Shot tungsten in daylight

I shot some outdoor photos and unfortunately had the settings at tungsten instead of daylight. Ugly. Is there a filter or other fix I can use to get tungsten back to daylight. Now there is a harsh blueish cast.
Canon PowerShot
Photoshop CS
Windows
I searched and tried some filters but no good results.
Thanks.

Open Bridge. Find the folder with the pictures you want to change. Select only those pictures needing changed because of incorrect light selection during picture taking making sure all had the same light problem (white balance problem). After selecting the pictures go to File>Open in Camera Raw. Change the white balance to auto. Then go to the bottom, open in Photoshop and Save As.
Ricky P. Brumfield
[email protected]

Similar Messages

Serious color problems with Lightroom

Hello,
I purchased lightroom this week and I am having a serious problem importing images. I am using a new Macbook Pro with OS Snow leopard. My camera is a Canon 1ds Mark2.
When I import files half of them have this awful deep orange cast over them.
If you look at the thumbnails some of the frames are normal and then the next few turn orange, all shot within seconds of each other in the same place, no WB change on the camera or anything. What is this, a bug in Lightroom? I dont experience this problem with Photomechanic or Photoshop.

It doesn't sound like you know what actually caused the problem. What happens if you 'delete' (i.e. remove from LR only) some of the previous "orange" pictures and try to reimport them into LR?
I understand that you are new to Lightroom – Welcome aboard! Your first step after learning the basic controls in LR is to adjust your 'Camera Default Settings' in the Develop module to better suit your workflow. I suspect you are using your camera with 'Auto White Balance' (AWB) set, which is inappropriate for RAW file format. Reason: If your LR Develop module white balance control is set to anything other than 'As Shot,' then pictures shot under different color temperature lighting will take on different color casts (i.e. orange, blue). The controls you have in LR (White Balance eye dropper) can help you to better determine the white balance settings for a particular shoot, and easily apply them uniformally across multiple pictures. This will provide better results than using AWB on any camera!
I use a ColorChecker Passport to create custom camera profile and white balance develop presets for 'Daylight,' 'Cloudy,' Tungsten,' etc. for each of my camera bodies. Therefore I never use 'As Shot' white balance setting, and never have this kind of problem. My default camera setting uses the ColorChecker custom 'Daylight' preset, which I can change to a different preset for any photo session that was not shot under normal daylight conditions. If you want good color control of your images, you should not rely on the 'Auto White Balance' setting on your camera (especially for JPEGs!). You don't need a ColorChecker to adjust your camera body's color temperature in LR, but it helps and also creates a full custom camera profile! I own three Canon camera bodies and they all produce slightly inacurrate white balance using LR's 'Daylight' white balance setting with high-noon sunny daylight pictures. I suggest you determine and create your own custom white balance settings in LR for daylight and then change your camera default to these settings. You can also create custom develop presets for Cloudy, Tungsten. etc., which can be applied to specific shooting sessions as a better "starting point" for white balance.
Do a little research on using Lightroom's White Balance Eyedropper tool – Here's one link:
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/Lightroom/3.0/Using/WS947672F1-AAB2-43de-9011-BDDECA05EC19.htm l

White Balance Options

Hi,
Under Develop, when I select White Balance, all I receive in the drop down menu are "auto", "custom", and "as shot".
I should be given the options of "Tungsten", "shade", "daylight", etc.
How can I get the full selection of White Balances?
I have Lightroom 2 and have a PC.
Thank you.
Barb

Barb,
You are editing a jpeg or tiff, correct?
The other options are available only for raw files.
Rich

My images from my canon camera are to warm when viewed in LR4

When I load my images into light room 4 the color is not correct. However the color is correct when they are viewed using the Canon software, Tiffen DFX and other programs. My monitor is calibated using Huey Pro. I use a Canon 7D and shoot RAW exclusively.

