Jump to content

Does White balance affect RAW.


Rudy

Recommended Posts

Correct. WB only affects the jpeg, but the setting is also stored in the metadata of the raw file. Software like Lightroom and Capture One use this setting as a starting point for their raw conversion (WB as shot). The WB is also used for the small thumbnail that is inside of every raw file for display purposes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I understand your reply correctly, white balance does not change the raw file.  However the information is there for applications that want to make use of it.  As I stated in my response to your earlier reply, I'm just going to use the auto white balance setting.  

 

Thanks

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 11/15/2020 at 10:47 PM, Herco said:

Correct. WB only affects the jpeg, but the setting is also stored in the metadata of the raw file. Software like Lightroom and Capture One use this setting as a starting point for their raw conversion (WB as shot). The WB is also used for the small thumbnail that is inside of every raw file for display purposes.

Is that exactly correct? The image settings are indeed used for the JPEG conversation, also for the embedded one. But as far as Lightroom goes they seem not to be used by the Lightroom presets. Or are they? And how? What can be used, for sure, is the lens correction stored in the meta data.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Paul Schmidt said:

Is that exactly correct? The image settings are indeed used for the JPEG conversation, also for the embedded one. But as far as Lightroom goes they seem not to be used by the Lightroom presets. Or are they? And how? What can be used, for sure, is the lens correction stored in the meta data.

Unless the WB is ‘overwritten’ by a WB set in the preset in LR, LR can use the stored WB in the RAW-conversion. It will be applied to the displayed image when importing, unless replaced by a WB set in a LR preset. To my knowledge LR behaves similar to Capture One in that aspect. To use the WB set by the camera, select WB As Shot in the import profile.

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Herco said:

Unless the WB is ‘overwritten’ by a WB set in the preset in LR, LR can use the stored WB in the RAW-conversion. It will be applied to the displayed image when importing, unless replaced by a WB set in a LR preset. To my knowledge LR behaves similar to Capture One in that aspect. To use the WB set by the camera, select WB As Shot in the import profile.

I have got to do experiments on that. It would also be nice to get the film simulations in Lightroom. They have their own, but the Fuji ones are great.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 11/18/2020 at 10:21 AM, Paul Schmidt said:

I have got to do experiments on that. It would also be nice to get the film simulations in Lightroom. They have their own, but the Fuji ones are great.

The film simulations (Main ones you get in camera) are in Lightroom. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Ahoy ye hearties! Hoist ye yon Jolly Roger and Cascade away. NGC 1502 The Jolly Roger Cluster:

      Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

      Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

      This is the equivalent of 43 minutes, 40 seconds of exposure. NGC 1502 is a neat little cluster located in the Camelopardalis Constellation. This region of space was thought to be fairly empty by early astronomers, but as you can see, there is a lot there. Kemble's Cascade (a.k.a. Kemble 1) is named for Father Lucian Kemble, a Canadian Franciscan friar who wrote about it to Walter Scott Houston, an author for the Sky And Telescope magazine. Houston named the asterism for Fr. Kemble and the name "stuck". NGC 1501 is the Oyster Nebula. A longer focal length telescope is needed to bring this one into good viewing, but it is well worth the effort. NGC 1502: https://skyandtelescope.org/online-gallery/ngc-1502/ Camelopardalis Constellation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camelopardalis Kemble's Cascade (and NGC 1501: The Oyster Nebula): https://www.constellation-guide.com/kembles-cascade/  
    • Looking for input; there are some decent deals and might want to take advantage to expand my lenses for my 100s already own: 110/2 32-64 35-70 100-200 + TC   Shooting mostly family shots, bringing my kit to capture family outings indoors and out. Tracking the 63/43 effective FLs on the two, but has anybody used both? Would the 55 (covered by two zooms right now) be redundant? Would the 80 be too similar in character to my 110 for portraiture?
    • See what I mean? Two instantaneous ads. Worthless.   
    • What's the deal Fuji X Forum? I'm noticing there are seldom replies to any topics - except for advertisements posted as replies. Really lame. Anyone else noticing the only reply they receive to a question is an advert?  🤠 fotomatt in Colorado  
×
×
  • Create New...