White balance control

With beta 4, is it possible to use the "alt/Ctlr" key to automatically show those areas in the photo that are true mid-grey?  This would allow one to then use the dropper in those identified areas - currently you need to hunt for the right grey tone.   I currently solve this issue by popping out to photoshop and applying a mid grey screen, but why not do in Lightroom?

John,
If you have an object in the image which you know a priori is neutral grey (because it has been manufactured to serve that function,) then using a white balance tool on that object will work to set a numerically "correct" white balance, i.e., one which will remove color casts. (Of course, whether or not this provides an aesthetically pleasing result is a different question. For example, if you use a grey card to normalize the white balance for an image captured by candelight, you'll get a result which some people would find unappealing, as some people want/expect candlelit scenes to have a warm orange ambience.)
I think you're looking for an automated method of identifying those regions in an image which are most likely to serve this purpose -- i.e., regions which would have equal RGB values when captured under standard daylight illumination.
I think you're confusing this concept with identifying those regions in an image which already have equal RGB values, despite having been captured under non-standard illumination.
As Lee Jay notes, knowing which regions in an image already have equal RGB values isn't going to help you set a new white balance. You need to use a region which doesn't have equal RGB values, but should -- where "should" means that after the white balance has been adjusted, the region will then have equal RGB values.

Similar Messages

  • Manual Exposure and White balance control?

    What Webcams provide the ability to manually set the Exposure and White balance?
    I know the nx pro ultra does, but I am having trouble connecting to it from my Java application.
    Also are there any other wideangle webcams out there?

    What Webcams provide the ability to manually set the Exposure and White balance?
    I know the nx pro ultra does, but I am having trouble connecting to it from my Java application.
    Also are there any other wideangle webcams out there?

  • Please add white balance adjustment to brush tool!!

    Please add to the brush tool the ability to adjust white balance.  I know you can currently paint a color over areas, but I would like to see a true white balance control in a brush.  This would be quite useful for wedding or event photographers who shoot quickly in varied lighting often without flash.

    More specifically, I would like to paint at 5500k or 3500k or whatever color temp I choose, measure, detect, or feel so inclined to.  Like I said before, I realize the paint with tint works, but painting a white balance would be much easier.  I never mentioned accurate.  Accurate photographs in mixed lighting usually look bad (especially when you mix in fluorescent).  My clients don't want "accurate" photos, they want what they remembered the event to look like.  I don't feel the need to suggest the current features fail in any way to make a suggested improvement upon those features.  The current (LR2) demosiac engine works well, but LR3 got an overhaul.  Was demosiac in LR1 and LR2 a failure?  I believe my suggestion is consistent with the intent of LR.  While painting a warming or cooling color would certainly achieve the desired results, painting a preset color balance or manual temp/tint would be quicker.  It makes for a better workflow.

  • Using white point for White Balance (instead of gray point)

    Dear All,
    I am looking to buy Aperture 2.0, but one point annoys me a bit : it seems that we can only use gray point to make a White Balance. I use to use only white points in Photoshop, as my photos of products rarely include gray colors. I take the photos on white background only, and when doing WB with a white point, my product gets nice colors, and more important, appears to "float" on a totally white background.
    Also, I do not want to bother with a gray card, as by experience it didn't prove to be as effective.
    My question is : is there any means or plug-in to use white point to make a white balance ?
    Thanks a lot !
    Arn'

    Arn,
    Hate to break it to you but.... It doesn't matter if you use white or grey as long as the actual color is neutral (no tendency towards blue etc.) what does matter regarding white is to make sure that there is enough color information in all the color channels to make an accurate assessment of the color of the light in the scene.
    As there are a million ways to do something in PS I don;t know exactly what you are doing but it sure sounds like you are actually doing a couple of things to the image in one step. In Aperture if I assume you are using the white balance control brick to manipulate white balance that is the only thing that is being changed - nothing else (like the contrast).
    RB