Could be a calibration or profile or an expectation issue, or even a bug.
Are your Huey profiles ICC4 or something less? LR has had issues with ICC4 profiles. Are you using a wide-gamut monitor? Are you using dual monitors of different models and calibrations?
Have you tried all the camera-match profiles in the Camera Calibration area? Adobe-rendering will never be exactly the same as Canon-rendering but the profiles with the Camera prefix attempt to match the Canon rendering insomuch as a profile can do this.
Does the warmth issue happen for tungsten and daylight/flash lighting or more just one of those?
Are you using a custom-WB measured by the camera and using As Shot in LR or something else?
Can you give us a side-by-side screen-shot that shows the LR and the DPP version, and perhaps provide a sample raw file and DPP-rendered JPG for download using www.dropbox.com or the like?

Colorchecker passport and the DNG profile editor

I finally got around to getting a Colorchecker passport to use with the DNG profile editor.
I was secretly hoping I could save time by shooting the chart on location and make an instant profile out of that - then the colors would be at least "close ballpark" so I would just have to apply white balance and then move on to more specific adjustments. But of course it wasn't that easy, it still takes a fair bit of color tweaking to get right in most circumstances.
So I'm wondering if my energy would be better spent trying to perfect one good dual illuminant general profile. For this I would use 3000 K tungsten at one end and 5500 K studio flash at the other. Or would it be better to use overcast daylight? In either case it's obviously important to ensure the chart is absolutely evenly lit.
And then I should probably have a separate profile for fluorescent tubes.
I'm curious what other people's experiences with the colorchecker/DNG profile editor are? How are you using it?

The color profile changes with the lighting, so a profile that was computed for daylight won’t be right for tungsten or fluorescent. Keep in mind that a custom camera profile is the set of corrections on top of an existing Adobe profile that the DNG has assigned to it, perhaps Adobe Standard, and all Adobe profiles are dual-illuminant profiles, so it makes sense you’d want to also create a dual-illuminant profile for general purpose use that has the same two lighting scenarios as Adobe used: 2850K and 6500K. The 6500K is the tricky one because full sun is warmer, closer to 5000K, and you need the right amount of haze to create 6500K sunlight, unless you are using standard D65 bulbs, indoors, which is likely what Adobe does.
I use a dual-illuminant profile for general purpose use, but since the WB-Tint values of both the tungsten and daylight ends are close to zero, lighting that has a tint not close to zero needs a separate profile. The common example is the greenish light from fluorescents, and I have several single-illuminant profiles for various artificial lighting scenarios with WB-Tint values that are relatively non-zero. I also have ones for very red sunsets and very blue twilight. If I had studio lighting I’d make a profile for that. Sometimes I make a custom profile for a church or other venue that has significant non-neutral walls or ceilings, or where sunlight through the stained-glass windows shining on the walls are giving a significant color-cast including a non-zero tint value to the lighting. If you know you’ll be doing some shots near a large amount of tall, green vegetation then a custom color profile can correct for the green tinge to the ambient lighting coming down from above mixing in with the sunlight.
Adding to the suggestion about wearing neutral clothing, I’d argue for dark neutral clothing because something lighter clothing will reflect environmental colors (sunlit vegetation or brick walls, etc, outdoors) and not be neutral.
Besides non-neutral clothing, try to avoid areas that have green grass or tree leaves or brick buildings that also color the light and reflect off the colorchecker. For the sunlit shots, I put my colorchecker face up on the sidewalk or parking lot, to avoid coloration from the grass and far away from trees or buildings especially in the direction I’m pointing the camera, so the only lighting is direct sun and ambient blue-sky, possibly diffused by hazy clouds. I point the camera down at the colorchecker, at a 45-degree angle and at a compass direction and not directly toward the sun, nor directly away from the sun. I try to shoot the target that is face up on the ground perhaps at a 90-degree angle from the sun to minimize any residual glare from the colorchecker’s slightly non-matte surface. Obviously directly away from the sun, the color-checker will have my shadow on it or I will be blocking the light from the sky near the sun.
I use the same sort of process for the tungsten end, choosing a room with neutral walls and put the target relatively flat on the floor facing up, perhaps tipped up somewhat toward the light, but not so much as to have any glare from the lighting, either, in other words, not with the lighting directly behind the camera, but somewhat over to the side.

