Author Topic: White balance and studio strobes (Read 26596 times)

lisafx · « **Reply #50 on:** September 16, 2011, 17:50 »

I shoot RAW, but I have found that sometimes WB is still a pain to nail in post processing.

I used to use a gray card, once, at the beginning of the shoot. It improved my WB, but I now use an Expodisc, and the results are even better. I bought a large size disk that will cover the front element of all my lenses. You just hold it over the lens and take a picture while aiming it at the light source. To my eye, the resulting pictures are always perfect.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #52 on:** September 17, 2011, 04:53 »

Quote from: SNP on September 16, 2011, 14:55

Quote from: cclapper on September 16, 2011, 14:12
Anways, to get the topic back on track and off the typical pissing contest, I shoot better than you, you aren't professional unless you're me...

Used the 5600K setting on my camera today for a couple of shots, and it worked a charm. Thanks for the tip!

it's not a pissing contest at all Cathy. questions are fair as a reaction to workflow posts, aren't they? I don't think it was far off topic at all since we're discussing white balance and shooting in camera/post-processing.

How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to stand on the ladder and put it in and 49 to gather round and say "ha, you think that's good? I'd make a much better job of it!"

What really matters here is not how any particular shooter works, but that people know the pros and cons of different techniques and choose the one they feel suits them best. That's all.

rinderart · « **Reply #53 on:** September 18, 2011, 12:26 »

Quote from: Ed on September 16, 2011, 08:36

Quote from: rinderart on September 15, 2011, 13:13
I specialize in studio Lighting and teach it and have long before this business was even thought of being a working Product/portrait photographer since the middle 60's. I used grey cards for exposure for many years. I use auto WB now. The difference between 5600 and 5700 is Very < very small. Im a pure Manual shooter except for unless Im trying something different. A complete understanding of WB is critical in Digital. As is the Complete understanding Of the principals of DOF and how it relates to distance from Subject and focal length Used. It is the foundation Of Photography. In the film days we had 2 choices, Now we have Hundreds. Digital is great but unfortunately it has spawned a whole lot of Lazy Photographers thinking there gonna fix it Later. This is penny stock Guys, The more you twiddle, The less you make. I shoot Raw for clients and Jpg for stock. Why? because I nail it first time. levels adj and Im done. For a possible 38 cents cost effectively it makes no sense not to. IMHO. Glad to see a Photo thread instead of another IS thread. LOL

Laurin, since I started doing this in 2005, one thing I learned very quickly from you and Bobby is to pay attention...and I still do.

I call bull. You don't nail it the first time. If you did, then why is it that the images you are submitting from your paintings are scanned with a Canon CanoScan LiDE 100. These are slide scans. Here's an example....

http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-image-willard-image21041276#

...and why is this image at 7.7 mp, shot with a Nikon D3 which produces images at 12.1 mp? If you get it right the first time, then why the reduction in size? In fact, that's just one example from your portfolio...there are multiple.

http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-photography-beautiful-woman-image20979957

Here's another from a D3 thats 5.5mp

http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-image-dunes-image20037491

Bud, I don't mean to call you out but like I said, you and Bobby taught me years ago to pay attention - want to learn lighting, then check the catch lights in the eyes. Want to learn photograhy or postprocessing techniques, then find an agency that shows EXIF information and study it. You may not do much in post, but you certainly don't nail it the first time. Nobody does.

Nobody does?. WOW, thats naive, Poor Photographers, How did they survive for 125 years before Digital and Photoshop?. I do nail it sorry. I have to. The Scanned painting images are from print's due to most were taken with film before digital. I cataloged every Painting I did [571] The prints are all that remain and the ones recently shot are downsized because I do not want buyers making huge prints from my work for pennies, I also Downsize everything else to 3400 Longest side regardless and that has nothing to do trying to hide something. My Paintings were exclusive to my Theatrical agent for 8 years for rental to Film and TV production. I had no idea I would ever be submitting them to penny stock because there was no penny stock.. I haven't painted for 12 years. 90% of them were shot for catalog purposes only. Thats why you see Cano scan.And the remaining pieces were shot 6 months ago when I got the rights back. if I thought ahead I would have shot everything on 4 X 5 Of which about 75 were.

