p.1 #1 · Who uses a color meter and is it worth the investment
I shoot weddings and the light is always mixed. I was thinking of acqiring a color meter which goes for about $1000. Is it worth the investment and are there any other alternatives.
p.1 #2 · Who uses a color meter and is it worth the investment
Just shoot a grey card. You'll save about $950. The only reason for a color meter, IMO, is when you're mixing ambient with strobes/gels, like on a larger scale commercial shoot. You don't need this for a wedding. Go buy another lens instead of this.
p.1 #3 · Who uses a color meter and is it worth the investment
How does a grey card help setting the correct color compensation in the camera? Please explain since I'm new to this.
Nov 21, 2008 at 01:22 PM
jjlphoto Offline • • • • • [X]
p.1 #4 · Who uses a color meter and is it worth the investment
meangene wrote:
How does a grey card help setting the correct color compensation in the camera? Please explain since I'm new to this.
Easiest way, do it in RAW. Measure the shot (with the RAW eyedropper ) of the grey card you shot, and "apply" that setting to the rest of the shots done in the same light.
p.1 #5 · Who uses a color meter and is it worth the investment
jjlphoto wrote:
Easiest way, do it in RAW.
Doing it in post in RAW is best, no question.
I also take a full-frame of the grey card (WhiBal card) and set a "Custom White Balance" (on Canon.) Then I shoot RAW+Medium JPEG. The JPEG should be decent for proofing, sorting, quick web pages, etc (use sRGB for the web.)
If you forget to shoot a new custom target when the light changes (assistants/models job to remind me, but ...) then you go to the RAW file
After a while you get a feel for the correct color temp and tint and can "tweak" the results a bit warmer or cooler to preference. (A great way to do that is with Adobe's new "custom" profiles - DNG ICC Editor.)
The color temperature numbers from a meter to Lightroom is not always 100% the same; they might vary by 500 degrees. But within one system - Lightroom for instance - you can use the numbers for comparison purposes.
p.1 #6 · Who uses a color meter and is it worth the investment
Color temp meters are not really worth it any more, back in the film days some people used them along with the case of 200 gel filters. But that was when shooting transparancy. Today you don't need the filters and even the meter is of marginal value. If you can find one for a hundred $ on eBay or CList it might be worth it but IMO they are more trouble than they are worth.
p.1 #7 · Who uses a color meter and is it worth the investment
Splitting the difference between different light sources doesn't work. What matters most is that the skin tones and reference colors seem "normal" perceptually. Complicating all of this is the fact that when looking at the scene your eyes will adapt and see the colors your brain tells you they should be but the camera just records what is there. So you'll perceive the wedding dress as "white" regardless of what light it is in, while the camera will record a mix that may be difficult to make head or tails out of in post processing if you try to split the difference with a color meter of AWB.
What seems normal perceptually varies widely depending on the context of the scene. For example, if the scene is a normally lit room regardless of actual color temp of the light the skin tones will need to be rendered more or less neutrally to seem normal. But if the photo is a couple sitting in a dark room at a table illuminated only by candles (or made to look that way in the photo) a warm yellow skin tone would seem quite normal and a "normal" pink skin tone would seem abnormally out of context with the source of the light.
Strategies for a venue like a wedding are:
1) Gell the flash to match the ambient light. If you put a 1/2 CTO gell on the flash and then do a custom WB from a gray card with the gelled flash you will get a good perceptual balance between the flash lit foreground and the ambient background.
2) Overpower the ambient. In some situations, like close-ups, too much background will be distracting. In those situations raising the shutter speed to cancel out the ambient and and the same time causing the distracting background to fade into the shadow can be an effective way to focus attention on what is really important.
The best approach would be a combination of both. If you gel the flashes to match the ambient and set the WB to the gelled flash off a gray card then anything shot within the range of the flash will be perfectly neutral. The tungsten background will also be a close match. Then if you want to isolate subject from background with flash fall-off all you need to do is decrease the shutter speed, up to the camera sync limit. You can also control the overall balance of flash and ambient with the selection of ISO speed. The higher you set the ISO speed the better the camera will be able to expose the background at shutter speeds you can hand-hold. Also as you increase ISO the flash will not need to work as hard.
When looking at things our brain tends to tune out the background anyway so when its not practical to gel the flash to match the ambient its better to balance to the flash lit foreground containing the main subjects to render their skin tones normally and let the background fall where it will. Its easier to deal with editing from a consistent baseline of WB balanced to the foreground. Cropping to avoid any more background than necessary for context would also be a good strategy. In a story telling format like a wedding there are ample opportunities to shoot an ambient balanced wide shot to establish the scene. That establishing shot then obviates the need to include so much distracting background in the other shots.
p.1 #10 · Who uses a color meter and is it worth the investment
I've assisted on commercial gigs where the shooter used color meters. Generally it was in situations where daylight, and various flavors of tungsten and flourescent light were present in addition to strobes being used.
The color meter made it much easier to decide how to gel lights.
In the case of wedding work though - I really don't think it would make as much sense to use a color meter. As others have mentioned, I'd just get it close and then make corrections to the raw file.
p.1 #14 · Who uses a color meter and is it worth the investment
meangene wrote:
What do you mean by RAW editor. I use Lightroom mostly however I do have PS3.
LR is a program for editing your RAW image files. If I understood your question correctly, you asked if LR supports RAW, and the answer is yes, its core function is RAW editing. You're already using it to process your RAW files, so I suppose I'm a little confused by your question. Or am I missing something?
p.1 #15 · Who uses a color meter and is it worth the investment
Color meters were best used on commercial shoots with CT film. I had one that rarely saw use, even in the film days. Digital cameras and editing programs just about eliminated the need for a color meter. Color meters are plodding instruments, not condusive to fast moving events like weddings. If you ever do purchase one though, I have a stack of CC (color compensating, and conversion) filters for cheap.
