
How I Started with Off-camera Flash
This is the place to find photography related content targeted primarily at studio photography. About light, lighting techniques, color balance, backdrops, posing, photographing objects, post processing, support equipment, light modifiers, standard practices, releases, selling, marketing, business related issues, and more.
Next, we move the temperature slider until the white patch appears close to white. Measurements are taken by simply moving the cursor over the white patch. Note that the measurements will vary a little from spot to spot, but one quickly gets an idea of just how close to a neutral white the color is getting. Remember that neutral will be when all three of the RGB values are identical (or in this case, close).
I was able to get a reading of 157, 148, 149 by only adjusting the color temperature slider. This is not bad at all, but why stop there when we can shoot for something better? With DPP we can fine tune the color by pressing the “Tune” button.
Raw Files (background info)
This post involves working with raw files, but at this time we will only be looking at white balance. For anyone unfamiliar with the term raw file, it is a file composed of data read directly from the camera's sensor. Most digital cameras use a monochromatic sensor, so in order to create RGB (Red, Green, Blue) color channels, the sensor is fitted with a color filter array composed of red, green and blue filters arranged in a symmetric pattern with one filter element for each photo site on the sensor. A program called a raw converter is used to interpolate a color and intensity for each photo site by using readings from surrounding pixels to create a jpeg or tiff file.
A study of the color filter array will yield a better understanding of what a raw file contains. There are several good articles already written on this subject and it is far beyond the scope of this posting, so rather than replicate what already exists in abundance, here are some links to follow for more information. DPReview, Wikipedia, Harvard, and John Savord's excellent writeup. An Internet search will produce a proliferation of similar reports.
All DSLR cameras and many digicams can output raw files either along side or in place of jpeg files. These files contain all 100% of the data from the sensor with no loss from compression or any other processing. In order to make use of these files, they must be processed by a raw converter. The camera manufacturer usually includes raw converter software as part of the package, but many people prefer the performance and/or features found in third party software, such as Adobe Lightroom, Adobe Camera Raw, Bibble, Capture One, et al.
For a number of years there has been a debate about the benefits of raw -Vs- jpeg files from the camera. At the end of the day one ends up with a jpeg file either way. However, the proponents of raw say that raw offers much more flexibility for processing, especially for white balance options. The jpeg shooters argue that in-camera jpegs are high quality and with features like picture styles, eliminate the need for shooting raw. In addition, in-camera jpeg files save a lot of processing time. For the record, I have been shooting raw for years and from my experiences, am thoroughly convinced that raw is the better work flow for me. That is all I'm going to say on the subject for now.
Custom White Balance (Intro)
So, let's get down to business. Virtually all raw converters offer a custom white balance tool. For the most part, all you need to do is select the white balance tool (eyedropper) and click on something that has neutral color content for a reference. This reference can be gray or near white, but cannot be black or pure white (0,0,0 or 255, 255, 255). For the examples in this posting, I am using the white patch from a QP Card.
You will need one image of the reference and will need the exposure to be reasonably close to correct and certainly not overexposed. If you have too hot of an exposure and the white reference has one or more blown color channels, the software cannot accurately determine its color. Once you click the tool on the neutral reference, the software will establish the white balance and you are done. It is very much like setting a custom white balance in the camera. For every shot taken under the same light source, you can use the same white balance settings or simply copy the white balance to those photos. This is one of the powerful features available to the raw shooter.
Custom White Balance Using Adobe Camera Raw (ACR)As you can see from the image above, the light source is very warm and the camera's setting is not even close to correct. To set the white balance, simply click on the White Balance tool at the upper left, then click the eyedropper anywhere on the white patch.
After balancing, you can see that the white patch is now a good representation of white. I took a color reading in the center of the patch. ACR is showing RGB values (1) of (154, 153, 151), which is very good. The “White Balance” control (2) now shows “Custom” and the “Temperature” display (3) is at 2600 degrees K. ACR does not show the tint on this screen.
Custom White Balance Using Bibble 4.10To set the white balance, simply click on the White Balance tool at the right, then click the eyedropper anywhere on the white patch.