I shoot Jpg for stock, I shoot Jpg/Raw for clients because They Might want the raw file. Not one ever has BTW. I teach because I can share 50+ years behind a camera, We write books,Do group workshops and lectures because we can. I don't have another Job, Never have. I've made a very Nice Living my whole life on being creative,Being a promoter and a pretty good business person. And I will never apologize for seeing any opportunity regardless of where it comes from and using it to my advantage. Period. Also....You can say anything you want about me I just consider the source but I find it extremely insulting that you or anyone thinks for a second that I don't offer good advice about technique or equipment and even More insulting to my friends and former students who put there trust in me to help them along the way to getting More out of this craft we love than this silly business can offer and one that is decaying rapidly. Thats what I teach, and Im always booked 3 months in advance and only 25% have even heard of stock.

When I joined this business, I saw an Business opportunity, There was no way I was gonna be the guy with 30,000 Images, What I saw was a 100,000 people that needed help, That was my focus, Not how many isolations I could crank out or how many Business Images I could take. Andres and others had that covered. And what I do shoot, I shoot for me because theres so many more ways to use your talent than Penny stock.....If you have it, and are willing to go for it.

I get out of this business exactly what I put in. if I didn't you really think I would do it? Im not that stupid.

In conclusion.... Shoot whatever way you want. I don't teach that anyway is better than another way. The end result Is the story, The Image. And from where I sit. Most go right past it. Do I play and manipulate? hell yes. when Im trying to create something or be artistic. My job as an artist is not to determine the value of my work. my job is the keep it mine, And Keep the channel open. There is no satisfaction and in that is what keeps us marching and different from the rest.

Im not interested in the socialites in stock. Im interested in some newbie with a $300.00 camera That sees. And Im proud as hell at the hundreds if not thousands I've helped get accepted and go on to a real Life in Image making and will Long after this business is no longer viable. Thats a photographer, Not a STOCK photographer.

I have a woman friend here in Beverly Hills thats 83 years old that has a 30 yr old Kodak Instamatic with duct tape holding it together that has her film done in a drugstore, never had a computer and to see what she does and what she see's brings tears to my eyes. Her vision and her ability to tell a story and communicate visually is so far above 99% of anyone I've ever seen on any stock site and trust I've seen pretty much all of them. Thats what turns me on. Sorry.

To bad this site turned into a pissing contest most of the time. It was a very unique place and I still read occasionally But this is why I don't post. You guys think you know my motivations, You don't have a clue what Im about. And I wish I could be perfect like some of you.

Ok. Back to the critique forum to find the next artist. And BTW My daily Rate is $1250.00 Plus assistants and expenses. And thats inexpensive for my town.

Have fun , And remember It not about what you did in your Life, it's about what you didn't do or were capable of.

lthn · « **Reply #54 on:** September 18, 2011, 12:38 »

"Nobody does?. WOW, thats naive, Poor Photographers, How did they survive for 125 years before Digital and Photoshop?"

Do you even know where the the dodge and burn tool in photoshop come from, Mr. old-time pro photographer? : ))

...and many of the other similar tools and blending methods for that matter....

luissantos84 · « **Reply #55 on:** September 18, 2011, 12:45 »

Quote from: rinderart on September 18, 2011, 12:26

Do I play and manipulate? hell yes. when Im trying to create something or be artistic. My job as an artist is not to determine the value of my work. my job is the keep it mine, And Keep the channel open. There is no satisfaction and in that is what keeps us marching and different from the rest.

so you DO NOT NAIL IT on camera! you do heavy post-processing, so leave all the big photographer crap about I nail it on JPG, if you do 10h of post after! nobody asked your daily rate, what a ridiculous post of you, maybe I am starting to understand what many talk/say about you, not saying you aren´t a great photographer, artist, painter etc but hell what the heck was this post? are you bipolar?

cathyslife · « **Reply #56 on:** September 18, 2011, 13:48 »

self-editing done. nothing to see here. continue on with the pissing contest...

MatHayward · « **Reply #57 on:** September 18, 2011, 19:21 »

Sigh.

Yet another thread that started out interesting and informative turns into a rant mechanism for insecure photographers incapable of believing some experienced photographers might actually know something they don't.

Mat

cathyslife · « **Reply #58 on:** September 18, 2011, 19:23 »

Quote from: MatHayward on September 18, 2011, 19:21

Sigh.