  • How-To: White-balance your image properly  Attn: Aperture Team @ Apple

    Since Aperture's white balance eye-dropper is more-or-less useless I have taken it upon myself to discover a means to accurately white-balance an image using Aperture.
    My method is as follows:
    1. Open my desired image in Aperture and hit Z to view at 100%
    2. Open up /Applications/Utilities/DigitalColor Meter
    3. In DigitalColor Meter, go into preferences and select the following options:
    Magnification Factor: 8x
    Refresh behavior: Refresh continuously
    [X] Float window above other apps
    4. Set DigitalColor Meter's "Aperture Size" to the third or 4th notch to get a fairly large radius
    5. Move the cursor over the image until DigitalColor Meter's "Aperture" box is over a portion of the image that you want neutral and hit Command(Apple)-L
    to lock it at that position
    6. Adjust the White Balance controls in Aperture until DigitalColor Meter reads equal (or approximately equal) R G B values
    You now have an image that's white balanced accurately for the area you selected. If it is not satisfactory, click on DigitalColor Meter and hit Command(Apple)-L to unlock and repeat the 5th and 6th steps above with a new area.
    Notice to Apple's Aperture Team: This is how white balance should work in Aperture. The white balance eye-dropper currently produces pretty random results. When working on this tool for a future update, look at allowing the user to set a radius for sampling the image and build the DigitalColor Meter into the application. This would bring Aperture closer to being a real professional tool.
    Dual G5 2.5GHz, 4GB RAM, GeForce 6800 Ultra DDL   Mac OS X (10.4.3)  

    Test Results:
    Aperture 1.1:
    Image Temperature: 3594
    Tint: -17
    When using the white balance tool on a white section of a photo, the RGB values changed from R 255 G 234 B 192 to R 255 G 230 B 197 and the Temperature changed to 3946 and Tint to 12.
    The photo still remained unacceptable.
    When usint the white balance tool on a grey section of the same photo, the RGB values cahnge from R 211 G 178 B 126 to R 208 G 180 B 162 and the Temperatue changed to 3154 and Tint to 2.
    The photo still remained unacceptable but was notably improved.
    Using Capture One Pro, the results were as follows:
    Temperatue: 3850
    Tint: -10
    When using the white balance tool on a white section of the same photo, the RGB values changed from R 255 G 241 B 200 to R 244 G 244 B 244 and the Temperature changed to 2500 and Tint to -16.
    Photo was very acceptable with no perceivable colour cast.
    When using the white balance tool on a grey section of the same photo, the RGB values changed from R 190 G 153 B 108 to R 153 G 153 B 153 and Temperature to 2550 and Tint to -2.
    Photo was very acceptable with no perceivable colour cast.
    From this quick test on a photo, I can draw the following conclusions:
    1. Aperture interprets temperature and tint data differently from Capture One Pro, although this likely due to the use of a camera profile within Capture One Pro;
    2. Using the white balance tool in Aperture on a "white" section does not neutralize the RGB values;
    3. Using the white balance tool in Aperture on a "white" section does not correctly remove a colour cast within a photograph;
    4. Using the white balance tool in Aperture on a "grey" section does not neutralize the RGB values; and
    5. Using the white balance tool in Aperture on a "grey" section does not correctly remove a colour cast within a photograph, although it does work better.

  • White Balance eyedropper not working?

    Hi all,
    Has anyone else tried doing a white balance adjustment in Aperture 2.0.1 with the eyedropper?
    In 1.5.x, it worked great -- I just clicked the eyedropper, clicked on a known-neutral-grey area of my photo, and the white balance was adjusted very well.
    In Aperture 2.0.1, I click on the eyedropper, then click on the same neutral-grey area, and for a second the photo adjusts beautifully -- then the white balance controls seem to randomly adjust back, and I get a photo that is no more color balanced than the original one.
    Is anyone else seeing this, and/or does anyone have any ideas why Aperture won't stick with the initial adjustment I'm seeing?
    Thanks in advance!
    \marc

