Canon 40D or XSi (450D) - Page 5

Canon is notorious for veering warm on Auto WB, but generally that is better than cool.

I usually stick to Auto WB and when shooting RAW it's nice you can change the color temperature to an actual Kelvin number. The in-camera WB presets (which I believe you were referring to in the first, bluish photo) are OK if you know for certain the lighting conditions, but a custom setting (which you did for the second photo) is generally preferable to to a preset, as long as the light is consistent.

Good to know about the warmness of the Auto WB setting on Canons.

Later tonight or tomorrow, I'll try to show y'all a warm WB photo, and the corrected photo.  The corrected one looks better, but in no way did it look like that inside the big room.  So, I'm conflicted as to how much effort I should go to "fixing" WB issues.

Nikon is pretty good at coming close on WB but I'd say I tweak a good 60% of my shots still.  With Lightroom I just get one per 'set' done and then set all around it to that.  Goes really fast.  As someone with multiple color deficiences (aka color blindness) WB is a bitch to nail and AWB helps a lot.

Here's the uncorrected:

and here's the corrected (the blue really pop in the corrected version):

Like I said, I'm conflicted to go fix a bunch of others, or just let the ride.  Maybe I'll just fix a few personal faves...

The second looks more accurate, but I would probably make it a touch warmer just because flesh tones are involved. That's mostly a taste thing though.

I find that Canon's auto WB works well outdoors, but is not very accurate indoors under artificial lighting. Patrick, I would suggest learning to shoot in RAW, since WB correction is very simple to accomplish then.

I've used the custom WB a few times, and the trick is to find a source that is more grayish white than pure white. I played around at a local Plymouth Whalers hockey game, and used the ice surface as my WB source. It turned out that the boards were a better source. Luckily, this was very easy to fix in Canon's DPP software, since I shot RAW.

If I shot more indoors without flash, I would think about getting some sort of WB setting tool for the camera. I have never tried one, but the Lally Cap looks quite portable, easy to fit on any lens, and is pretty affordable.

File size is the main reason I've avoided shooting RAW at the moment, as I tend to shoot 1,000s of photos when I do shoot, and I would burn through SD cards and hard drive space (I'm the weird pack-rat when it comes to digital photos, I rarely delete anything unless it's totally useless).   Having 20MB RAW files for single photos would just crush my pack-rat mentality.  But I do understand that it would make WB corrections much easier in post.  I guess I'm just trying to do as much in-camera (like old school movie film effects) to avoid doing as much in post.

I do need to find some 18% grey cards, I've heard that's what some photogs use to do custom WB under weird lighting conditions. 

Pat,

I believe Scott is refering to this:

http://www.lallyphotography.com/store/

Sounds like it may be a newer, easier/better(?) WB tool than the old Expodisc (or translucent coffee can lid) -- and seems cheap enough too (unlike the old Expodisc).

Shooting gray card (or similar) probably doesn't work quite as well/reliably/quickly for the kind of fast moving shooting like what you want.  This method w/ the Lally Cap (or Expodisc or similar) probably significantly reduces WB errors caused by stray light, etc.  I suppose the slight downside may be that it probably requires more light to work than using a gray card since you need the light to pass thru the "cap" rather than reflect off a gray card.

Think I may order one myself...

_Man_

This talk has inspired me to play a bit with cheap solutions. Like a coffee filter and rubber band. It'd be interesting to compare it to the Lally Cap...

The guy's tone in this is kind of funny: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4uotPvQhf8

Oh my, that Lally cap looks so low tech, but I'm intrigued (even if it costs $32 shipped for an item that can't cost more than 34 cents to make).  Thanks for the link (Man), and suggestion (Scott).   Cam, let us know which coffee filters work best, which is funny because I don't even drink coffee!

Well... I have no idea what brand of filter they are since they're an old stack my dad gave me years ago. I don't even have the coffee maker anymore, but I use the filters for making things like yogurt cheese and straining soup stock. :)

I'll post some comparison shots though. So far I like the coffee filter better than a translucent plastic lid because you can attach the filter to the lens more easily and then aim the camera where needed.

I guess there are no surprises here. AWB first; custom WB second. No post processing, just uploaded the JPGs straight from the card. The coffee filter is closer to accurate than at auto, but I would still want to do a little tweaking.

For me the determining factor is the occasion or event. When I'm shooting events at work, the source of light is consistent, so I tend to use custom WB. If I wind up needing or thinking I'll need flash, I leave it on auto. If I'm working where lighting conditions vary, auto WB. If I'm doing shots of food in my house, I'll probably do custom because I have the time and luxury to do it.

I may have to raid my company's coffee filter stash...

Cam, when did you get the 7D?

A couple months back. Really wasn't planning on it but I'm happy with the upgrade. It has some nice features, my favorite being the rotating focus point. When you turn the camera to portrait you can set it so the focus point automatically moves to a point you use in that orientation, which for me is second one from the top. Super handy during concerts and any time I need to shoot quickly.

I don't really need all the pixels most of the time, so I usually just shoot at the M-Raw setting (about 10MP). For concerts though, I can set it to the full 18MP to get a little more reach from my lenses via cropping.

The HD video recording is also a plus, since for many years I have been putting off getting a video camera because I could never completely justify one. This way I have a really good, versatile one if I need it. I have not done too much video though, but am looking forward to experimenting.

Related to the 7D, here's some video a local photojournalist shot of some bald eagles in town. The streaming doesn't do it any favors, but it's inspiring nonetheless.

Beware, you may experience lens envy!

http://www2.registerguard.com/mm/index.php/videos/comments/the-skinner-butte-eagles/

Very cool, Cameron. Thanks for sharing.