Yet another thread that started out interesting and informative turns into a rant mechanism for insecure photographers incapable of believing some experienced photographers might actually know something they don't.

Mat

Yep.

rinderart · « **Reply #59 on:** September 18, 2011, 20:07 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on September 18, 2011, 12:45

Quote from: rinderart on September 18, 2011, 12:26
Do I play and manipulate? hell yes. when Im trying to create something or be artistic. My job as an artist is not to determine the value of my work. my job is the keep it mine, And Keep the channel open. There is no satisfaction and in that is what keeps us marching and different from the rest.

so you DO NOT NAIL IT on camera! you do heavy post-processing, so leave all the big photographer crap about I nail it on JPG, if you do 10h of post after! nobody asked your daily rate, what a ridiculous post of you, maybe I am starting to understand what many talk/say about you, not saying you aren´t a great photographer, artist, painter etc but hell what the heck was this post? are you bipolar?

Thanks for the nice words.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #60 on:** September 18, 2011, 22:06 »

Quote from: rinderart on September 18, 2011, 20:07

Quote from: luissantos84 on September 18, 2011, 12:45
Quote from: rinderart on September 18, 2011, 12:26
Do I play and manipulate? hell yes. when Im trying to create something or be artistic. My job as an artist is not to determine the value of my work. my job is the keep it mine, And Keep the channel open. There is no satisfaction and in that is what keeps us marching and different from the rest.

so you DO NOT NAIL IT on camera! you do heavy post-processing, so leave all the big photographer crap about I nail it on JPG, if you do 10h of post after! nobody asked your daily rate, what a ridiculous post of you, maybe I am starting to understand what many talk/say about you, not saying you aren´t a great photographer, artist, painter etc but hell what the heck was this post? are you bipolar?

Thanks for the nice words.

don´t play the vitim here, read your post, you are attacking every possible contributor that read this forum, you were like expressing the rage in you, I believe you should seen private message to people who really piss you off not to all microstockgroup community

luissantos84 · « **Reply #61 on:** September 18, 2011, 22:07 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on September 18, 2011, 22:06

Quote from: rinderart on September 18, 2011, 20:07
Quote from: luissantos84 on September 18, 2011, 12:45
Quote from: rinderart on September 18, 2011, 12:26
Do I play and manipulate? hell yes. when Im trying to create something or be artistic. My job as an artist is not to determine the value of my work. my job is the keep it mine, And Keep the channel open. There is no satisfaction and in that is what keeps us marching and different from the rest.

so you DO NOT NAIL IT on camera! you do heavy post-processing, so leave all the big photographer crap about I nail it on JPG, if you do 10h of post after! nobody asked your daily rate, what a ridiculous post of you, maybe I am starting to understand what many talk/say about you, not saying you aren´t a great photographer, artist, painter etc but hell what the heck was this post? are you bipolar?

Thanks for the nice words.

don´t play the vitim here, read your post, you are attacking every possible contributor that read this forum, you were like expressing the rage in you, I believe you should send private message to people who really piss you off not to all microstockgroup community (I don´t have anything against you, actually I do enjoy read your posts back in SS forum)

luissantos84 · « **Reply #62 on:** September 18, 2011, 22:09 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on September 18, 2011, 22:06

Quote from: rinderart on September 18, 2011, 20:07
Quote from: luissantos84 on September 18, 2011, 12:45
Quote from: rinderart on September 18, 2011, 12:26
Do I play and manipulate? hell yes. when Im trying to create something or be artistic. My job as an artist is not to determine the value of my work. my job is the keep it mine, And Keep the channel open. There is no satisfaction and in that is what keeps us marching and different from the rest.

so you DO NOT NAIL IT on camera! you do heavy post-processing, so leave all the big photographer crap about I nail it on JPG, if you do 10h of post after! nobody asked your daily rate, what a ridiculous post of you, maybe I am starting to understand what many talk/say about you, not saying you aren´t a great photographer, artist, painter etc but hell what the heck was this post? are you bipolar?

