# Auto white balance always wrong in cloudy or snowy conditions?



## Garbz (Feb 13, 2007)

I have a Nikon D200. My question is about automatic whitebalancing on photographs. For some reason I find the camera tends to get some shots very wrong. Examples include on an overcast day with some sky visible where the shots come out too blue, or on an overcast day photographing snow, or photographing inside of churches lit by outside sunlight only.

In all cases the autowhite balance fails to get it right. In the first case the correct setting appeared to be cloudy +2, the second cloudy +0 and the final one setting it to sunlight.

If these are in the normal range of the camera why does it sometimes go so wrong? Do other photographers here always set their whitebalance manually with a grey card?


----------



## shingfan (Feb 13, 2007)

auto white balance as you see is not an ideal tool for getting a good white balance......the ideal would be to use a grey card for custom white balance...or adjust the white balance on RAW afteraward......i started a thread to ask ppl who ppl would usually with white balance adjustment just right below yours


----------



## ksmattfish (Feb 13, 2007)

With my 20D it seems to me that I could put the camera on a tripod, and make several exposures of the same scene in the same lighting, and the auto-WB will come up with a different WB everytime.  I keep my DSLRs set to 5000 degrees, just like daylight balanced film.  I shoot raw so it's no big deal to change it later if that doesn't work out.


----------



## JIP (Feb 13, 2007)

In my opinion auto white balance is almos always wrong.


----------



## droyz2000 (Feb 13, 2007)

I have a D200 as well and most of the time, as with most cameras, the Auto WB is incorrect. I do find that the vast majority of the time the Auto WB is close enough that I can correct it afterwards. That being said, I only shoot in raw so that I can alway go back and change it.


----------



## Alex_B (Feb 13, 2007)

some cameras are better with auto white balance for some type of shoots, others for others and some are always wrong. that is because the camera simply cannot know what your ambient light is like, and what the image should look like ... you yourself however know.

but this really does not matter, since auto WB isn't what you will be using in the future 

shoot raw, and WB while shooting is no more hassle ...


----------



## simonkit (Feb 13, 2007)

RAW is always the better option when shooting in tricky conditions like these - WB is easily corrected afterwards

simon


----------



## Garbz (Feb 15, 2007)

Shinfan I saw your thread and along with that and my purple shots taken of a castle today it prompted my question 

Raw also takes up 6 times the space, and takes hours for me to convert afterwards. I already shoot raw for controlled shoots, but this white balance thing is mainly hurting my snapshots. 

I mainly ask because everytime I load a raw into CameraRAW in photoshop the autowhitebalance does a MUCH better job than my camera.  I will try today running around with the whitepoint set at 5000k and see what results I come up with.

Btw can anyone explain how autoWB works? My guess is it equalizes histograms or something like that.


----------



## Garbz (Feb 16, 2007)

Daylight setting works very well at daylight. 5200k on the D200 Thanks matt the resuts are great.

I did a little bit of testing in a museum and established that the D200 auto WB fails completely under pure tungston or most neon lights even when taking pictures of white paper  I think Auto WB mode is officially dead to me.


----------



## shingfan (Feb 16, 2007)

Garbz said:


> Daylight setting works very well at daylight. 5200k on the D200 Thanks matt the resuts are great.
> 
> I did a little bit of testing in a museum and established that the D200 auto WB fails completely under pure tungston or most neon lights even when taking pictures of white paper  I think Auto WB mode is officially dead to me.


 
auto WB is not a preferrable method by most professionals......but if you are going to shot it RAW and adjust it afterward....i would use white balance....and i'm sure it doesnt take 6 times more space....i have D80...RAW is only about double or 3 times more space (approximately 8-10 MB each file)......the best way to adjust white balance is either use custom white balance (you nee dto set it every time the light condition is differet).....or use auto WB and then adjust it afterward on your computer..........for me.....i use auto WB...and the use nikon capture NX to recalculate the WB automatically....it does a good job all the time....(if it is so good...then why the hell are you asking more about WB....lol)....it is because i'm trying to learn more about WB as a beginner

you dont get white when you shoot white.....instead...you'll get grey...because camera's meter is metering for 18% grey......this i learned from this forum


----------



## Majik Imaje (Feb 18, 2007)

I am old school  I use film

when taking photos of snow/ ice sunny day

I walk around for years.. with one setting in / on my camera


ev 15   125 @ f 16  

haven't lost one shot yet!

any light meter  can only 'AVERAGE".. !