    Still not working. I think the root cause of the problem is the mechanics of using the tool itself; I hope this screen shot shows up below ...
    Here I have APPLIED EFFECTS open, and have selected Midtones (Greys) to be expanded so that the eyedropper and other details appear:
    Now, just below where it has a box and "Impacted frame area in white" (which I know is a checkbox allowing the area effected to be seen), there is a little color box and an eyedropper.
    What EXACTLY do I do to select (activate) the eyedropper and subsequently tell the program what I feel should be grey in the selected clip?
    As mentioned before, I can click it and the cursor briefly changes to the same shape as the eyedropper. But as soon as I move the cursor a fraction, it changes back to an arrow (normal cursor) shape. Even then, going to the area I need to select in the image, and then clicking it, does exactly nothing to the appearance of the image shown -- even if the colors start way off. No correction at all. It is as if the tool does nothing. The color wheels below all this DO work however - it's just the eyedropper that doesn't do anything. This just cannot be Adobe's intention. I am convinced there must be some flaw in how I am selecting the tool itself. And the user guide - needless to say - is worthless in explaining the mechanics.
    So very frustrating. This appears to be the only thing wrong with the program - nothing else seems amiss.
    NOTE: To add insult to injury, this promised white/gray/black balance feature and the three-way-color corrector is the SOLE REASON I purchased the software. Funny.

  • 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.

  • Creative Ultra for Notebook, white balance not working??

    After years of use with my Creative Notebook Cam Pro I decided to upgrade and get the Ultra for Notebook because it's a CCD and works better in lower light conditions.
    The drivers install fine however I cannot adjust the white balance nothing changes when I click apply. I have both 98SE and XP drivers installed and it appears that the bug is present in both sets of drivers.
    This is a big disappointment because using this cam indoor with artificial lighting is next to being useless. Furthermore there's no saturation controls included in the drivers so I couldn't reduce the colour to b/w even if I wanted to.
    As a product that's been on the market for nearly 2 years I'm surprised that no bug fixes have been issued for this problem I'm sure it's been mentioned before here?
    Does anyone know if CLabs will fix the problem soon because as it stands this product isn't worthy of my time or money.
    Richard S.

    It should be directly underneath the image preview - press the T key if it's not there.

  • The panel with White Balance, contrast, exposure, whites, blacks, etc. has disappeared from my Develop screen

    The panel with White Balance, Exposure, Contrast, Tone, Whites, Blacks, etc has disappeared from my Develop screen.  The control panel on the right side now starts with Tone Curve and I can't find a way to revert back to the screen with the other adjustments. I need to know how to correct this problem.
    This is what I'm working with now:

    Right click 'Tone Curve' (the title/words) and enable 'Basic'.
    Do you see it?

  • Select area with white balance picker

    Here's an improvement that would make it much easier to make accurate white balance picks:
    A white balance picker that can sample an area of pixels.
    This can be done in two ways:
    1. Perhaps the simplest and most logical: Make the white balance into an area selector, like the mask tool in Photoshop. The pixels in the square are averaged and used to set the white balance. You could keep the one-click functionality as is.
    2. Give the white balance tool an adjustable sample area. 1x1, 3x3, 9x9 for instance.
    I've been trying to investigate if it is possible to get averaged WB values by picking from a very zoomed-out view of the image. It seems to work, but I'm not 100% sure. Anyone who can fill me in on this?

    I see what you mean (I just tried it) - pretty clear whats going on there...
    The way it is seems pretty good to me - as long as you are willing to use >1:1 zoom ratio for fine control, no?
    i.e. its easy to pick exactly which pixel you want. Are there cases where you would want a pixel in-between? or would it just be a convenience (to use an averaged area) so you wouldn't have to choose amongst candidate pixels?
    Just curious mostly...
    Rob

  • Eye drop tool for white balance

    It has been requested an eye drop tool to correct white balance issues in color correction for a long time. Is there any news on this? Will it be a new feature in upcoming updates?
    If not... does anyone know a plugin that will do the same thing?
    Short description:
    I want to be able to select which colors are supposed to be white with an eye drop tool during color correction. This feature was available in earlier FCPs like 6 and 7. It saves tons of hours being able to auto adjust the whitebalance in post, rather than trying to match the correct color balance - dragging up and down these color circles, and then matching the color settings throughout the whole project.