Thanks for the nice words.

don´t play the vitim here, read your post, you are attacking every possible contributor that read this forum, you were like expressing the rage in you, I believe you should send private message to people who really piss you off not to all microstockgroup community (I don´t have anything against you, actually I do enjoy read your posts back in SS forum)

Ed · « **Reply #63 on:** September 19, 2011, 07:33 »

Quote from: rinderart on September 18, 2011, 12:26

Nobody does?. WOW, thats naive, Poor Photographers, How did they survive for 125 years before Digital and Photoshop?. I do nail it sorry. I have to. The Scanned painting images are from print's due to most were taken with film before digital. I cataloged every Painting I did [571] The prints are all that remain and the ones recently shot are downsized because I do not want buyers making huge prints from my work for pennies, I also Downsize everything else to 3400 Longest side regardless and that has nothing to do trying to hide something. My Paintings were exclusive to my Theatrical agent for 8 years for rental to Film and TV production. I had no idea I would ever be submitting them to penny stock because there was no penny stock.. I haven't painted for 12 years. 90% of them were shot for catalog purposes only. Thats why you see Cano scan.And the remaining pieces were shot 6 months ago when I got the rights back. if I thought ahead I would have shot everything on 4 X 5 Of which about 75 were.

I shoot Jpg for stock, I shoot Jpg/Raw for clients because They Might want the raw file. Not one ever has BTW. I teach because I can share 50+ years behind a camera, We write books,Do group workshops and lectures because we can. I don't have another Job, Never have. I've made a very Nice Living my whole life on being creative,Being a promoter and a pretty good business person. And I will never apologize for seeing any opportunity regardless of where it comes from and using it to my advantage. Period. Also....You can say anything you want about me I just consider the source but I find it extremely insulting that you or anyone thinks for a second that I don't offer good advice about technique or equipment and even More insulting to my friends and former students who put there trust in me to help them along the way to getting More out of this craft we love than this silly business can offer and one that is decaying rapidly. Thats what I teach, and Im always booked 3 months in advance and only 25% have even heard of stock.

When I joined this business, I saw an Business opportunity, There was no way I was gonna be the guy with 30,000 Images, What I saw was a 100,000 people that needed help, That was my focus, Not how many isolations I could crank out or how many Business Images I could take. Andres and others had that covered. And what I do shoot, I shoot for me because theres so many more ways to use your talent than Penny stock.....If you have it, and are willing to go for it.

I get out of this business exactly what I put in. if I didn't you really think I would do it? Im not that stupid.

In conclusion.... Shoot whatever way you want. I don't teach that anyway is better than another way. The end result Is the story, The Image. And from where I sit. Most go right past it. Do I play and manipulate? hell yes. when Im trying to create something or be artistic. My job as an artist is not to determine the value of my work. my job is the keep it mine, And Keep the channel open. There is no satisfaction and in that is what keeps us marching and different from the rest.

Im not interested in the socialites in stock. Im interested in some newbie with a $300.00 camera That sees. And Im proud as hell at the hundreds if not thousands I've helped get accepted and go on to a real Life in Image making and will Long after this business is no longer viable. Thats a photographer, Not a STOCK photographer.

I have a woman friend here in Beverly Hills thats 83 years old that has a 30 yr old Kodak Instamatic with duct tape holding it together that has her film done in a drugstore, never had a computer and to see what she does and what she see's brings tears to my eyes. Her vision and her ability to tell a story and communicate visually is so far above 99% of anyone I've ever seen on any stock site and trust I've seen pretty much all of them. Thats what turns me on. Sorry.

To bad this site turned into a pissing contest most of the time. It was a very unique place and I still read occasionally But this is why I don't post. You guys think you know my motivations, You don't have a clue what Im about. And I wish I could be perfect like some of you.

Ok. Back to the critique forum to find the next artist. And BTW My daily Rate is $1250.00 Plus assistants and expenses. And thats inexpensive for my town.

Have fun , And remember It not about what you did in your Life, it's about what you didn't do or were capable of.

Laurin, As mentioned, my intent was not to call you out. My intent is to keep it real. There are newb photographers here and elsewhere that don't know when you are posting just to provoke conversation - as you have said in the past you do relatively often. There was no need for a Charlie Sheen- Like rant.

Things take time and there are appropriate ways to learn how to do things. Putting things on "auto mode" in a camera isn't the correct way to learn things - I think we can agree on that. When an image is rejected at the agency you review for because of white balance issues, people are going to want to figure out what thye are doing wrong. When you state that you take a picture, in jpg, and upload that directly to the agency after a levels adjustment, and you've promoted yourself to the point where people believe you without examining your work can be misleading and discouraging to other folks. To discount OTHER people's experiences in order to pat yourself on the back or promote your classes isn't helpful either.