After balancing, you can see that the white patch is now a good representation of white. I took a color reading in the center of the patch. Bibble is showing RGB values (1) of (185, 193, 188), which is good. The “White Balance” control (2) now shows “Click White”, the “Temp” display (3) is at 2762 degrees K, and the “Tint” control is at -34, which adds a little bit of green.
Custom White Balance Using Canon Digital Photo Professional (DPP)To set the white balance, simply click on the White Balance tool at the right, then click the eyedropper anywhere on the white patch.
After balancing, you can see that the white patch is now a good representation of white. I took a color reading in the center of the patch. DPP is showing RGB values (1) of (147, 152, 156), which is acceptable. The “White Balance” control (2) now shows “Click White Balance”. Oddly, there is no temperature display for DPP.
Coming Next
It is now past my bed time, so I'm saving the part on manual white balance for next time. Until then...
-Gene
Continue on to Temperature of Light - part 8 (Manual White Balance with Raw Files using Canon's DPP)
Select the photo of the white patch and then press the “Set” button. The camera will ask if you want to use white balance data from this image for the custom white balance. Press the “Set” button for OK.
The camera then displays a reminder to set the white balance to custom. Oddly enough, though there is plenty of screen space, instead of spelling out the word custom, they simply display the icon for custom white balance.
Press the “WB” button on the back to set the white balance type. Use the right/left arrow keys to select Custom (shown below), then press the set button.
You are now ready to shoot. If the display is active, it should show the custom white balance icon below the ISO setting.
Coming Next
That's it for now. In the next posting I will demonstrate how to set a custom white balance using raw processing software. I will use my favorite, Bibble 4.10, but might also take a stab at it with Canon DPP and Adobe Camera Raw.
Until then...
-Gene
Continue on to Temperature of Light - part 7 (Custom White Balance with Raw Files)
Take a look at the photo above. It was taken with incandescent light and the camera was set for auto white balance. This magazine cover has a good B&W print that should have been sufficient for the camera to get a decent color balance. However, as is the case for many cameras (especially Canon DSLRs), the auto white balance fell far short of the mark.
The lower photo shows the camera's display, including the RGB and luminance histograms. Notice how red dominates. The camera has chosen a color temperature that is not even close to incandescent.
Auto white balance attempts to figure out the color temperature of the light being used by searching out the brightest thing in the image. It assumes that this is a white surface and so does a color balance based on that. It sounds good on paper, but in practical use it leaves much to be desired.
The problem lies with not always having a true white reference. What if there is nothing white or even close to white in the scene? In this case the camera makes a best guess at what might be close to white and calibrates to that. In reality it does not usually get it right and sometimes it doesn't even come close. There is also the effect of color shift. Under incandescent light, something with a blueish hue might appear as white to the camera, in which case it will make a bad assumption about color. In the case above I cannot imagine what went wrong, but it certainly is not right.
Why not use Presets?
Presets for daylight and incandescent usually get you close, but quite often, not often not close enough, and sometimes they are just plain wrong. The image above was taken with the incandescent preset. The improvement in color compared to auto white balance is obvious. However, it still has a reddish hue that is not found in the real life subject. The RGB histograms from the camera show the improvement, but also show the lack of proper white balance. Because the magazine cover is essentially black and white, all three histograms should look the same.
If without a way or time to calibrate and under known lighting, I would use a preset rather than trusting auto. However, what if I'm in a room that is lit with Reveal incandescent bulbs? From part 4 of this series we know that the Reveal incandescent bulb will produce a light that has more blue than a standard incandescent bulb. If my camera is set to incandescent white balance, then I will get a blue cast in my images.
Fluorescent bulbs are even more problematic, as they have much variability from based on the manufacturer and type. They also shift color with use. Some cameras have two or more fluorescent settings, but that cannot possibly cover all of the variations one might encounter in the real world. Even if there were a preset, how would you know which one to use? When possible (as it usually is), it is always better to get a custom white balance. Daylight varies by time of day and atmospheric conditions.
What About Using a Custom White Balance?
