White balance
On the last The Image Quality Processor Blog post - see http://blog.phaseone.com/5-easy-steps-t ... 7_2016_IQP - Niels V. Knudsen write regarding white balance:
Is the red, green and blue histograms not being on top each always a sign of a need for a white balance adjustment? If so, could somebody explain why?
Step 1: Fine-tune the White Balance
I notice that the red, green and blue histograms aren’t really on top of each other indicating that it is a good idea to adjust the White Balance in the image. I use the white balance picker in the splashing water as this diffuses the light and gives a good general balance for the whole image.
Is the red, green and blue histograms not being on top each always a sign of a need for a white balance adjustment? If so, could somebody explain why?
0
-
The histogram is nothing more than a graph of the distribution of pixels in your image. The only time a histogram would have all three channels displaying identically on top of one another is if you had a file with identical distribution in all three channels - like a solid gray fill or neutral gradient. I wouldn't worry so much about the histograms and worry more about the actual RGB pixel values displayed for each channel. When they are equal, when R=G=B, you've got neutral. Your numbers can vary a little and still appear more or less neutral. 0 -
I think that the advice in the blog is particularly unhelpful - it makes a frankly foolish assumption that "neutral" inherently equates to "correct" white balance.
In fact, in low contrast images more than most, the last thing you might want is a neutral WB rendering.Is the red, green and blue histograms not being on top each always a sign of a need for a white balance adjustment?
Definitely not - let your eye be the judge, not the histogram.
Want to kill a Golden Hour image? Follow the "Professor's" advice...0 -
For the image in the Blog post, Niels' advice it spot on. The foam is white, and to get white, the RGB values needs to be the same, and the histogram can indeed help with visualizing that.
This doesn't mean that this goes for all images in the world, nor was that ever claimed.0 -
Thanks for the replies. [quote="Peter50" wrote:
The histogram is nothing more than a graph of the distribution of pixels in your image.
Indeed, all a histogram gives is a frequency distribution of pixels in an image. Furthermore, the histogram does not indicate where in the image the pixels are. However, I will need a lot of convincing to "ignore" the histogram (I am aware that you might not be suggesting this).[quote="Peter50" wrote:
When they are equal, when R=G=B, you've got neutral. Your numbers can vary a little and still appear more or less neutral.
White is neutral 255, 255, 255 and black is also neutral 0,0,0, which leads me to the next point.[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:
For the image in the Blog post, Niels' advice it spot on. The foam is white, and to get white, the RGB values needs to be the same, and the histogram can indeed help with visualizing that.
The reason why it works in Niel's blog post and the reason why it worked after I tried it with some of my shots is because foam is white, snow is also white and some clouds are also white.[quote="Keith Reeder" wrote:
Let your eye be the judge, not the histogram.
I am afraid I cannot just rely on my eye, my eye gets it wrong very often; perhaps because it is not very well trained.[quote="Keith Reeder" wrote:
Want to kill a Golden Hour image? Follow the "Professor's" advice...
Not sure if the "Professor" would give such an advice for a Golden Hour photograph.0 -
I would have thought that, artistic interpretation aside, getting the image somewhere understandably neutral, more or less, would be a good starting point for re-colouring to suit a mood. Not always necessary for the purpose of course but useful for some images.
From memory colour neutrality accuracy is not the only benefit of well aligned colours if one seeks sharp and punchy images.
Grant0
Post ist für Kommentare geschlossen.
Kommentare
5 Kommentare