As you say, let's help out the new folks.

P.S. - I would LOVE to see a copy of an invoice reflecting that billing rate because I have a real tough time believing a photographer that has the capability of making 2.5 million per year (2050 x your claimed hourly rate) is spending time reviewing images, submitting images, or teaching.

Peace

lthn · « **Reply #64 on:** September 19, 2011, 07:40 »

My ex-neighbour has a daily rate of 25000 euros. Nobody knows it, because nobody cares... but thats his rate anyway according to him. It's official : D

Ed · « **Reply #65 on:** September 19, 2011, 07:43 »

Just re-read Laurin's rate. He says "daily rate" not hourly rate. $156/hour for an 8 hour day is a reasonable rate.

My apologies.

OM · « **Reply #66 on:** September 23, 2011, 18:42 »

Quote from: disorderly on September 15, 2011, 07:36

Alien Bees are supposed to produce 5600, and that's where I set my white balance in camera. (Okay, 5560, which is as close my my D300 lets me go.) According to what I've read on Buff's site, Bees vary their color temperature a bit as you adjust power, but not enough that I've noticed an issue.

Buff's new Einsteins are supposed to be more color accurate across their power range. They have two modes: one that sacrifices flash duration for color accuracy and a second that gives you very fast flashes for stopping action at the cost of some variation in color when you vary power.

I think it's only a feature of very expensive studio flash generators such as Broncolor Grafit that allows a very fast flash speed with constant color temperature. The thing not to forget is that adding a light modifier such as a softbox to a flash unit will decrease the color temperature and if you're using a brushed alu beauty dish + softbox on another head, then the light color may vary but maybe not so much to cause real problems unless the softbox fabric is old and dirty. I would always do a grey card/white diffuser exposure at the beginning of a session and adjust accordingly to save time in post processing. Another thing to watch out for if you're using budget (nasty very cheap) softboxes is to check the diffuser cloth for UV emission. (Use one of those forged bank note detectors in a darkened room........if the softbox glows purple, then you'll never get a good skin color when it's in use on a model Same goes for shoot through umbrellas.....check 'em first).

markrhiggins · « **Reply #67 on:** September 27, 2011, 23:30 »

one thing always to remember is that if shooting in raw the settings on the back of the camera do not effect the file - only the way it displays on the back of the camera. Setting one strobe at a lower setting than the other can also at times create a slight difference in colour in the image one part to another.

PS. My day rate is cheap. I recently shot a pole dancer just for the stock rights to the images and I will even hold the reflectors for free on a Pirelli calender shoot.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #68 on:** September 28, 2011, 01:03 »

Quote from: cclapper on September 18, 2011, 19:23

Quote from: MatHayward on September 18, 2011, 19:21
Sigh.

Yet another thread that started out interesting and informative turns into a rant mechanism for insecure photographers incapable of believing some experienced photographers might actually know something they don't.

Mat

Yep.

Can I double that and raise you a yup?

What's so hard about getting white right? LOL

Sandeel · « **Reply #69 on:** January 14, 2012, 19:30 »

Hi everyone, this is my first post here, and this seems to be the right place to ask a question on strobe color tint.

I have been working with a few speedlights for years, but today finally I got my first studio strobe, a Jinbei Digital Pioneer III 600. The thing that is noticeable about the color temperature is not the actual temperature in Kelvin, but the tint, that's to say, the green/magenta balance. It's much more pinkish than my Nikon hotshoe flashes. If I shoot a white seemless or graycard and set the gray point in ACR, the temperature settles on 5500, which is exactly what the manufactorer promises, but the tint is on -21 which is a lot of correction. Seeing that I couldn't find a single information on this issue on the web, I don't know if this is due to bad quality or is it common or intended? I have to say, the skin tones actually come out slightly better than with the Nikon flashes once the WB is set accordingly. Same softboxes of course. Anyway, the problem is that I can't use the device together with my speedlights or in combination with daylight.

So my actual question is what approximate green/magenta tint your strobes produce. There's a lot written on color temperature, but the thing is, you can have 5500 Kelvin, but still too much green or magenta. RAW shooters will be able to see some numbers. In ACR I have to add a lot of green to get neutral gray and in Capture NX with the setting "flash" the tint has to be on +1, which is quite a noticeable step.