Glad you asked because if you are going to let the camera generate jpeg files for you, this is the best way to go. The photo above was taken after performing a custom white balance. As you can see, the image correctly depicts the black & white photograph on the cover of the magazine. A look at the RGB histograms in the next photo down confirms an excellent white balance. The simple step of performing a custom white balance has produced a near perfect rendering of the subject, enough said.
Coming Next
In the next posting I will demonstrate how to set an in-camera custom white balance using a Canon 450D. This tutorial should make a good primer even for non-Canon users, so until then...
-Gene
Continue on to Temperature of Light - part 6 (How to Set an In-Camera Custom White Balance)
Our other clue to good color balance is seen in the Red, Green, and Blue histograms.
The between the Red, Green, and Blue histograms. The three histograms show the same basic distribution of pixels at about the same luminance. This is good enough to use with no additional white-balance adjustment.
Lightsource: 150W Halogen Incandescent light bulb (modeling lamp from a monolight).I didn't have any regular incandescent bulbs on hand, so I used the modeling lamp from one of my studio lights. It is no different from any normal halogen bulb except that it has an additional layer of glass to make it safer (JDD style). The spectral output is virtually the same as for an ordinary incandescent light bulb. They both burn a filament to create light. The only difference is that for one, the filament burns in a vacuum and for the other it burns in halogen gas.
Back to our analysis. Notice that the white balance card shows a distinct reddish tint and the colors in the chart are badly skewed toward red. I don't need to make a measurement to know that the color is off considerably. Nonetheless, using the color picker to take a measurement on the middle gray patch, I get (140, 80, 46), which confirms the red bias that our eyes see. This reddish look is the same that we get when we forget to set the white balance on our digital cameras when taking photos indoors. When this happens, the photographer's phrase for describing this effect is that “it was an artistic choice.”
The Red, Green, and Blue histograms tell the story. The reds are about twice the brightness of the greens and nearly four times the brightness of the blues. The spectral content of this light is not even close to sunlight.
Lightsource: 100W Reveal Incandescent light bulb (special coatings to raise color temperature)I had some “Reveal” incandescent bulbs available, so thought I would take a look to see if “Reveal's unique neodymium glass filters out dull, yellow rays unlike regular soft white bulbs...”
Visually you can see that the although the colors are still substantially skewed, reds do not dominate quite as badly compared to the unfiltered halogen bulb. The histograms indeed show a slight improvement in that the blue is now a bit stronger relative to the green and red. The difference is enough to be notice by the eye, but for photographic purposes, the difference is marginal at best. This light source is still a distant match for daylight and the bulbs still dissipate the majority of the power used as heat.
The gray patch of the white balance card measures (131, 75, 52), which confirms a strong red bias with slightly more blue content compared to the halogen lamp.
Lightsource: 23W Daylight Balanced Compact Fluorescent light bulb
I gave this a 10-minute warm-up period, as these bulbs shift their color temperature dramatically over the first few minutes of being powered on.The daylight balanced compact fluorescent has a completely different story to tell. As expected, the histogram shows a light that is much closer to what the camera expects for daylight. As you can see, it is a nicely close match to natural sunlight. Not only are we getting a white patch that looks white, the colors in the chart are vivid and easily discernible.
For the record, this is not one of the expensive bulbs that you get from the camera shop. This is an inexpensive CF bulb bought off of the Internet for around $5.50 each. If you need a decent continuous light source on the cheap, this is it.
Taking a reading of the middle gray patch I get (91, 96, 90). While not absolutely perfect, this is good enough to use without any additional white-balance adjustment.
Lightsource: 200WS Studio Flash set for f/5.6 Predictably, the daylight photo gives us a nice white that is very much like the daylight balanced fluorescent, except without the odd peaks. It is no surprise that a strobe (flash) is considered the best light source for photography. Not only does it provide a lot of lighting power for a small amount of energy, but it is very close to the spectrum of natural light. A flash can be mixed with sunlight with no corrective filters.
Light sources are rated as either continuous or non-continuous. A continuous light source will reproduce light across the entire range of visible light, from red to violet. A non-continuous light will produce only some of the colors from the visible range. An example of continuous light is a standard incandescent light bulb. While it is very weak in blue light, it does contain enough light across the visible range that our eyes are able to properly identify colors when illuminated under this lighting. An example of non-continuous light is a sodium vapor lamp, which produces mostly an orange/yellow color and has virtually no blue color. If you view a color chart under a sodium vapor lamp, you will see a very poor rendering of color, such that everything will have a distinct orange tint and many colors will not be discernible.