    The Color Corrector in FCPX is a misnomer. The color board is more about grading - not correcting.
    If you can tell how the color is casting (or read the scopes) then the Color board is easy: line up the global control over the color and drag it downward (that will "subtract" the offending cast from the image.)  Or use the shadows, midtones, and highlights controls individually for those ranges.
    [But I find scopes difficult to use quickly, so:]
    You can also use *any* of the effects, titles, or generators that have any color parameter selection (or gradient!) as an eyedropper in a pinch. Click on the swatch for the color parameter and from the pop up dialog (color picker), use the Magnifier (top left corner) and choose any pixel on the canvas (or anywhere else for that matter.) That will give you clear indication which primary elements are "too heavy" (red, green, blue -- or any two with greater value than the minimum) Using the HSB sliders mode (second icon and last on the dropdown) will give you the degree angle (which is what the color board uses) of the hue cast and the Saturation value will give you an indication of the "magnitude" of the cast. Move the appropriate control in the color board to the Hue degree and subtract the % shown by saturation -- and you're "white balanced" (I should say: neutral.) [PS, if you're not going to be using the effect, etc -- simply disable it by clicking on the blue rectangle -- you'll still be able to use the color picker -- and whatever the effect is won't interfere with your color edits.]
    If you have Motion, you can build an "eyedropper" quickly by drawing a rectangle, setting the fill opacity to 0 and publishing its fill color -- it can be an effect, a title or most easily: a generator. Titles and generators are most easily dragged around the storyline and don't become "part of" a clip.  If you don't have Motion, you can download one here: http://sight-creations.com/fxexchange/eyeDropperAssist.zip (a generator.)

  • White balance oversimplified

    This problem is not specific to Aperture, but rather an example of industry-wide brain damage, ACR and LightZone get this wrong too. BreezeBrowser and dcraw get it right.
    The issue is simple, or rather oversimplification. All of these new "Pro" tools believe that white balance can always be expressed in a color temperature and a green/magenta tint. While that's true if your entire world is illuminated by pure blackbody radiation, it's mostly wrong in a growing number of cases (the green/magenta tint is a tip of the hat to fluorescent lighting, but it's still insufficient for some stage lighting and I've had odd problems with LED sources)
    My case is the most extreme, and most annoying: I shoot infrared with modified cameras. I've removed the IR cutoff filter from the camera, and typically shoot through a red or IR-only filter. This produces false-color images that often have quite striking color variations. I always shoot RAW, and make a point of setting the white balance in-camera when I'm shooting.
    When Aperture (or any of these other apps) do the RAW conversion, they mangle the WB data to fit this temp-and-tint view of the world, and the result is usually bright red pictures.
    I though the point of a "Pro" application was to give the user more control, not less.
    So, Apple: Please fix this. Give me a way to actually use the WB data from the camera in extreme situations. At least Aperture doesn't claim to offer "As Shot" like ACR.
    MacBook 2.0GHz/White   Mac OS X (10.4.6)  

    Are you shooting RAW?
    So, here's the problem:
    http://homepage.mac.com/n6mod/IRRAWDemo/
    Canon G3, no IR cutoff internally.
    1: #29 Filter, RAW converted in Aperture
    2: Same raw file converted with dcraw -w (matches the thumbnail)
    3: R72 Filter, RAW converted in Aperture
    4: Same raw file converted with dcraw -w (matches the thumbnail)
    It's infuriating to import a set of images that look fine when Aperture is using the thumbnail embedded in the raw file, and then watch them turn red as Aperture re-renders the previews.
    MacBook 2.0GHz/White Mac OS X (10.4.10)

  • White Balance - Plug in for adjusting

    I forgot to set the white balance on my camera before recording.  I remember coming across an AE effect plug-in that will set/adjust the white balance but I cant remember which one it is.  
    thank You
    CS4