Thanks!

MatHayward · « **Reply #70 on:** January 14, 2012, 21:31 »

Hi Sandeel,

Have you tried setting a custom white balance in camera? I find that my flashes don't always match exact color temperature with my studio strobes but it doesn't matter typically because no matter what even if I'm only using my studio strobes or even just one I always set the white balance manually. I use the Ed Pierce Photovision target to do it. I still shoot RAW of course because it's never just perfect and I like the flexibility. Customizing the white balance takes a lot of the guess work out though.

I don't think -21 is a huge swing towards green or red either. If the pic looks right then go with it. Be sure to color calibrate your monitor though so that it looks right on your screen and everyone elses

Good luck,

Mat

RacePhoto · « **Reply #71 on:** January 15, 2012, 01:24 »

Sandeel are you mixing your light sources?

If the only light is the new unit, it will be correct with auto white balance. Otherwise you need to know the correct color temperature of that unit.

Doesn't matter, except in some extreme cases, if you have a slight tint to the light, as long as ALL THE LIGHT is the same. The auto WB should compensate.

If you are getting a cast or tint, and with only one light source or all the same, there's something seriously wrong. With mixed light sources, it will make you crazy because you have two or more whites and you'll never get just one.

This is where custom white balance beats setting it to 5500K for example. Even Auto WB will adjust.

I still don't understand how you can get a tint with a correct WB setting? Even if you have full spectrum lights vs less of the visible. By definition the WB should make things White.

Easier said, the lights should not have a tint or produce one, after you set the WB to that particular light. Something is wrong. Either with the lights are reflecting off something else or your WB settings are set for some other source?

Yes your different Mfg. units may be different colors. Most Xenon flash tubes are close to the same unless there's some added coating to the glass, or coloration of the glass tube itself. The color of the electrical arc through Xenon, is a constant color.

Do you have some modeling lights staying on? (producing the tint) Are you shooting lowest power which made drop your color Temp. down to 4700K?

Sandeel · « **Reply #72 on:** January 15, 2012, 05:03 »

Thank you very much for the patient responses.

Quote from: MatHayward on January 14, 2012, 21:31

Hi Sandeel,

Have you tried setting a custom white balance in camera? I find that my flashes don't always match exact color temperature with my studio strobes but it doesn't matter typically because no matter what even if I'm only using my studio strobes or even just one I always set the white balance manually. I use the Ed Pierce Photovision target to do it. I still shoot RAW of course because it's never just perfect and I like the flexibility. Customizing the white balance takes a lot of the guess work out though.

Okay I have to explain better what exactly I do. I do use custom white balance. If I set up a new WB to match the new strobe, of course I get perfect gray. The problem is that the color of the strobe is just too different from the Nikon SB-800 and a neutral daylight. If I fire the strobe and a speedlight at the same time on a flat surface then there's no problem, I could still set a custom white balance and get neutral color, but in realistic situations mixed light color is just bad for the results. My custom white balance can either match the one light source or the other. On a face for example, on the side where the strobe is stronger the color is different than on the other side. The white balance setting doesn't fully solve the problem.

My plan is to buy another three strobes anyway. But still I wanted to be able to combine them with other light sources. I don't want to have 4 strobes which differ too much from other studio strobes, but maybe that's not the case and all studio strobes in general have more magenta than hotshoe flashes. (??)

Quote from: MatHayward on January 14, 2012, 21:31

I don't think -21 is a huge swing towards green or red either. If the pic looks right then go with it. Be sure to color calibrate your monitor though so that it looks right on your screen and everyone elses

Good luck,

Mat

Perhaps it's not huge, but it's well noticeable at the first look. My monitor is calibrated.

Quote from: RacePhoto on January 15, 2012, 01:24

Sandeel are you mixing your light sources?

If the only light is the new unit, it will be correct with auto white balance. Otherwise you need to know the correct color temperature of that unit.

Doesn't matter, except in some extreme cases, if you have a slight tint to the light, as long as ALL THE LIGHT is the same. The auto WB should compensate.

I know mixing light sources should be avoided as far as possible, I know the results, it just doesn't look clean. I just want to know if the strobe of my choice is reasonably close to more well-known strobes or perhaps is it junk. Actually I find everything quite nice about it, only the light color worries me and I have no comparison to other strobes.