N80 Working ok except for battery life

Hi All
Just a quick one to say I have not had any of the problems everyone else is complaining about. The software version is 3.0617.0.3 and I am on Orange. My only problem is battery life, lasts a day! so I am about to turn off Bluetooth and the search for WLAN to see if this makes a difference. Orange said if not they would test the phone to see if it was faulty or the battery.
Oh one other thing the N80 does not like the Parrot CK3100 car kit.

sister_bliss, I have been following this thread with some interest as battery life is the biggest problem I have with this phone, I can live with or work around other issues until they are sorted via firmware. For information, with regards to how many features are running and signal strength etc, I use my phone on GSM only, bluetooth/infrared only when required - I have these set up as standby icons for convenience. Signal strength is excellent even on 3g and I have disabled packet data connection and use it only as required and I get a maximum of 2 days out of a full charge. Btw, I noticed yesterday that using the camera eats battery life, I sometimes need to take photos as part of my work - for reports etc, not often but sometimes and even shots taken in daylight use a lot of energy. Once again, if an application built into the phone uses so much energy it should be taken into account when fitting the battery, I buy a mobile phone to use as a tool not just to sit on my desk looking flash and tools get used - in my case frequently. Sorry if this sounds like a rant but nothing, imo, could be simpler to rectify than this, your thoughts would be interesting.

FR: color temperature adjustment layer

I know there are 5 million methods to adjust colors in PS, but I would really prefer a simple (and almost scientific) method like the color temperature adjustment in ACR (with the green-magenta color cast adjustment).
Ideally, PS would read the current color temperature from the EXIF data (and adjust to any adjustment layers below), and give the option to pick a neutral pixel (and display the color shift based on that). in case there is no original color temp available, the grey pixel picker could be used to establish a base value, and give the user at least relative color shift values (or the user could enter the values by hand from ACR).
The reason for this is that most (pro) photographers probably know the color temp of their environments (lights, ambient, gels etc) (or can read those values from ACR), so adjusting values in regards to kelvin would make things much more precise than the ambivalent values of e.g. the color balance adjustment.

What I was asking is a different method to achieve the same results what is possible with levels/curves/color balance etc without going into lab mode. (btw, the lack of a grey picker and the zoned approach of color balance isn't ideal sometimes)
thank you for reminding me that I need to brush up on my color theory. your reply has a tone of "why are you asking this, there are already tools for this" which I find a bit too conservative, when my intention is to make PS even more user friendly... if we would go with your paradigm, we wouldn't need levels, because everybody could just use curves, and yet both are very popular and often used based on the users preferences.
what I am asking is bringing the white balance settings from ACR into an adjustment layer, with all it's implications.
it would enable users to specifically balance images with mixed light sources (with the proposed color temp/WB adjustment layer with it's mask) by entering values in kelvin, and not some arbitrary numbers from 0-1 or 0-255. it would be so much easier to balance tungsten to daylight by adding 2000 kelvin to the image, or to control a straw gel that was added somewhere in the scene. I can imagine so many applications for this adjustment layer...

Color temperature adjustment

Hello,
A really good feature would be color temperature adjustment for Adjustment Brush and Graduated Filter to be able to set a corect white balance through the whole picture. This could be a scenario: a sunset with (partialy) falling shadows (from trees) on some people. Also to have a White Balance Selector for those two adjustments.
Thanks.

What I was asking is a different method to achieve the same results what is possible with levels/curves/color balance etc without going into lab mode. (btw, the lack of a grey picker and the zoned approach of color balance isn't ideal sometimes)
thank you for reminding me that I need to brush up on my color theory. your reply has a tone of "why are you asking this, there are already tools for this" which I find a bit too conservative, when my intention is to make PS even more user friendly... if we would go with your paradigm, we wouldn't need levels, because everybody could just use curves, and yet both are very popular and often used based on the users preferences.
what I am asking is bringing the white balance settings from ACR into an adjustment layer, with all it's implications.
it would enable users to specifically balance images with mixed light sources (with the proposed color temp/WB adjustment layer with it's mask) by entering values in kelvin, and not some arbitrary numbers from 0-1 or 0-255. it would be so much easier to balance tungsten to daylight by adding 2000 kelvin to the image, or to control a straw gel that was added somewhere in the scene. I can imagine so many applications for this adjustment layer...

