard makes things not nearly so garish blue, and it is possible to use Photoshop to neutralize things even more:
    However, as you say, other raw converters do ok with this image despite the high WB temperature, so I think the Canon T3/1100D profile needs some work, but probably won't get it since it is not a high-end camera.
    For example, here is the default conversion from LibRaw that is part of RawDigger, and in my opinion is an improvement on the camera rendering though perhaps lacks a bit of saturation:
    As another example, here is RawTherapee's conversion, after I neutralized the auto-tone and color values it applies by default, and appears to be a bit too saturated but that could be easily adjusted:
    I would agree that Adobe is doing something wrong with this camera in this lighting.  A clue is the bright green color of the top-central coral which seems to be yellow in the non-Adobe renderings.

  • Custom white balance from Canon 5D Mark 3 erased from RAW files when developed in Lightroom 4.2?

    Hi Everybody!
    Got a bit of a problem...I set custom white balance for a lot of my photos (I'm a nightclub photographer) as sometimes the colours are so saturated the image becomes unusable. Unfortunately in Lightroom 4 the photos import with the correct WB I have set but when I click on them to develop the settings are changed and the image looks completely awful. I try and adjust the image back to the way I have taken it but it never looks the same....why is Lighroom not recognising the WB settings I set within my 5D?
    Any pointers?
    Cheers!
    Sarah

    All Raw images can be expected to change appearance significantly after the initial display of the in-camera embedded JPG preview, has been replaced with a true LR-generated conversion preview.
    This is because all in-camera image settings and processing options (except WB) are disregarded by Lightroom. Lightroom just works to its own processing default, and this is in your control to get as you want it.
    Even the in-camera WB, is only used provided LR is set to "as-shot" WB at the top of the Basic panel. If LR's default gets changed to a fixed WB of some kind, then that is what every image will show initially thereafter.
    Even with the right WB transferred and used, first LR renditions can still look very different than the camera rendition; two people picking up the same violin might make very different noises with it. One of the biggest effects for that, is when proprietary in-camera "dynamic range boost" (or however else named) functions have been used. These work by deliberate underexposure of the basic capture, and Adobe software tends not to then apply the right corrective for that.
    Even without these special functions in play, it is still usual for Adobe factory default processing - combined with camera programmed metering - to produce images which appear a little on the dark side, but which nonetheless have good scope for brightening without losing highlight detail. An image that looks generally bright enough in this context, will usually turn out to have blown highlights. If the camera has any kind of a low-noise sensor, the shadows will tolerate brightening even better than the highlights will.
    And if your customised LR default has applied some brightening and that turns out to be too much in a given case, it can simply be turned back down for that image with no harm done. Or you might prefer to under-correct with your default; up to you.

  • Lightroom 4: Massive BUG with White Balance / Quick Develop. Totally Unreliable!

    I just recently updated from LR3 and just now found a massive bug concerning the white balance adjustments in the quick develop module.
    After a studio shooting and especially after weddings I use the "make warmer" adjustment in the quick develop panel to give all (a few thousand NEFs) a nicer look all at once.
    The great thing about this is - like all quick developments - that it increases the color temperature relative to each image's starting white balance.
    Yesterday I wanted to edit my first wedding in LR4 and like in LR3 applied one click "make warmer" to all images at once (previously WB was "as shot").
    While I browsed through the images to rate them I noticed some of them were very "pinkish".
    After closer inspection it came out that a lot of images (50%-60%) had the following custom WB set: 5316, Tint: +10.
    It is always this exact combination no matter what the "as shot" WB was.
    That setting of course applies way too much magenta to a lot of images.
    After resetting the WB of single images to "as shot" and selecting "make warmer" once again the images look fine and get appropriate WB values.
    But every time I select more than one image to apply "make warmer" a lot of them get the strange value of 5316 and +10.
    Sometimes it's even just the first few images of the selection that get correct values and all the following ones get the off value. It appears to be totally random.
    I tried completely resetting all images prior to "make warmer", setting them to different camera profiles first and even switched them to Process 2010 again. But absolutely no luck!  :-(
    The "make warmer" tool gives me totally unusable results.
    I find it strange, that I couldn't find anything about that on the net.
    PLEASE fix this ASAP.
    To apply WB to thousands of images individually is a real pain.
    I would be glad to support you fixing the issue.
    My setup:
    Nikon D700
    Nikon D300s
    (Both cameras affected, I only shoot NEF)
    Win7 x64
    LR4.1 as well as LR4.2 RC

    @ssprengel
    I get your point but that is exactly my problem.
    Not only is there no pattern but also once I reset a file that got 5316+10 to "as shot" and select "make warmer" for it again it does get the correct value! As long as I select it as a single file without others.
    So just to simplify my findings and explain what I have been doing all night:
    - SELECT 5 files in Library View (all freshly imported, no settings altered, WB "as shot")
    File 1: 5700 / -8
    File 2: 5500 / -8
    File 3: 5550 / -8
    File 4: 5450 / -6
    File 5: 5500 / -7
    - CLICK "make warmer" once
    Result:
    File 1: 6089 / -8
    File 2: 5867 / -8
    File 3: 5316 / +10
    File 4: 5316 / +10
    File 5: 5316 / +10
    1 and 2 are okay!
    - SELECT 3-5
    - RESET THEM
    Result:
    File 3: 5550 / -8
    File 4: 5450 / -6
    File 5: 5500 / -7
    - CLICK "make warmer" again
    Result:
    File 3: 5316 / +10
    File 4: 5812 / -6
    File 5: 5867 / -7
    File 4 and 5 are okay!
    - SELECT File 3 again
    - RESET IT
    - CLICK "make warmer"
    Result:
    File 3: 5923 / -8
    now File 3 is okay, too.
    It is completely random!
    But that is no way to work, of course.
    I have two weddings from last week and am going nuts already.

  • Aperture 3.1 - White Balance Doesn't Update

    Since upgrading to 3.1 I have noticed a somewhat annoying behavior with the White Balance data.
    When I change from one selected image in a project to another image the White Balance data does not update.
    If I deselect so no image is displayed and then select the new image, the data does update.
    This only happens with images on which I have not made a manual White Balance adjustment. If I have made an adjustment then the data displays correctly on the adjusted image when it is selected. However, then selecting an unadjusted image causes a reversion to the 'incorrect' behavior.
    Note that the image appearance does not change, so the actual image is not affected by this, only the display of the data.
    Is anyone else experiencing this?
    If so - any suggestions on how to fix?

    Other users have reported similar issues see :[White Balance Glitch|http://discussions.apple.com/click.jspa?searchID=-1&messageID=12521251]

Maybe you are looking for