I realize your using digital, but you can still set your camera manually

try these settings and see what happens!! I bet you will be surprised

ONCE YOU IGNORE THAT METER !








This what happens, when I use the top setting. no matter which year

or what part ot fhe world I am in!


----------



## Alex_B (Feb 18, 2007)

Majik Imaje said:


> I realize your using digital, but you can still set your camera manually


 
film does not automatically mean manual and digital does not automatically mean automatic  In both worlds you find both sorts of people ...


----------



## Garbz (Feb 22, 2007)

I know about the grey I have been into film photography for many years. And it is 6 times the size. 16mb on the D200 everytime compared to 2-3 for a JPEG. But the point is if Nikon Capture NX's WB algorithm gets it perfect then why not the camera's!

btw yay for manual, but Majik Imaje I disagree. Currently in Europe and as a proponent of the sunny 16 rule I can guarantee that even on a perfectly clear day thanks to global dimming being much worse here than australia I have not gotten the sunny 16 rule to produce an image with the right brightness. They all come outtoo dark here in Austria or the Suisse. Oh well in 4 days that won't matter anymore!


----------



## Christie Photo (Feb 22, 2007)

Majik Imaje said:


> any light meter  can only 'AVERAGE".. !



umm....  sure.....


No.  That's not right.  I will agree that any light meter is only as good as the photographer using it, and they are often used incorrectly.

Don't give up on it.  Do some reading.  Do some shooting.  You really can nail things down.

Pete


----------



## Majik Imaje (Feb 22, 2007)

I guess it is way way over your head what I am even trying to say .

I am making very simple statments.. and you are telling me NO ?

LISTEN .. I don't care what part of the world you live in.. 

A sunny day here.. is still a sunny day somepleace else.. now.. just because you have polution or global warming or different light the point it this.. 

that ev chart those fiom settings.. ARE A STARTING POINT.. now if it does't work in your area..then adjust accordingly.  

don't dare tell me a meter does not average.. put a meter right in front ot a grey card  or a white card.. so that it is just taking the measurements off that card.. what is it doing? it reads ALL THE LIGHT relecting off that card.. and establishes a reading that is  AVERAGED on all the data

I am not taking about pointing that meter into a crowd of different colors or values..

well I guess your right.. in 40 years I never did learn how to use a gossen Luna pro!!  ha ha ha.ok!!

that's ok.. I have people tell me all the time.. that I don't know how to change a light bulb either.!!  but I live with 'FEEBLE MINDED" people.. 

that have no idea what they are talking about.  If I have a 35 mm pentax K-1000  I can adjust it manualy.. if I have a sony digital camea  model xyz

I can use it manually and make adjustments.. I can also use it automaticaly..

whew.. i have been uisng these principles when teaching for 40 years..

this is all so new to me! wow.!! it is amazing that any of my images have ever been exposed properly!

where I live.. a brght sunny day.. I notice which EV to use to obtain a perfectly exposed image.  now in your area.. ESTABLISh  a starting point!

then once you have that starting point.. then fill in your own EV values

I know people that have absolutly no idea how to use alight meter or even how to read one.. but put a mamiya  Rb  in there hands.. load them up with film. and they can walk aoutside and shoot roll after roll after roll with no meter. in all typss of conditions.. and every frame is CONSISTENTLY expose with the same density.  and they do weddings. inside and out

under all conditions. because they have learned how to read light!
some people  cant even read a simple paragraph!


----------



## Puscas (Feb 22, 2007)

....it's beyond me why you're not already ruling the word. Being better than all of us I mean...








pascal


----------



## Majik Imaje (Feb 22, 2007)

ha ha ha ha.. well here we go.. I am trying my best to explain something that is very simple 

how did we twist this around ? ruling the world.? better than? no!

I am nothing. nobody.. but I do know what I know from reading only!

and it works!

Now if I am not explaining things properly.. then I will do my best to make a clearer presentation. I live in a place where people are absolute authorities on everything.. yet it is sad.. because (I am not talking about photography) they don't know what THEY are saying.

I have owned many luna pro's.. I just gave them all away. to people that wanted to learn. I learned so much . from watching that light meter. I had all the attachements and read those manuals 100 times.. I am a very slow learner.. but once I understand and REMEMBRE what all of those words say.. then I am on my way .. to better resultsl!

I am in the Arctic.. much snow/ ice.. and I show you via a kodak chart

starting points for Exposure values. Now one person says they live in this country and that won't work.. YES IT WILL. it will work anyplace in the world.. BUT YOU HAVE TO CHANGE THE NUMBERS to suit your location.

I have never been to other countries.. so I dont know, where your starting point may be. but you still use EV values.! If you understand them and how they work. and if you truely understand how they work, then just by knowing ONE NUMBER.. you can correclty build all 22 ev charts..in your head ! (using your fingers)

BUT.. if a peson is always looking and depending on that light meter.. THEN YOU WILL NEVER UNDERSTAND what I am talking about.

let me try and explain it like this; First of all I think you will agree, that ONLY three things happen (exposure wise) when you press that shutter.

1. image is too dark

2. image is too light

3. Image is correctly exposed


IT does not matter.. where you live in the world or which planet you are going to visit. Light is light!... Light has different colors, initensities. etc.

I use EV 15 100 ISO I am very comfortable with this method. so comfortable that I only have to expose one frame of film to obtain the results I want. I have been doing this for decades. with no ruined film exosure wise.. I only got 10 frames per roll. I dont want multiple frames of the same subject. all I need is just one. I want ten different images on that roll not 1 image 10 different angles or views.

EV 15 = 125 @ F 16 now that fits me perfect where I live. and i have used this in the Arctic, in Seattle, in Boston! and all over Alaska. and it works.

Now you don't have that light intensity in a different country say Scotland..

so what EV do you use ? well I am not in Scotland so I know that it must be a LOWER NUMBER. such as EV 12 @ 100 ISO = what ? I bet you have no idea yet? it is only three stops difference.. so now.that you know what your starting point is.. you can use EV values! 

EV 12 @ 100 ISO = 125 @ f -5.6


1000
500
250
*125 @ f 5.6*
60
30
15
8
4
2
1

Just by knowing that ONE NUMBER. in that EV chart. now you can fill out all 22 charts in your head! it is THAT SIMPLE! but.. you might have to use your "fingers" ! but now you can switch to any EV and instanly fill out that chart or any chart.! every shutter / f stop combination yeilds that exact same results but with greater / lesser depth of field.

I am very sorry if I didn't explain this clearly.

One more Illustration that will CONFUSE any meter made.!

I am outside.. bright sun.. a person is up against a black wall wearing white clothing.. what are YOU going to meter.. I am just going to look at the light.. and make the setting and click and I have a perfect exposure.

125 @ f 11 = ! PERFECT ! USING 100 iso BRIGHT SUN DISTINCT SHADOWS


----------



## Puscas (Feb 22, 2007)

I'm not questioning your knowledge, but _c'est le ton qui fait la music_ and after reading your comment, the Geico commercial came to mind: "First of all, I'm not a 100 percent in love with your tone right now". 

But hey, keep sharing the knowledge! People like me benefit from it greatly.





pascal


----------



## Majik Imaje (Feb 22, 2007)

HA HA HA.. tone?  I haven't got to speaking about "tone" INIG yet.!


I don't want to act ? like a no it all.. or anything else.. I just want to help people understand.. it took a long time, FOR ME to learn this.. I did not read this in any book. I read a carton of film and decided to try it and found it was a lot easier than using a light meter.

but the main THING I notice right away.. was my negatives were a lot more consistently exposed!

out on the ocean ice... A METER is bouncing all over the place!  if I have to take the time to adjust that meter.. I just missed many photographs.

that can NEVER ever be captured again!