When we consider light sources for photography, we obviously want to use a continuous light source so all of the visible colors can be seen. Our eyes are optimized for sunlight and consequently, our digital camera's sensor and image rendering has been optimized to mimic the way our eyes see. Because of this, we would like a light source that closely matches the emissions of the sun, within the visible light spectrum. Ideally our light source will contain little or no ultraviolet and little or no infrared. The camera's sensor is sensitive to both infrared and ultraviolet. Most digital camera sensors use filters and coatings to reduce the absorption of light outside the visible spectrum, but the effectiveness of these filters vary and there are trade offs with light loss and cost.
In the next post we will take a look at some common light sources and discuss their characteristics and suitability for photography.
-Gene
Let me give you a quick rundown on the sessions.
The first session was the longest and focused on lighting and how he got the lighting seen in the many resplendent photos that he shared in the form of 24” x 36” prints and in his slide presentation. Many of these appear as if elaborate lighting setups were used that must have taken considerable time. In reality, as David shared how he got the light, we could begin to understand how very little equipment can be used to make awe inspiring photographs. All were done with just one or two portable flashes and a reflector or bounce off of some available surface (even a person's white shirt). What impressed me about this segment was his ability to see light everywhere and the potential in virtually everything. If the lighting didn't exist, he made it happen using whatever tools he had at the moment. Weddings can be fast moving, high pressure affairs, which often leave little more than fractional minutes for setup and execution of a shot. Of course, there is always the photographer's lie, just one more shot, but even that buys only a little more time. With just a handful of gear and an understanding of light, David has made wonderful portraits in moments. It isn't rocket science, just a good understanding of light and an out of the box view for the potential of anything to interact with light. This is a subject that is near and dear to me, as I'm sure it is for every studio photographer.
The next section covered silver bullet techniques that he uses to speed up his work flow. This section covers mostly the software that he uses and endorses. It gets a bit commercial, but is well worth wading through because of the demonstrations. Of particular interest to me is a program called LumaPix Extreme 4. I thought that Corel Draw was the fastest way to do free form layouts, and of course, there are things that only it can do, but LumaPix Extreme 4 does most of what Corel can do and it does it many times faster. It comes equipped with awesome templates for a starting point, and has an automated setup wizard that can create an entire album (100+ photos) in a few seconds. It appears to be the perfect tool for setting up a photo montage, poster, senior book, family book, wedding book, and about anything that needs photos and text, or I should say graphic elements, arranged in a format suited to the genre and with a very polished professional look.
The last part of the seminar focused on the business aspects of running the business. This segment covered ways to make your business more profitable. Virtually everything David covered in this section is directly applicable for the studio photographer. David discusses how to leverage our relationships with vendors and other associates to increase our visibility in the local community. As he says, “get to know the people doing business with the people you want to do business with.” I don't want to attempt to reproduce his information here, but just let me tell you that it is reliable and relevant for today with an eye toward the future. Even for someone with honed business and sales skills there is fruit to be gleaned. For the rest of us it is life giving, crystal clear water fresh from the mountain stream.
I will get back on track with the series on lighting starting with the next post, but felt that this seminar is so good that it merits interrupting the series. If you are at all on the fence about going, just sign up and be there!
http://www.digitalwakeupcall.com/
-Gene
An extreme in terms of size, would be the sky on an overcast day, which can leave virtually no shadow.
In the next posting we will take a look at how distance between light source and subject changes the effective size of a light source.
Continue on to part 4"Quality of Light - part 4 (effective size)"
All content on this blog is copyright © 2009 Gene Lee, all rights reserved. Copy permission is granted to the general public for limited academic use, which may include Internet discussion forums and electronic messaging systems in addition to the fair use granted by U.S. copyright law. You may copy up to 10% of the content or 1000 words, whichever is less. Please contact me if you would like to copy more than this. No portion may be reproduced for commercial use without express written permission.