X-Rite ColorChecker Profiles don't show up in LR 5.3

Dear people in this forum, i need your help!
I have installed X-Rite's Colochecker Passport for a long time,
and a im using it to create camera-profiles in every shoot.
But now the profiles don't show up any more in LR 5.3.
I have checkes the desitnation-folder. And in windows explorer
i can see every profile. I have downloaded the x-rite dng profile-manager,
and it also shows up all profiles.
What can i do? I need the profiles for accurate color-reproduction.
Please Help.
Ragards
Martin

twenty_one wrote:
Each patch has standard RGB values for ProPhoto, Adobe RGB or sRGB. For use in Lightroom with its percentage values, a little bit of trial and error is required (jumping in and out of soft-proof). But in the end the white patch should land around 94%, number 4 gray at 48%, and the black at between 15 and 20%.
I agree the White (9.5) and Black (2) patches may be helpful for establishing White and Black clipping points, but not LR's Exposure setting. The camera profile's tone curve and LR's PV2012 "image adaptive" Tone controls shift the "optimum setting" of the Exposure control considerably.
Jao published a table with Lightroom's "precise" CCPP values:
http://lagemaat.blogspot.com/2007/09/more-precise-values.html
The values he posted for the grayscale patches are levels:
20, 33, 47, 63, 78, 95
With the Adobe Standard profile and LR default (0) adjustments using one of my CCPP images shot in Sunny Daylight:
17, 35, 56, 76, 88, 95
With Camera Faithful profile and LR default (0) adjustments:
16, 34, 54, 71, 83, 93
With Adobe Standard profile and "normal" LR Tone adjustments:
(Exposure +.50, Highlights -40, Shadows +40, Whites +15, Blacks -15)
20, 43, 63, 79, 90, 97
None of these images have the 4th patch (5, .70 D) at the 47 or 48 value. The only way I could get close to the CCPP grayscale patch values is using an Adobe Standard profile created in the DNG Editor with a linear tone curve. The resulting image is pretty flat for any normal usage, despite the fact that the patch values are very close to the "actual" values.

Adobe Standard Profile - YMMV

I've mostly not used Adobe Standard profile due to a significant magenta bias on my D300, but lately I've been using it more and more (and liking it) - the magenta bias is sometimes easily corrected simply by adjusting the tint slider toward green. - still not perfect for all photos, but is just what the doctor ordered for some...

Ther are following differences:
- D700 profile has the same forward matrix for both tungsten and daylight. D800 profile has different matrices, which means it is true dual-illuminant
- D700 profile has different lookup table which does some rendering (so actually this one is more similar to camera profiles), while lookup table in D800 has minimal impact to colors
- D800 profile has additional HueSatVal lookup tables for both illuminants, helping to calibrate colors more preceisely. That's why the size difference
However, Adobe didn't aim to get Nikon colors, they are calibrating their profiles to give similar output for various cameras.

Adobe Standard Profile for D800 vs D700

Adobe Standard profile for the D800 appears to be a better color match to the Camera profiles for the D800 than Adobe Standard for the D700 color match to it's Camera profiles. I notice that the D800 Adobe Standard Profile is a larger files (118KB) than the D700 Adobe Standard Profile (55KB), so it apparently uses an updated profile. I have not used the Adobe Standard profile for the D700 because it's colors appear to be wrong, but the D800 Adobe Standard profile does not appear to have this issue.
Any comments?