I have no idea,? what you typed.. I think it is french.. the only thing I know about french  is bread and large fries. & the name of a "mustard"!


I only had a "split second' when I saw this girl standing there like this.

I raised my camera and -=click=-   I was offered $100,000 for the complete rights to this image.. I DECLINED!....I went to the GALLERY I used to work for, This Famous Art Gallery does not sell photographs,
they only work with the top ten artist's in the WORLD.. I took their advice. They advised me to have litho's made.. so they could place this..in their gallery for sale!


----------



## Garbz (Feb 25, 2007)

wow ease up there. As I said I have used the old rule of thumb as a guide before, I was mearly pointing out it may need adjustments depending which part of the world you are in, mostly for the benefit of others. I did in no way mean to put your knowledge in question!

Btw nice photo


----------



## JD in Socal (Feb 25, 2007)

Majik Imaje said:


> I was offered $100,000 for the complete rights to this image.. I DECLINED!....


I would take that deal if I were you.  Go back and ask if the offer is still good...


JD


----------



## JD in Socal (Feb 25, 2007)

Majik Imaje said:


> One more Illustration that will CONFUSE any meter made.!
> 
> I am outside.. bright sun.. a person is up against a black wall wearing white clothing.. what are YOU going to meter.. I am just going to look at the light.. and make the setting and click and I have a perfect exposure.


With all due respect, you need to learn to operate the meter properly.

Spot meter off the person's face, and you will get a good reading. You can also meter off the blue sky (away from the sun) and you will be darn close.

But, that being said, stick with what works. If you can eyeball it and get the exposure correct, more power to you. I'm not nearly that good, and need my camera's meter to help me.

JD


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Feb 25, 2007)

JD in Socal said:


> With all due respect, you need to learn to operate the meter properly.



Oh dear. Now you've done it.


----------



## Majik Imaje (Feb 26, 2007)

but I took these 27 years ago, and to this day there is no collection like it in all of Alaska. you can't bring a camera into a whaling village & take  photographs.. I was very very fortunate to have been chosen by a Captain.

.. to do. accept that amount. However the V*ice*(pun intended)President of that bank. is in jail now!  But I did turn it down and I am glad I did for have made way more, each year, than that amount.

I make more that that every year off my images. I am not hear to brag or lift myself up in any manner. Just to offer advice and illustrations because I once was.. a newbee, obsessed with learning this. and I needed inspiration, just as so many menbers of this board do. I offer what  I have learned the hard way. To help others avoid the same mistakes. I learned from Kodak. Just by reading their directions over and over until I had them memorized. Then I STARTED to understand. but there was one thing I could NEVER UNDERSTAND.. is that when I took a photograph .. it would not look exactly like what I saw when I originally looked at it.  it was never the same. Then i read one statment about Ansel Adams.. when he printed in his darkroom..  THEN instantly I KNEW what I was doing wrong.
Just by reading one sentence, my printing changed so dramaticaly, that when professional color labs were given the negative and the print.. THEY COULD NOT DO.. what they saw in that finished image!

In the darkroom,, it is all accomplished by using your 'hands" ! UNDER that lens  between the lens and the paper, your hands CREATE the IMAGE YOU WANT!

this is the statement that I had read.._* "it would often take Ansel Adams 30 or more sheets of paper.. to make one perfect print!*_






At least, 20 times a week, during the tourist season,  and other times of the year, People walk by our gallery in Anchorage, and they often point to the pic of the girl above. Daisy Della Fay, and they tell the visitor. .. "That is MY daughter.. when she was young".. True! ha ha ha.! 

-=click=- if i had to mess with a light meter.. no matter how simple it was, I would have never gotten that shot of that expresson on her face. The computer monitor does not do justice to this image!


----------



## Avis (Feb 26, 2007)

Majik Imaje said:


> I am not hear to brag or lift myself up in any manner.



Well, you've managed to hide that well and fool an awful lot of us.

