Male Wallaroo

[Colin Driscoll]

Here is the male Wallaroo referred to in my recent posting of a female.
1DXII 70-200mm f/2.8L II & 2xIII 360mm 1/1250 f6.3 iso800
Taken at the same location as was the female, just a little later. Which raises a question about color balance. The female was in early morning shade and the male in early morning sunlight. Both shots are a good representation of the scene as shot but one tended a little blue and this one a little red. Is there a preference among commenters towards adjusting color temperature to full daylight?

[Colin Driscoll]

Here is the shot set at daylight balance.

[Steve Kaluski]

Is there a preference among commenters towards adjusting color temperature to full daylight?

Hi Colin, I shoot auto WB on my 1DX MK2's, Picture style to Neutral and all the settings set to zero or equivalent as I want a capture that just retains the info nothing more as I will 'Colour correct' within the PP stage. Get a 'Neutral mid grey' as your starting point will ensure no colour casts and a level playing field in which to then take the image warmer/cooler and then beyond in colour adjustment. Other folk choose to work differently, I think Artie likes to preset his WB to i.e. Shade, Cloudy, daylight... etc subject to the conditions, so it all comes down to personal preference, but getting a good basis to work from at the start is key.

Just be mindful that you 'may' also need to adjust the Tint slider too, however these two should provide a good starting point, then you can address the other areas of Colour management accordingly.

[Colin Driscoll]

Thanks, Steve, (and commenters of the previous post) this has been a great learning experience for me.

[Steve Kaluski]

Does it make sense Colin, as I hope it may clarify your question?

Colin I took the 2nd posting, dropped the exposure by a fraction, Shadows, Whites and Blacks need opening up, they are choked in the darker elements, plus too much Contrast, it's chocking also the midtone detail where all your detail is. Balance out the FG grass and you start to see a lot more, I like the framing and look back pose. Techs look OK and with that kit you can nail anything.

When did you last calibrate your monitor as both posting look very dark?

Hope this helps.

Steve

[Colin Driscoll]

Yes Steve I follow all of that, and really appreciate the advice. I'd say that the best representation of the scene and animal would be midway between your post and mine. My monitors are fine (Dual Dell U2717D) and I am more likely to get pinged for being too bright than dark on the Avian forum.

[Steve Kaluski]

My monitors are fine (Dual Dell U2717D) and I am more likely to get pinged for being too bright than dark on the Avian forum.

Well, best if you can keep ALL lights off and the monitor back facing the window, then you can hopefully avoid any additional ambient light hitting the scene. If as you say the monitor is all good, then it's all down to adding too much Contrast & Blacks within the workflow and if you are using LR then it will add in Contrast without you knowing, likewise even if the value is at Amount 25 in sharpening, behind the scenes both LR & PS (ACR) will add some extra. Nikon & Canon values will vary within the software, it's a bit naughty that is why I have nothing in the camera too.

BTW just check the sharpness on a large monitor of your RAW files, the LCD on the MKII is/can be a little bit misleading at 100% due to the hi res quality of the screen. A lot of folk have thought the images were sharp after viewing on the back, only to have their hopes dashed when they got home.

[Rachel Hollander]

Hi Colin - I set white balance the way Steve does (he taught me to do so). Whether to add warmth, etc comes down to how you like to depict your images. Personally, I try to process so that the scene, colors, warmth, etc is as close to how I remember the scene as possible. Others prefer to adjust things for what is perhaps an overall more pleasing image, e.g. warmer light, cloning out distractions, etc. With respect to your image, not knowing the actual colors and warmth, I like the detail and colors in Steve's rp with maybe a bit of the warmth from your op.

TFS,
Rachel

[Glenn Pure]

Interesting discussion here on WB and colour balance. But before getting to that and without seeing the original scene, I liked Steve's RP best of these versions... except for the obvious vignette. Are you correcting for the normal vignetting that full frames introduce (less apparent on crop sensor cameras)? If so, might be worth investigating as your software should be able to correct it with a checkbox or similar. I liked the pose you've captured but agree the colour and tone needed some work.