    There's a list of training resources at http://www.synthetic-ap.com/support/kb/420301.html
    To do white balance it's really simple: Apply Color Finesse to a layer. In the effect controls window, click the "Auto Color" button. You're done.
    Obviously there's a lot more to Color Finesse, but despite its depth, it's pretty simple for doing simple things.
    (Note that Auto Color is new to Color Finesse 3 and CS5.)
    Bob Currier
    Synthetic Aperture

  • Correct white balance

    I just join new job. They taped big project with white wall. Three cameras. Two of them are same and one new camera. I am not sure which camcorders but I see those two cameras are apparently off white balance (slight yellow) while new camera show look great. I am not familiar with color corrections. It got me confused which ones that I should adjust for white balance correction like level controls highlighs mids blacks, color balance, color controls.. all those... not sure which is good to correct white balance. Hope that I am able to match with one look so white and great colors.

    Try the Magic Wand.
    Turn the CC to Visual mode, that's where you see the colour wheels.
    At about seven o'clock on the Balance wheel is a little eye dropper.
    Here's how to do it:
    Have the clip edited into the Timeline then place your playhead over that clip.
    Open this clip (the one in the Timeline that needs to be corrected) into the Viewer. Okay, what you have is the same clip being diplayed in the Viewer and Canvas. This is so when color corrections are made in the Viewer you can see the changes in the Canvas straight away. You know if things going the right way or not.
    Drag the Color Corrector from the Browser>Effects>Video Filters>Color Correction>Color Corrector and drop it on the Viewer.
    A Color Corrector Tab will be available on the Viewer.
    Click the Color Corrector Tab and the CC Filter appears.
    Click the eye dropper and move the cursor over the Canvas, the cursor should look like an eye dropper if all is well.
    Find something that should be WHITE in the Canvas, place the eye dropper over this and click on it. Instant balance correction can be seen in the Canvas.
    If this doesn't work then you can use the wheels manually to change the balance.
    Al

  • White balance selections, Quick Develop and Develop...let's talk

    One thing that isn't well-known is that the adjustments in Quick Develop and the adjustments in Develop are *fundamentally different* from each other.
    Develop is basically designed to provide *absolute* adjustments to RAW images. It can be used for JPEGs too, but in that case, the white balance setting is not absolute as it's already been corrected in-camera. So the WB settings are meaningless since you don't know where to begin and the temperatures are removed for the same reason. You just start where you are and get warmer or cooler.
    Quick Develop is designed to provide *relative* adjustments to all images. What this means is, if you have many images selected and hit the right exposure arrow ">" you'll increase the effective exposure of all of those images from wherever they are now to that plus 1/3 stop. If you hit the ">>" you'll get 1 stop increments.
    Since QD is always making *relative* adjustments, it may be reasonable to assume that you have a known, corrected starting point from which to make relative adjustments. That may be why the daylight and other options are available in QD. I personally think this is a bad assumption as you don't know what corrections have been applied in-camera. Thus, I think those options shouldn't appear in QD just like they don't in Develop.
    Comments?

    The relative vs. absolute of the QD vs. Dev modules is something I'm not familiar with LR enough to dispute. However isn't the point of LR's non-destructive nature, that all actions on an image are relative to the initial baseline, whether it is a RAW or JPG (or Other).
    Granted applying a preset WB set of values against a JPG does not make a lot of sense in the development of a repeatable workflow, but if a set of WB values improves a JPG image, who cares. Its all non-destructive and I can reset at any time.
    I tend to not like operating in applications that are too stringent in keeping me walled into the "right" way of doing things. Particularly based on the super intelligent decision of the software developer because they know how it is supposed to work. (I have license to berate this group because it is my vocation) Changing the user interface from one module to another (if they both do the same thing) or from one file type to another is not a good thing. Consistency is paramount to user freindliness. If indeed the QD and the Dev modules work differently then it is expected that the controls be labeled differently to express this difference. If a selection is detrimental to the image or will cause application issues it is better to leave the selection visible (for consistency) and disable it (gray out) to keep it from being selected.
    The abreviation of White Balance: to WB: in the application is also bad form. It is jargony and does not assist new users to understanding. Screen real estate is scarce and I understand the inclination to do this, but there is a cost.
    - Morey

Maybe you are looking for