the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

  • site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge
You are here: Home / The Last Word / Testing for ETTR, part 8

Testing for ETTR, part 8

December 7, 2012 JimK Leave a Comment

In a comment to this post, a reader asked me to compare the ad hoc color balance adjustment technique that I developed a few days ago with the UniWB technique. I’d not been aware of that approach. It turns out the goal is the same: to get the in-camera histogram to approximate the true raw histogram by adjusting the in-camera white balance. There is an excellent tutorial on UniWB here.

I went through all the UniWB calibration steps with the D4, and got results that were worse than I got with my ad hoc technique. However, I learned two things that I’ve used to make the process I use faster and more accurate.

The first is how to judge the results. Rather than eyeball the histograms in the camera and in Rawdigger as I used to do, I now look at the coefficients that the camera puts in the EXIF metadata to tell the raw processor how to compute the “as-shot” color balance. In order to get the in-camera histogram to approximate the true raw histogram as closely as possible, you want coefficients to be equal. In Nikons, the green coefficient is always one, so you want the red and blue coefficients to be as close to one as possible. Using this technique gives you a numerical measure of how close you are, and tells you which way you have to go to get closer. If the red coefficient is greater than one, add more red. If the blue coefficient is greater than one, add more blue. If both the red and blue coefficients are greater than one, add more green. Maddeningly, the adjustments interact nonlinearly.

Secondly, it’s better to start with a magenta image, tell the camera to white balance to it, and then tweak the resulting in-camera white balance with the fine-tuning controls than it is to set the white balance by color temperature and green/magenta bias. The reason is you get more range that way. With the D4, you can’t add quite enough green through the custom color temperature dialog.

So, here’s my procedure. Open up Photoshop. Create a new image, fill it with magenta on your color calibrated monitor, and make a photograph of it. If you’ve got a Canon, you might as well start with Guillermo Luijk’s values for the Canon 350D. In the sRGB color space, they are: R=162, G=64 B=104. For the D4, using Luijk’s technique, I got R=120, G=64 B=94, but those values didn’t give me very good results. Specifically, they were red-shy. When I used R=162, G=64 B=104, I got pretty close to the right coefficients. Be sure to fill the frame with the color sample. It’s probably a good idea to defocus a little so that you don’t have the detail of your monitor’s pixels in the image, but your camera will average it out later if you don’t bother. Expose for a middle gray. White balance to that.

If the coefficients for the red and blue components of the white balance are within five or ten percent of the coefficient for the green component, you’re done.

If not, go back into the custom white balance dialog and pick “fine tuning” or some such name. Add or subtract red, blue, or green from the white balance. Take a picture of anything. Load the raw file into your computer, and look at the EXIF metadata. If the coefficients for the red and blue components of the white balance are within five or ten percent of the coefficient for the green component, you’re done.

Repeat the last paragraph until you’re satisfied or bored to tears.

Don’t try to get bang on with the coefficient values. As a reader said in a piece of correspondence that I’ll get to in a few days, “We’re playing horseshoes here.” Close is plenty good enough.

The Last Word

← ETTR testing, part 7 ETTR by spot metering, part 2 →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

March 2023
S M T W T F S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
« Jan    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • Good 35-70 MF lens
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • Mal Paso on Christmas tree light bokeh with the XCD 38V on the X2D
  • Sebastian on More on tilted adapters
  • JimK on On microlens size in the GFX 100 and GFX 50R/S
  • Kyle Krug on On microlens size in the GFX 100 and GFX 50R/S
  • JimK on Hasselblad X2D electronic shutter scan time
  • Jake on Hasselblad X2D electronic shutter scan time
  • Piotr Chylarecki on Who am I?
  • JimK on Who am I?
  • Piotr Chylarecki on Who am I?
  • Stefan on Swebo TC-1 OOBE

Archives

Copyright © 2023 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.