I've been getting the itch to upgrade camera bodies lately, but have not been able to justify the expense yet.  I'd love to add either a 7D or 5DMkII and keep my current 40D as a 2nd body.  A 5DMkII would probably also involve some lens purchases and sales, too, as I would probably swap out my EF-S 10-22 and 17/55 f/2.8 lenses for a couple of "L" lenses for the 5D. A 7D would be more practical due to my existing lenses, but I would love to add a full frame body to my kit.

We do not have any big travel plans this year, though, where my 40D will not suffice. Maybe before our next trip out West next year. Patience is definitely a virtue with camera body purchases, as they only drop in price over time.

So I went looking for coffee filters in the company break room, and got to talking to an admin assistant, and after I told her what I was going to do with the coffee filter, she got all excited because her and her husband go to car shows (and other shows/convention halls), and they take lots of photos, and noticed all the funky color cast to their photos, and were amenable to trying out the coffee filter to set a custom white balance on their next photo outing.  I couldn't believe someone in my office even got the concept of white balance in photography.   

I suppose it's more interesting than saying you're going to make yogurt cheese.

I tend to use the cameras preset white balance settings. I almost never use auto white balance because it can be so easily fooled. If you are going to do a manual white balance you NEED to have a card that you know is white to key off of. Your eyes are too easy to fool into thinking something is white when it really isn't. I have a folding white card that I carry around sometimes.

You got some really nice shots Patrick, but I personally would like to see a little fill flash in these. With over head light like you get in a convention center, you tend to lose the subject's eyes in shadows. Fill flash would add a catch light in the eyes and also help illuminate the lower half of costumes that tend to get lost in the shadows as well. Fill flash would also help with your white balance issue. Yes the flash is daylight balanced, but if you set the white balance for the flash, the subject will be correctly balance, where the background will go a bit warm causing the subject to pop. Of course you could color correct the flash to tungsten as well to match the existing light.

I hope that this advice it taken for what it is, just some constructive criticism.

Doug

I was doing my best not to also walk around with my external flash (it gets to be too much of a production at that point, plus my neck was already straining from the new heavier lens on the dSLR), since I had another shoulder bag for shopping slung around me, but in the end, I also thought I should have used fill flash for the eyes as well (I didn't want to use my on-board dSLR flash except for dire lighting conditions), live and learn.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patrick Sun 

I also thought I should have used fill flash for the eyes as well (I didn't want to use my on-board dSLR flash except for dire lighting conditions), live and learn.

If not for the indoor lighting color biases and potential red-eye problem, I'd think the on-board flash would be ok for a little fill and catch light.  Should be fine for daytime outdoors use for instance, but of course, that's not your situation.

BTW, RE: custom WB setting, I remember someone mentioning (long ago when I first started) using a slightly blue-ish white card to yield a slightly warmer, more pleasant WB.  Personally, I like it slightly warmer in many/most cases myself.  It all depends on what you're going for.  At the end of the day, photography doesn't need to be just about some strict, accurate view of reality.  In fact, it's probably rarely about that at all (even if most people think otherwise)...

_Man_

Perhaps I had considered the red-eye effect and then decided to not use flash if possible, that weekend was a swirling target-rich environment.

I just don't want people looking jaundice or icy cold, which would require more post than I'd want to subject myself to for a large batch of photos.

BTW, if you do accumulate dust in your 17-55, the cleaning procedure is pretty simple:

http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/drp

Thanks for the dust-cleaning link, hope I don't have to refer to it anytime soon...

So, I was at my high school reunion this past weekend, and I was surprised by the lack of red-eye I got in my photos, even though I was using an external flash with a simple diffuser cap on it.  The flash is a Canon 430EX knock-off.

I volunteered to be the reunion photographer (it would allow me to mingle without it being awkward to approach some of the former classmates that I had little to talk about with since we weren't in the same classes together, and it would allow me to slink away if I got into a dull conversation).   So, overall, it worked out okay, though I decided to use the shotgun auto-focus mode since I'd be shooting in landscape orientation with usually 2-6 people in the frame.  Normally I shoot center-focus, pre-focus on one person, and move the camera lens to re-compose, but with so many people, I just let the camera's AF do the work, and for the most part, it did well enough.

I did end up cropping the photos to mainly get the people in the final composed frame of the shot and get rid of the dark backgrounds and dead space (it was in a somewhat dimly lit lounge on the top floor of a Holiday Inn, so shooting without a flash was out of the question).  And it depended on some areas with different lighting conditions where I had to raise the gamma a bit in the photos, and then de-saturate the photos because the colors were really saturated at times. 

I used this photo opportunity to hone my use of the dSLR with external flash, and my new Canon EF-S 17-55mm IS USM lens (for the close-up to medium shots) in anticipation of Dragon*Con in early September.  I think it went okay.  I learned a bit, and will be able to apply some of that knowledge soon as I gaing more confidence in using a dSLR for taking photos of all the craziness that happens at Dragon*Con, and not have to fall back to using my usual point-n-shoot digital cameras.

I was also glad I brought my camera, we got all the attendees together on the dance floor for a big group shot, though I sort of wished I had a wider lens, but we got the shot after all.  It was great to make photo-memories for the motley crew of classmates from my high school, and to share them through Facebook/Flickr, which allows other classmates who didn't make it to the reunion to at least see their old friends as well in photos.

I stopped by the local university bookstore and ran across a Gary Fong Lighsphere for a measly $20! I just hope I don't lose it. :)

I was really envious when I saw someone with a collapsible lightsphere at Dragon*Con last weekend.  Too bad it's $60 from Fong's website.