Ther are following differences:
- D700 profile has the same forward matrix for both tungsten and daylight. D800 profile has different matrices, which means it is true dual-illuminant
- D700 profile has different lookup table which does some rendering (so actually this one is more similar to camera profiles), while lookup table in D800 has minimal impact to colors
- D800 profile has additional HueSatVal lookup tables for both illuminants, helping to calibrate colors more preceisely. That's why the size difference
However, Adobe didn't aim to get Nikon colors, they are calibrating their profiles to give similar output for various cameras.

White light sources (and their quality)

(continued from another thread)
White LEDs are currently not a great way to illuminate your prints because they are not near full spectrum light sources. Most "white" LEDs are currently blue or violet LEDs with a green or yellow phosphor added to look neutral - but they have very little light in other areas (especially red). Some high end white LEDs are getting closer to full spectrum - but those are only recently available, and are not yet widespread.
Cheap fluorescent lamps tend to have a few "spikes" of light and have some wavelenths almost entirely missing. "Full Spectrum" Fluorescent lights are getting better, and cheaper - but are still not comparable in quality to tungsten or daylight.
Spectra measured with X-Rite ColorMunki and Argyll CMS spotread utility. Multiple readings averaged, normalized and plotted in Microsoft Excel.
[ updated Dec 16, 2012 to add white LED4, a recent Cree flashlight LED ]
[ updated May 27, 2013 to add samples from 2 LED lightbulbs ]

(1)
http://www.fho-emden.de/~hoffmann/prooflight18092003.pdf
(2)
http://www.fho-emden.de/~hoffmann/fluorescent02062006.pdf
Some additional information (2006):
(1) shows spectra for proofing light by Just (fluorescent) and Solux (tungsten)
and related topics.
(2) shows spectra for commercial fluorescent tubes.
Illuminance E (lux, lx) and luminance L (candela/m², cd/m²) can be related only under
certain assumptions (isotropic diffuser). The one gets (Hunt, Measuring Colour):
L / (cd / m²) = (1/pi) E / lx
or simplified
L = E / 3
Monitor L = 100 cd/m² (luminance)
Office desktop E = 500 lx (illuminance)
Proofing light E = 2000 lx (according to some standard for critical inspection)
We can see immediately, applying the rule of thumb, that paper prints cannot
be viewed side by side with monitors with good results:
2000/3 = 666 (print) <----> 100 (monitor)
The ambient light at the working place in my environment is about 50 lx !
Proofing light is available in a neighbour room.
Best regards --Gernot Hoffmann

JVC HD7 - TOD convert - quality - parameters ?

Hello everybody,
Hopefully I'll help with some data and have some questions at the same time.
After researching several communities I use MPEG SC 1.9 to convert the TOD files. There was a little disturbance, either to convert to HDV or AIC. Hopefully my little test will display the difference:
*TOD file 39.7 MB in 1920x1080*
*DV file 46.3 MB in roughly 1.5 min*
adjustments within MSC...Format: DV Stream(PAL, Interlaced,16:9, Audio rate 48000khz), scale Interlaced, color re-interlace, upper pic first
-> FCP no render for Video necessary
-> hopefully I got all menue options halfway right. Apparently I'm not US and use a german version
*MOV file 143.6 MB with Apple Intermediate Codec in exactly 1 min*
adjustments within MSC...Format: Quicktime Export, Compression AIC, Audio uncompressed, 1920x1080, scale Interlaced, color re-interlace, upper pic first
-> FCP rencer for Video necessary
-> hopefully that's the codec everybody means, when talking AIC !?
General FCP question here:
I've set it to HDV 1080i 50 and then imported the files to the project. Apparently the movie in the canvas (100% size) should be huge, a lot of scrolling bars. But it isn't. It's a little bit bigger than the canvas or viewer window and the picture isn't that clear.
Same thing with the TOD file in Mpeg SC. It's not crystal clear, far away from expectations. Cars in city limits seem to have stripes while in motion. The frame size doesn't fit. It should be bigger than my smaller display can display.
Here's the info out of Mpeg SC:
Stream: MOV001.TOD
Pfad: ~/Movies/MOV001.TOD
Typ: MPEG transport stream
Dauer: 0:00:13
Datenmenge: 39.73 MB
Bit Rate: 24.66 Mbps
Video Spuren:
4113 MPEG-2, 1920 × 1080, 16:9, 29.97 fps, 28.00 Mbps, oberes Halbbild zuerst
Audio Spuren:
4129 MP2 stereo, 48 kHz, 384 kbps
Stream Dateien:
MOV001.TOD (39.73 MB)
Why is the 1920x1080 not the size it should be ? Honestly, if that s the quality from a daylight shot I will sell that camcorder right away and buy a PAL system mini DV for half the price. It's bad !
Another angle: *I've chosen Apple FCP unkompr. 8-Bit 4:2:2 in MSC*.
At least I got a 1920x1080 picture/movie. But what does 8Bit 4:2:2 mean ?
Is that what all of you do ? Guess not.
22 sec of movie 78.7 MB blows up to 2.55 GB !!!
Still the quality isn't that great. Would someone please help me with the parameters in MSC to convert ? That would be awesome.
Well or any other way around the conversion. I'm a little desparate right now.
Lowlight quality of the camcorder is really bad. One bulp and it's spooky dark. But that's not that bad, if at least perfect lid scenes would be great.
Anyone with experiences when it comes to quality of the HD7 ? The pic isn't clearer as the one of my 5yr old miniDV and I shot at bluesky daylight ???
Help is highly appreciated.
thanks.
I still wait for those super color pics