As you say, slight differences are alright and can be compensated by the correct white balance. But:

Quote from: RacePhoto on January 15, 2012, 01:24

If you are getting a cast or tint, and with only one light source or all the same, there's something seriously wrong. With mixed light sources, it will make you crazy because you have two or more whites and you'll never get just one.

This is where custom white balance beats setting it to 5500K for example. Even Auto WB will adjust.

I still don't understand how you can get a tint with a correct WB setting? Even if you have full spectrum lights vs less of the visible. By definition the WB should make things White.

Easier said, the lights should not have a tint or produce one, after you set the WB to that particular light. Something is wrong. Either with the lights are reflecting off something else or your WB settings are set for some other source?

Yes your different Mfg. units may be different colors. Most Xenon flash tubes are close to the same unless there's some added coating to the glass, or coloration of the glass tube itself. The color of the electrical arc through Xenon, is a constant color.

Do you have some modeling lights staying on? (producing the tint) Are you shooting lowest power which made drop your color Temp. down to 4700K?

Well, like I told Mat, if I fire differently colored light sources onto a flat surface then there's no problem, the white balance will do just fine, but what about everything else? Say I shoot a portrait and have the pinkish light on the right and the more greenish one on the left. The skin tones will not be perfect. Where the one light casts shadows the color of the other light comes to the fore and the white balance must be somewhere in between.

Now, if I find out that mixing strobes and speedlights will always get bad results because the technology used by strobes generally produces a more pinkish light or speedlights are too greenish anyway, then I'll give up mixing and just wait to have 4 identical strobes. But I was thinking that strobes are supposed to produce neutral daylight. My Jinbei has 5500 Kelvin, which is fine. I thought I could mix them with the Nikons because they have about the same Kelvin number. I don't see why the green/magenta information isn't somehow included into the color temperature information of devices.

No, my modelling light doesn't stay on when the flash fires. I had no reflected light with color cast. And I have tried at different powers, full, half, everything. Actually the color remains pretty much consistent.

Thanks a lot so far.

disorderly · « **Reply #73 on:** January 15, 2012, 12:26 »

As a general statement, mixing strobes that produce different colored light, whether the difference is in color temperature or tint or some combination of the two, will give you a white balance problem that no amount of color correction can fix. That's (one of the reasons) why we have gels: to change the color of a light to match the others in the scene. Unless you can isolate the effect of one light and color correct just that part of the image, you're kind of screwed. Don't try to combine lights with different color temperatures unless that's the result you're going for. Otherwise either find a combination of gels that will correct the color or limit yourself to a consistent set of lights.

By the way, in some cases it's not the light that's the problem but the modifier. Passing light through a modifier (soft box, umbrella, etc.) can change the color of the light. Usually the amount of change is small enough to ignore, but it's real.

Sandeel · « **Reply #74 on:** January 15, 2012, 13:49 »

I tried the different flashes with the same softboxes, so that wasn't the problem.

Gels seems to be the only way if I don't want to get rid of my speedlights. I already ordered two that seem right, though I don't know how exactly to determine the needed color. As you say: "Don't try to combine lights with different color temperatures" well yes, that's exactly what is bothering me so much. What I ask myself is whether other strobes will give me more neutral color. Today I compared the strobe to overcast daylight and it was distinctly more red than the daylight.

So, thanks for clarifying that using gels is the right way to go as long as I am forced to mix lights. I still need to find out how to attach them to a strobe with a softbox.

And still what I would really like to know is the tint of one or two other strobes than mine.
Let's put the question this way:
When you open a RAW image in Adobe Camera RAW (it was shot with your strobes) and the white balance is perfectly neutral (safest would be to click on a gray card area with the white balance tool), then what value does the tint slider show? I would appreciate that information a lot.

Thanks for all the help.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: White balance and studio strobes (Read 26596 times)

lisafx

MatHayward

BaldricksTrousers

rinderart

lthn

luissantos84

cathyslife

MatHayward

cathyslife

rinderart

luissantos84

luissantos84

luissantos84

Ed

lthn

Ed

OM

markrhiggins

RacePhoto

Sandeel

MatHayward

RacePhoto

Sandeel

disorderly

Sandeel

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors