WhiBal White Balance System

[Suhit Gupta]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-6456-7031' target='_blank'>http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-6456-7031</a><br /><br /></div><i>"A new product for removing colour casts and establishing a contrast range when processing files shot as RAW format originals is poised to ship. Called WhiBal, it has been created by software developer and RAW file format proponent Michael Tapes to provide what he believes will be a more usable and effective method of setting a white balance in RAW conversion software."</i><br /><br /><img src="http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/images/388_whibal_1.jpg" /><br /><br />I have never personally used a gray card before; however, from what I have read, it is a great way to make sure your pictures are correctly White Balanced. This is especially important when you are shooting images in RAW format so as to get the best foundation to "develop" your digital images through post processing. One of the best ways to ensure of proper and accurate color, regardless of lighting conditions is using such a gray card. There are two different models of WhiBal, WhiBal Pocket and WhiBal Studio. Both are comprised of four different cards, attached by a corner grommet. They differ only in their size: each card in WhiBal Pocket is 2 x 3.5 inches, while each card in WhiBal Studio is 3.25 x 6 inches. Both WhiBal models include a lanyard. There is plenty more information on the linked sites.

[Neil Enns]

Nify. I just bought one, and will write up a mini-review once I get it and play around with it a bit. I shoot RAW exclusively and have been in plenty of situations where the white balance is off and I spend too much time trying to correct.

Neil

[Suhit Gupta]

Nify. I just bought one, and will write up a mini-review once I get it and play around with it a bit. I shoot RAW exclusively and have been in plenty of situations where the white balance is off and I spend too much time trying to correct.
Yeah, those are exactly the things you would want this for. I just wonder though about the times you want to take a quick picture, taking the cards out to callibrate may be a bit tedious. Hmm... I wonder. Looking forward to your review.

Suhit

[Neil Enns]

Yeah, it'd be kinda tough in those situations. But a great example of where it would be handy is when I went home for my sister's grad. I took over 300 pictures in the hockey arena the grad was held in and the lighting was awful. Nightmarish to try and correct when you don't know the temperature of the lights.

Neil

[SassKwatch]

This is one of those things where, IMO, too many photographers have become technically obsessed. As a general rule of thumb, I consider WB 'correct' when it produces the visual image I wish to produce. Sometmes that corresponds with 'reality', sometimes not.

There would be a whole lot more interesting photos available if more photographers spent nearly as much time learning to make their pics 'speak a thousand words' as they do obsessing over things like WB and histograms.

I'm slowly coming around to the notion that Adams/Weston actually have done the photographic community a disservice in showing us just how much can be accomplished technically. Too many people spend an inordinate amount of time emulating their technical expertise and wind up (all but) ignoring the idea that those guys were about a whole lot more than technical expertise. But then, I think I've ranted about this before. :)

[Neil Enns]

I'm much more interested in making an image that depicts what I want. As you indicate below, sometimes that means it's a 100% accurate representation of the real world, complete with the ghastly yellow cast of hockey arena lighting. Sometimes that means shooting on Kodachrome for the sheer pleasure of the cool tones it brings to the image. Sometimes that means using cards to colour correct the white balance to bring out accurate skin tones in an image.

However, I don't agree that obsessing with WB and histograms causes fewer interesting photos to be taken. Digital, IMHO, makes it much more likely for great photos to happen. With the freedom to shoot thousands of images without wasting a single piece of film, I can mess around with WB and histograms as much as I like, and sometimes I hit on a funky combination that works!

Neil

[Lee Yuan Sheng]

Skin tones are rarely accurate. If they were, we'd all be dead photogs. =P

This however is a somewhat overpriced photography gizmo. Not totally useless, but expensive for what is essentially a buncha plastic pieces. And having to flip between 4 different cards sounds like a pain to me. A single card with grey, black and white sounds more convinient to me.

I'd like to add to SassKwatch's rant by saying that photogs now are not only obsessed with technical perfection, but also with gadgets and widgets that supposedly help them make their photos better.Most of the time they are better served with making mistakes and learning from them rather then letting these thingmajigs put them into auto-pilot mode.

[SassKwatch]

Digital, IMHO, makes it much more likely for great photos to happen.
I think the potential for that to happen is certainly there. I just haven't seen much evidence it's actually the case.