OMG! It's like saying I am the only true driver out there because I used to start my car with a crank handle and repair it three times by the roadside on a trip of 50 miles!!! I don't know any photographers that prefer to "sort it in PS" . It often takes time. Adjusting WB takes all of about 0.5secs. So what? Who cares? Old people are the only 'true' photographers yada yada yada... Congratulations. Camera craft is dead, youngsters and digital aren't real photographers etc. Yawn. Move on. Enjoy what you do, I'll enjoy what I do. Yes, you are much better photographer than me cos you shot or shoot film. Does it really matter? Are your skills/craft better than mine? Maybe, maybe not.Everyone is entitled to their opinion, when I say get it right in camera I mean in the principles of photography, like the right exposure being selected instead of taking the shot with the attitude of if its a bit light or dark I can sort it in PS, selecting the right WB instead of sorting it in Ps, getting the framing and composition right instead of oh I can clone that out or well with a few layers I can add that bit I missed in PS
Call me old fashioned but I learned photography the hard way when it could cost you a lot of money for wasted film and prin5ing cost if you got it wrong in the camera
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, when I say get it right in camera I mean in the principles of photography, like the right exposure being selected instead of taking the shot with the attitude of if its a bit light or dark I can sort it in PS, selecting the right WB instead of sorting it in Ps, getting the framing and composition right instead of oh I can clone that out or well with a few layers I can add that bit I missed in PS
Call me old fashioned but I learned photography the hard way when it could cost you a lot of money for wasted film and prin5ing cost if you got it wrong in the camera
Now why could i not have said it like thisGetting the WB right in camera? But WB settings only affect the in-camera JPEG, if you happen to be shooting jpegs. I sometimes shoot paintings for the painter, when it's very important to get white balance right. But I don't fuss with getting it exactly right at the time of shooting. I let the auto WB get it nearly right, which it's good at, just for the convenience of not having a distractingly tinted live view while working off a tripod, and I'll include enough gray card and reference colour samples in the shoot to be able to do a really careful WB back at the computer.
As for getting exposure right at the time, there are some situations, such as landscapes with sun and clouds, where the dynamic range in the view, and how you wish the photographic image to represent it, is so wide that no single exposure can get it right. Some kind of multiple exposure and blending or HDR is necessary. Some like to do the multiple exposure and blending in the camera by using a graduated filter at the time of shooting. That's much easier than blending together two negatives when printing in the darkroom, but if you have the appropriate skills not as easy or as flexible as doing it in computer.
I've carefully said "in the computer" here rather than "post processing", because modern digital cameras have increasingly powerful computers in them. Some of them offer the user the ability to multiple exposure HDR and panorama stitching in camera at the time of shooting, but not quite as good as could be done later in post processing with a bigger more versatile computer.
For those reasons I argue that "getting it right" according to the "principles of photography" means making the best use of the resources avsilable, which sometimes means shooting with a view to getting the best images with which to finish the job later in computer.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, when I say get it right in camera I mean in the principles of photography, like the right exposure being selected instead of taking the shot with the attitude of if its a bit light or dark I can sort it in PS
, selecting the right WB instead of sorting it in Ps,
Hearing a camera shutter noise in a public bathroom can never be for anything normal.
This is realy getting out of hand, it seems that you are takeing my comments to the utter extreams and reading in to what i have said as my meaning that it is all gospal, i do not mean it as gospal it is only a general statement about WB
this is my last post about this
OMG! It's like saying I am the only true driver out there because I used to start my car with a crank handle and repair it three times by the roadside on a trip of 50 miles!!! I don't know any photographers that prefer to "sort it in PS" . It often takes time. Adjusting WB takes all of about 0.5secs. So what? Who cares? Old people are the only 'true' photographers yada yada yada... Congratulations. Camera craft is dead, youngsters and digital aren't real photographers etc. Yawn. Move on. Enjoy what you do, I'll enjoy what I do. Yes, you are much better photographer than me cos you shot or shoot film. Does it really matter? Are your skills/craft better than mine? Maybe, maybe not.
Thanks.I've been meaning to respond to this sig quote for some time. Back in the days of film I sometimes used to use public bathrooms to switch between rolls of half exposed film of different ISO etc.. On a bright sunny day a toilet was often a good place to find no windows and relatively dim light which improved the security of fumbling around in a portable dark bag. Which often involved the sound of a shutter as one wound past the requisite number of already taken exposures.
So it's not necessarily the case that the sound of a shutter in a public bathroom can't be for anything normal. Unusual, yes of course, but not inappropriate or reprehensible.
This is a rather good example.
http://sploid.gizmodo.com/this-composite-photograph-from-wwi-is-better-than-most-1458519043
Frank Hurley was the Antarctic photographer as well, wasn't he?
In fact, IT IS BEST PRACTICE to do this in conjunction with a reference shot containing a grey card. How can YOU or indeed ANYONE actually set the correct white balance unless you measure the colour temperature of the light?
Frank Hurley was the photographer on Shackleton's Antarctic expidition where he took some great photographs. He was also a war photographer and was quite happy to add dramatic skies, extra explosions and more smoke to make an image stronger.
If you are not aware of Shackleton's expedition, look it up. They survived against all odds. The book Endurance is well worth reading - and looking at the pictures!
Steve.
I said this is my last post on this, so as not to offend anyone else, i am not sulking i am just moving on to something else to stir things up abit just kidding please dont hang meGood... because as a general statement about white balance it's flat wrong. There is nothing clever about setting white balance in camera, as unless you know the exact colour temperature of the lightsource at that exact moment, you're just guessing. Shoot raw, use auto WB and take a reference shot with a grey card and you can get it almost completely accurate every time by setting WB post-shoot by sampling the grey card. As there is zero quality penalty for doing so. Why would anyone do anything else?
Drag yourself into the 21st century please instead of going into a "This is my last post" sulk about it. You're wrong... change your practice instead, and admit you're wrong.
I said this is my last post on this, so as not to offend anyone else, i am not sulking i am just moving on to something else to stir things up abit just kidding please dont hang me
Not such a freindly site after all is it?
Its called a discussion, Harold. People having a different opinion to you doesnt make them unfriendly.
Not such a freindly site after all is it?
it always has been- literally speaking it means painting with light
Yes it does
It's a strange attitude, to say something that you know to be confrontational and then feign surprise when you get a result. You've come across like a teenager after his first pint. Picking fights he's not equipped to win and then complaining about the bullies.I said this is my last post on this, so as not to offend anyone else, i am not sulking i am just moving on to something else to stir things up abit just kidding please dont hang me
Aggressive? Really? Wow? To the point maybe, honest as well, but aggressive it certainly wasn't! You should see me when I'm really angry...Rich,
You obviously have strong opinions on this sort of thing but why express them in such an such an aggressive fashion? You come across a right ****.
Aggressive? Really? Wow? To the point maybe, honest as well, but aggressive it certainly wasn't! You should see me when I'm really angry...
Oh and notice there that I didn't call anyone names...unlike some I could mention...
Oh well you must be right then. Sorry if I've hurt your feelings! Stroke, stroke, hug, hug! I'm a pussy cat really...Well I've been the recipient of your honest and to the point opinions myself and it is not a pleasant experience...... so I'm not surprised at Kingo9919's reaction. He was quite clearly shocked.
As for being a friendly forum, it generally is. But note my comment above in post no 630.
If you've a Lowepro backpack, the grey of the interior is allegedly 18%, so can be used to set the white balance ont he camera
That's good news as I've been using it at times.
Plus.. it's not the 18% that's important. It's the neutrality of the grey.