WB & RAW - a question!

[Hallsy]

There seem to be quite a few knowledgable guys on here, so thought I'd ask a quick question.

I always shoot RAW and then post process using Light Room or CS2 (only if I want to any specific editing).

I was told that it doesn't really matter what WB setting is used when shooting RAW as you can adjust it when post processing using the temperature sliders, which I often do.

Thing is, whenever I read a magazine with tutorials they often tell you to set the WB to for instance, daylight, then whatever else, and then select RAW, but my question is why? If shooting RAW then why not just leave it on AWB?

Should I be adjusting my WB setting to suit what my conditions, even though I always post process?

I've been told that for HDR you should set it to a constant WB setting to maintain consistency which makes sense I guess as you normally batch process the RAW's using HDR software, then adjust if necessary the final HDR, so this would maintain consistency in the original RAW files I guess.

[pixelpixel]

Maybe they tell you as some people like me don't have a RAW feature

Remember white balance can be changed but what if you wanted to print the images from camera or maybe from card. <Without a pc/mac> how would they look ?

[electrolyte]

I always set my camera up in AWB and use Lightroom to adjust the white balance in PP. Works fine for me. If I can't get a balance I like I'll convert it to b&w and then the balance doesn't matter so much...

[Hallsy]

Sorry it was in reference to tutorials that tell you to use RAW (obviously, dependant on camera) then to set a WB setting. I found this strange as I always adjust pp, but wondered if I was missing something!!

[dragonzuiko]

I sometimes use auto WB myself,most of the time its ok,but sometimes the camera gets it wrong.I do like setting my camera to take the best picture,so i have less pp on the computer.Its best to let your camera do all the work,rather than your pc after.If you like using your pc to finish the picture carry on doing that,its what is best for you at the end of the day.

[senu]

I use RAW mainly , dont use Lightroom much ..yet but use Canon DPP.
Auto WB .is often the camera default, unless I can do a custom WB for an indoor occasion where one custom WB setting wil do for al the Images
Nonetheless, the simple WB correction in DPP means it can almost invariably be fixed even if I chose the "wrong WB setting in camera
Incidentally, Canons Picture style settings seem to work a trick as you can select on in camera, and change it as well in DPP

[Hallsy]

I have never used the Canon software, I started with CS2, but then someone recommended LightRoom to me and I really liked it, so rarely use CS2 now.

Anyway, funnily enough I processed a load of pics yesterday and they all had a temperature of 4000k and had blue cast, I checked my camera and I didn't actually have it set to AWB!! Nevermind, I might try the changing the WB to suit what I'm shooting then that gives more subtle adjustments necessary in LR.

[dood]

I've also read articles where they ask you to set the WB even if shooting RAW. The justification was that you should get as close to where you want so that you have less adjustments to make later. This has never made sense to me as it doesn't take much effort to move the sliders anyway. There is one advantage though of trying to get the WB right in the first place - some people shoot RAW + JPEG and if the JPEGS are fine they don't mess with the RAW files. In this instance the setting of the WB will influence the JPEGs.

[vinz420]

Originally Posted by dood

...The justification was that you should get as close to where you want so that you have less adjustments to make later. This has never made sense to me as it doesn't take much effort to move the sliders anyway..

No offense dood but don't you think that's what makes photographers lazy now? In my own opinion, I'd like to get the photo as it was shot including white balance, cropping, and especially exposure. There are A LOT of photographers out there who:

1.) click shutter button
2.) check preview
3.) snap another one jsut in case there was something wrong on the first photo

My point is why not get it right the first time? This teaches the photographer discipline, to rely on the actual event to take the picture right the first time, rather than relying on modern computer technology to remove/modify any mistakes. Don't get me wrong, I use photoshop as well but ONLY if I have to (skin imperfections mainly).

[Tobers]

I carry a grey card in my bag. Occasionally I'll remember I have it with me. When I do, I take it out, chuck it on the ground and shoot a frame. Then I shoot all subsequent shots of that session with AWB.

Back in wonderful Lightroom, I set the white balance using the grey card frame, and then apply the changes to all the other frames in the sequence using the cool Sync Settings tool.

If the light changes during the session, it all usually goes to pot and I cant be bothered as AWB does the trick pretty well anyway.

[senu]

Originally Posted by vinz420

No offense dood but don't you think that's what makes photographers lazy now? In my own opinion, I'd like to get the photo as it was shot including white balance, cropping, and especially exposure. There are A LOT of photographers out there who:

1.) click shutter button
2.) check preview
3.) snap another one jsut in case there was something wrong on the first photo

My point is why not get it right the first time? This teaches the photographer discipline, to rely on the actual event to take the picture right the first time, rather than relying on modern computer technology to remove/modify any mistakes. Don't get me wrong, I use photoshop as well but ONLY if I have to (skin imperfections mainly).

Differnt strokes
but

• Bear in mind that folk get decent bodies and lenses in order to minimise the need for PP as much as possible
• Also cameras ( and even default settings) do add to or remove something from the "as is" picture
• If say you got 3 different brand cameras with identical lens and same scene youll end up with unidentical images: The sensors and image processing chips and software are not as neutral as they could be
  
• Camera settings could be inadvertently left on the wrong setting, then what?

There are the extremes of using Auto,( P and S) and using manual exposure mode ( and focus) along with an off camera light meter
I agree that a little "laziness" can occur but most folk on here (AFAIK) aspire to move from Auto and are definitely not contented with Point and shoot.. or Post processing ( for what its worth)
Im all for a helping hand from the camera especially if it gets it right