View Single Post
Old 01-17-2013, 08:31 AM   #2149
Scooby Guru
Member#: 261612
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Minneapolis, MN
2002 WRX - 750WHP
9.5s @ 150mph


Originally Posted by KLBO View Post
Setting doing a custom WB take 1 mins tops, at least on a Nikon. For me its worth it. But everyone has their own work flow.

Takes 1 min, but if you do it several dozen times over the course of a wedding, then you've wasted quite a lot of time. And I still don't see ANY reason it's better than shooting a gray card at each location and then setting the custom white balance back at home when you have a keyboard/mouse/giant monitor/quad core process/8GB of RAM/etc to do it for you. IMO it should be faster for, allow for less wasted time with the client and produce the same (or likely better) results. The only reason it would be better to do it onsite is if you want to save yourself time later. Or if you like to chimp (or let your clients chimp) and want them to look right.

Originally Posted by BrendanTheGreat408 View Post
Hate the first one sorry.

The second one a great shot, amazing lighting on the car but something seams off, its almost as the horizon is not level? perhaps some auto leveling to fix the small lean of the image. just my 2 cents, do like the second a lot tho
Originally Posted by FL4TFTW View Post
The car and the street are perfectly level. The house isn't perfect but he can't help that.
I agree that the first one is unimpressive, but the lighting on the car in the second one is exceptional! This is probably one of the best lit/edited shots in the thread! It's unfortunate that the background is so mediocre. This one would be a good candidate for a cut and paste, IMO.

I also agree that the leveling is off. Setting the ground to be level isn't necessarily right. If you want it to be truly straight then a tree or building is usually better. Ground can slant (ie. a hill) but buildings are usually straight up and down. In this case the ground was actually sloping down from right to left, so that's how it should look. It would look much more natural that way.

Originally Posted by Red. View Post
Just as an illustration (for anyone who might learn from my mistakes) to the mixed lighting sources and WB here is an example of a photo with light sources of two different temps - one of daylight (~5500K) and the other from household lights (~2500-3000K). The little girl's (my daughter) face is lit with more yellow household light, while the back and legs are lit from sunlight through a big sliding glass door. It was kind of an "ah-ha!" moment for me while I was reviewing the photos, trying to even out the WB. This was shot in jpg, edited in iphoto and is about as good as it is going to get. I'm sure in photoshop this could be better balanced, and I believe in LR4 you can adjust color temps with the selective editing brush? But, I'm ok with it how it is for what it is.

_DSC0233 by Aspiratho, on Flickr[/IMG]
This is a good example, but it can be much worse even. And you can edit it out in nearly all cases, but it will usually come down to manual adjustment and be very labor intensive.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
xluben is offline