Not help full I know, but I did have the same problem with the HD7, a customer brought it back. He could not get a quality picture. We tested several day's the camera, also another HD7 but we could not get good quality in a Apple setup. (Tested with iMovie (6HD) FCE 3.5 FCP6.02 OS 10.4.10)
He did buy a Sony HDV

Tungsten E2 Reset Loop After Applying Security Panel Update and Daylight Savings Updates

I applied the Security Panel and Daylight Savings updates to my Tungsten E2 handheld. The hotsync operation required me to press reset. Now my handheld loops on the Palm Powered screen. Subsequent attempts to reset have the same result or ask me to delete all data.
Does anyone have a solution for this?
Bob Ludwig
Post relates to: Tungsten E2

If you have the data current in Palm desktop, do the hard reset. Do another sync to see if the E2 starts looping.
If it does, you will need to rename the backup folder in the username folder and then sync again.
Here is a link to an article regarding the location of the username folder on the PC http://kb.palm.com/wps/portal/kb/common/article/37326_en.html
Try installing one update at a time to see if one of the updates are causing the issue.
For reference purposes, click on the following link for the support page for your device on the kb.palm.com webpage.
http://kb.palm.com/wps/portal/kb/na/tungsten/e2/unlocked/home/page_en.html
There are links on the page to the user guide, troubleshooting, how to's, downloads, etc.

How does LR use Daylight/Tungsten settings in a camera profile?

Didn't see this in the very excellent DNG profile faq. If I make a profile that has different settings for daylight and tungsten, how exactly does LR decide when to use each? For instance, I would imagine that if I choose the Tungsten preset for WB, it would use the profile's Tungsten settings, but what if I just adjusted WB manually and set it to the same values as the Tungsten WB preset. Would LR still use the profile's Tungsten settings?
Or does it kind of combine/average them depending on whatever WB values you use?
Edit: Or if it's based on the setting you used in the camera, how would it handle an in-camera custom WB setting?
Anybody know?

Hi Will, correct, this information is not in the FAQ. Instead, the exact weighting method is given in the DNG specification. Here is the info (I copied and pasted from the spec):
DNG 1.2.0.0 and later requires a specific interpolation algorithm: linear interpolation using inverse correlated color temperature.
To find the interpolation weighting factor between the two tag sets, find the correlated color temperature for the user-selected white balance and the two calibration illuminants. If the white balance temperature is between two calibration illuminant temperatures, then invert all the temperatures and use linear interpolation. Otherwise, use the closest calibration tag set.

Shot tungsten in daylight

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for