File :-(, x, )
Ruskie
How come the automatic white balance sucks so bad?
Ive got a Pentax K100D and payed quite a lot for it, I thought it would be good at these things?

Both pictures taken 23mm, f/9.5 and 8 seconds exposure time.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:
>> Anonymous
Paying a lot of money doesn't necessarily mean anything. I have come to the conclusion that Nikon's and Canon's auto white balance are acceptable but not too accurate. They are a bit warmer than you would expect them to be. Kodak's auto white balance is pretty on target. I can only say this for well-lit conditions. I am not too sure how well Kodaks do at night or low light conditions compared to Nikons or Canons. The difference is probably embedded in the sensor and whatever algorithms are used to determine the white balance.
>> ??????? !KEBab7wem6
That might be because automatic white balance sucks. Especially for night type images white balance is a Russian roulette. Best thing you could do is adjust it manually, either by preset or white card.
>> Anonymous
Protip: Its easier to correct the white balance working with the RAW.

Just set your camera to the default white balance mode, then fix it in post.

Its what we did in the "good old days" of film processing.
>> Anonymous
Could you post a fullrez picture. Nothing fancy at all, so it dont matter if you post it on 4chan. Id like to see the k100d in action.

Im thinking of buying that camera :)
>> Ruskie
     File :-(, x)
>>36662
Ok.

The little "dot" at the top is some crap on the lens i didn´t know of when I took the pictures :(

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePENTAX CorporationCamera ModelPENTAX K100DCamera SoftwareK100D Ver 1.00Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)34 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:02:28 20:53:37Exposure Time10 secF-Numberf/9.5Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating200Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length23.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3008Image Height2000RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeClose View
>> Ruskie
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePENTAX CorporationCamera ModelPENTAX K100DCamera SoftwareK100D Ver 1.00Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)300 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:03:01 15:05:22Exposure Time1/15 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating200Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length200.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3008Image Height2000RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeClose View
>> Anonymous
Basically, if you want good white balance, shoot RAW or use a gray card. AWB sucks on all cameras.
>> Ruskie
>>36674
The thing is that my computer is a old piece of shit with a 40gig hard drive. Shooting RAW is not an option until I get a better computer :/
>> Anonymous
Pentax has an excellent white balancing system. I own a K100D but the auto white balance sucks for shit. If you manually do it you get great results.
>> Anonymous
>>36678
You can't really fuck up manual white balance. It's just a light temperature value. Either it matches the lighting you're in or it doesn't.
>> Jal
>>36671
Thanks! :D
Looks good.

>>36640I have been wondering about White Balance. Most people are saying to do this on your computer. But if you check proffesionalls I dont thay allways check the white balance before. I feel that this is abit like taking a photo in less light and then trying to make it brighter in photoshop. And that shows big diffrences.

Maby I should just read up on white balance instead.
>> Anonymous
Please read the manual. AWB does not suck, it works and it works good, but just for something like natural light in 3500K-7500K range.

It's not so hard to set correct WB, you don't need RAW or gray cards or other junk, just read the manual or something.
>> Anonymous
How do you set the wb when it's dark outside?
>> Anonymous
>>36707
Learn about light temperature then come back. Thx.
>> Anonymous
>>36710
That is when it's quite difficult. You have to know what light you're taking a photo of. If it's sodium street lights, you need to know the temperature of those lights and set that in your camera. This is pretty impractical, that's why RAW is great. Just do it on the computer.
>> Anonymous
Fucking hardcore photography scientist, I laugh at you ! Next you'll be telling me that I cant take a good photo without using HDR or some such shit.

Photography isn't about technology, it's about feelings.

Anyone can set good WB just by looking at result on LCD ! Because there's absolutely no need for super correct WB, just set it to something that looks good.
>> Anonymous
>>36718
White balance is an issue because in your own words, photography is about feelings. If you want to capture a certain moment or invoke a particular emotion, then you're aiming for aspects of composition, lighting and the such. But white balance affects the overall tone of the photo. If you want to create the illusion of something being sterile and your white balance is on the warm side, then what you want to capture is different from what you are getting. This is a bad thing and that's why white balance, among other things, is an important issue to resolve!
>> Anonymous
>>36671

Where was this pic (same as op) taken?
>> Ruskie
>>36744
Gothenburg in Sweden.