You say you've gone from being a foreman in an airport to the world's foremost photographer just by reading a film carton?
Wow! I wish I had thought of that. Is there any more packaging material you would recommend to us newbies?


----------



## Majik Imaje (Feb 26, 2007)

WOW..  you have been reading everything I have been typing.. good for you.. but please .. DONT ADD WORDS.. that I didn't say.. yes I worked at an airport.. I NEVER SAID  "WORLDS FORMOST PHOTOGRAPER"  you added those words and they are not true. I am nothing, cept a little bit successful at photography in one unique area only. I haven't touched a camera since 1990

I have said over and over again on this board!  who am I ? no body nothing!  

but I have learned a few things.. "have I learned anything else by reading instructions or film cartons ?  

as a matter of fact I have .. and Kodak offered me 10 million dollars. and told me to get it patented!  Now i would like to write about this true story. and tell the truth. just to inspire some people to THINK outside of KODAK'S BOX !


----------



## Avis (Feb 26, 2007)

Majik Imaje said:


> I am nothing, cept a little bit successful at photography in one unique area only.



Something I think we can all agree on here.
But if you really believe this then why do you not recognise that there are other photographers here who know easily as much, if not more, than you? Or who have achieved as much, if not more, than you?
Your posts have a small amount of basic knowledge in them hidden under a whole heap of bullsh*t, waffle and patronising, arrogant, bigoted  opinion.
People are her to learn and share, not have you dictate to them and then get arsy when they disagree with you.
And you haven't touched a camera for 17 years? 
How do you expect anyone here to take you seriously?
As things stand now you are in danger of coming across as nothing more than a loud mouthed and boring buffoon. Perhaps we should have a show of hands of all the people who currently skip over your posts without reading them. It appears that you accept people do.
I'm sure you have a lot to offer the people here but your personality is getting in the way.

Remember the old proverb:
The man that is self-taught has a fool for a teacher.

Maybe you should now try to learn from others instead of off film cartons.


----------



## Majik Imaje (Feb 26, 2007)

no pun inteneded!  I have not lied about anything or stretched the truth about anything I have tried to teach here.

from Oct 69 to July 1990 I was truely obsessed with photography.

I still am.. but I can't see well enough now that I am disabled. I thought I could pass on some information that is all true.. 

yes paramount studio's wanted to know who taught me also.. !

and if you read that post you will find out who my teacher was and how I learned so much.

As I look back on my photography experiences.. I have taught hundreds of people. and never has anyone insuled me over simple statments I have made.. PLEASE  show me one line of bullshat ? 


I can back up everything I have stated.! so sorry to offend you sir Avis!


----------



## Alex_B (Feb 26, 2007)

Avis said:


> And you haven't touched a camera for 17 years?
> How do you expect anyone here to take you seriously?


 
We can argue about anything in here, but that post was unneccessarily rude. If somone didn't take any images for decades, that does not mean he forgot everything.

I agree that I would not agree with everything Majik says, and that some posts might be confusing and not really helping beginners whose practial problems with photography are just different from Majik's answers,


----------



## Majik Imaje (Feb 26, 2007)

Was of my daughter age 5 Kezia 2002 -=click=-







When I say I haven't used a camera .. I mean.. USED.. as in 20 -40 rolls constantlly shooting.. no!

those days are well over for me.. 

http://majikimaje.com/drkrm15.jpg  I can't do that no more.. contact dermititis.. I break out all over the place just form the fumes from chemicals.. sure I pick up a camera every now and then.. BUT NOT LIKE I USED TO "USE" ONE!


----------



## Alex_B (Feb 26, 2007)

So are you

Mark, Andrew, Jesse, Isaiah, Khris, or
Isaiah Mark Andrew Jesse Eves??

I am confused now.


----------



## Majik Imaje (Feb 26, 2007)

so I moved to anchorage to finish processing, thousands of prints, I rented a studio apartment and moved all my stuff down. and then back up to the village later.

I had a durst color processor.. but breaking out from the chemicals was still a big problem.. Last time I processed color was 1985 and I can still do it blind folded. when you have your hands in water for 25 years.. you can actually tell the temp with your hands!  IF you have practiced and paid attention! Your skin is very sensitive to temp changes.!