As for the discussion on colour balance, I'm in Artie's camp of using presets. I then tweak from there. Using presets, I think, gives the most accurate rendition of the scene and I've found it works well in my hands although I'm using DPP like Artie. But very hard to argue with Steve and the results he produces too! I know of others who also like auto-WB. As you may know, human eyesight is remarkably good at correcting for colour casts and weird lighting. A good example is to take a photo under warm artificial light using a neutral preset WB like 'Cloudy' then taking a shot outside on a cloudy day. The indoor shot will look quite normal to your vision but it will look ghastly on the camera image with WB set to cloudy. Our eyesight adjusts for that strong cast in artificial light to make everything look normal again. Similarly, a shot taken close to sunset - the light captured on camera will look a lot warmer than it did to your vision at the time. Sorry though, I'm telling you stuff you probably know.

In terms of monitors and lighting situation they are in, my understanding is a little different to Steve's - although again, hard to argue with Steve's skill and experience. I had always understood that neutral, even lighting is best for your monitor situation: no strong light from any direction and not bright or dark either. Just, soft and even with time for your eyes to adjust to that environment too before doing any work. Monitor brightness should not be substantially higher or lower than the surrounding room environs. Often hard to achieve a perfect setup like that though.

[Steve Kaluski]

Hi Glenn, very much appreciate you chiming in.

As we have said before, there are many ways to 'skin a cat' and although there are areas which you have to follow, there are also areas that are done on 'what works for you'.

Personally I don't like using camera presets because it's the camera deciding for me, ditto I tend to work in the dark and only have the light from the monitors visible, albeit even they both have hoods, but that's me There are however certain items photographed where there is a mid grey card placed in frame to gain a more 'accurate' colour rendition, however very impractical for the majority of photographs taken and posted here.

I liked Steve's RP best of these versions... except for the obvious vignette.

No vignette applied by me here Glenn, unless it has stemmed from the OP?

[Glenn Pure]

No vignette applied by me here Glenn, unless it has stemmed from the OP?

Hi Steve, I wasn't suggesting you'd added a vignette but that it was from the OP. It comes particularly from full-frame cameras because the light from the lens hits the sensor at a greater angle around the edge of the sensor and introduces a natural vignette which can be easily corrected in PP. It's often not obvious. I think in the work you've done on this image, it has simply and unavoidably made it more obvious... but maybe it is just the way the shadows fell in this scene? Who knows. Certainly looks like a sensor vignette.

You are clearly able to produce fine images so whatever you are doing is working brilliantly. However, standard advice on setting a calibrated monitor up is what I've outlined at least the last time I checked this info. As for WB presets, as you may know, it's irrelevant what the camera is set to when a frame is captured. The WB is simply a metadata line in the RAW file that informs your processing software what WB you selected when taking the frame (or just a memory jogger for yourself). You can change the WB to whatever you like when processing the frame and it will simply over-ride the RAW metadata entry for WB.

[Colin Driscoll]

Again I really appreciate the input and have a lot to put into practice when work allows. There is no sensor vignette in the OP or the raw file (if there was it would have been cropped out in any case). I've not had a hint of vignetting even with my 16 mm lens. Steve's post introduced a little shading in the lower corners which I didn't mind.

[Steve Kaluski]

Hi guys, there's no Sensor vignetting, but it might have stemmed from (on my posting) where I slightly darkened areas that may have overlapped, as it was a quick fix to illustrate a point, normally I would use a different route (if required) and applied to a RAW where you have a lot more control and data.

BTW Colin, what do you use to process your RAWs?

[Jonathan Ashton]

I think I prefer the last image in terms of colours, with a shot like this I appreciate you may end up with several versions and then become confused over which is preferable. I suspect getting white balance by putting the dropper on the left inner ear and or the chest would give something close to an acceptable temperature. An interesting image well detailed.
I wondered if wallaroos were hybrids but I understand they are a distinct species.

[Colin Driscoll]

BTW Colin, what do you use to process your RAWs?

I use DPP 4 Steve but often just to save out as 16 bit Tiff for processing in Photoshop (CC2017)

[Colin Driscoll]

Thanks for the dropper tip Jonathan.