----------



## Majik Imaje (Feb 26, 2007)

I am the "father" the very PROUD father of four high school dropouts... ..

that make more in one month.. at home  than I could ever make in a year

working as a union electrican!  

http://majikimaje.com/shophere/agora.cgi     FOSSILIZED IVORY !

when .. ?? have you ever heard of 4 hs. dropouts making 40 - 80K

in ONE MONTH!.. ??

I can back up EVERYTHING I say.! and I have absolutely no problem ever.. .. admitting when I am WRONG!


----------



## Majik Imaje (Feb 26, 2007)

.. .. and when I walked into pump station # 6 on the Trans - Alaska - Pipeline, I was working on a job and I told the supervisor, Your fire alarm system is wired backwards.. and he jumped on me just like Avis did.. who the hell are you he said to me. We test this system 3 times a day for seventeen years.. you are so full of it he said.. get the hell out of here.
Next day.. I get this.. .. !!






Avis.. you have been on ever construction job I have ever worked on. and I have always proven you wrong.. EVERYTIME.!

If I don't know what I am talking about, then I will keep my mouth shut! but if I do take the time to type something in to try and help someone THINK and learn and practice.. THEN IT IS TIME TESTED FOR OVER 3 DECADES! ok ! thanks.. when Kodak says PAIINT  A DARKROOM WHITE! well no wonder my first two darkrooms were so hard to work in!


----------



## w.pasman (Feb 26, 2007)

As said, some cameras are better than others in guessing what would be the right white balance. Going RAW and doing WB afterwards is best way to go. Correcting WB in JPEGs is asking for trouble (deminished color depth). 
If I really had to take JPEGs, I would use the on-camera display to check the WB and shoot until satisfied with the WB. I think a minor WB correction on JPEGs afterwards can be done.

Majik,

IMHO the background of your snow images is way overexposed. Your rules of thumb may be a good starting point but I would have chosen shorter shutters for the photos you show. People are nicely exposed though.


----------



## Avis (Feb 26, 2007)

Alex_B said:


> We can argue about anything in here, but that post was unneccessarily rude. If somone didn't take any images for decades, that does not mean he forgot everything.



It was not meant to be rude - or no more rude than Majik Imaje has already been to others on this Board without provocation. You have taken it out of context.
It was meant as a rhetorical question anyway but the answer has been illuminating. It is just a pity we had to go through this to get there.


----------



## Majik Imaje (Feb 26, 2007)

QUOTE;"Your posts have a small amount of basic knowledge in them hidden under a whole heap of bullsh*t, waffle and patronising, arrogant, bigoted opinion."


Thank you for your "professional" advice. but in all the posts I have made on this great web site forum.

you sir., are the only one .. making statments and twisting around my words. and you have to "hide" ?  as another identity? ha ha ha..

I was born at night.. ... but it wasn't last night!


----------



## w.pasman (Feb 26, 2007)

Sorry I missed part of your question... but others apparently also :-D



> In all cases the autowhite balance fails to get it right. In the first case the correct setting appeared to be cloudy +2, the second cloudy +0 and the final one setting it to sunlight.
> 
> If these are in the normal range of the camera why does it sometimes go so wrong? Do other photographers here always set their whitebalance manually with a grey card?



This sounds pretty normal to me. Overcast usually gives blueish tint. And your auto white balance might get confused if the church windows are teinted red or so. Neutral daylight setting should be OK with most sunlight lit settings, inside as with the church or outside. Snow probably reflects more blue from the sky than other environments.


----------



## Garbz (Feb 27, 2007)

Actually something I was trying to dig out of the knowledge on this board is the theory behind how AutoWB works, and far more importantly why some packages do such a fantastic job and others produce a load of crap.

I am well aware where the issues are with whitebalancing relating to light sources such as the sun the sky and the image itself. Just wondering why the camera fouls it up while Nikon Capture 4.4 does a fantastic job. Afterall the camera is more recent then the software


----------

