D200 White Balance & ACR

[blumesan]

I recently took a series of flash exposures with my D200. I had set the camera white balance to "Flash" (which, according to the Nikon manual, is 5400K). When I opened the RAW files in ACR the "AS SHOT" white balance showed 6150K, and the images had a distinct overwarm tint. This was easily corrected by changing the WB dropdown menu to "Flash" or by using the WB eyedropper.

Now I have heard that there was a time that Nikon encrypted the WB data in the exif so that it could not be read by raw converters other than their own. However I believed that this problem was long since resolved. Apparently there is still a problem. Has anyone else noted such a large discrepancy between in camera setting for WB and what ACR reads as the "as shot" value?

Cheers/Mike

PS Perhaps this would be more appropriate in the Image Management forum. If so, the mod may feel free to move it.

[cyclohexane]

Has anyone else noted such a large discrepancy between in camera setting for WB and what ACR reads as the "as shot" value?

Yes.

ACR reads the WB meta data extremely poorly for Nikon NEFs. This was discussed at length in another thread some time ago, but I think it is at least two years old now.

It isn't encryption; just poor handling of the data by ACR.

[blumesan]

I didn't expect it to be right on, but I was surprised by the discrepancy. From 5400K set in camera to 6150K as read by ACR. Plan to check what happens when specific degrees K are set for in-camera WB and how these are interpreted by ACR, "as shot" values.

[cyclohexane]

Nikon's Kelvin values don't correspond exactly to actual color temperature, so you're also hosed there. Thom Hogan mentions setting the Kelvin value higher on camera than his Minolta color temperature meter in his D200 review.

[blumesan]

A very quick check of correspondence (or lack thereof) between WB as set in camera, (using the option to directly select color temp) and the color temp value as read from raw file in ACR.

First number is in-camera setting. Second number is ACR "as shot" value. Third number is change in Mired:

4800K --> 4550K -11
5000K --> 4750K -11
5300K --> 5000K -11
5600K --> 5250K -12
5900K --> 5450K -14
6300K --> 5800K -14

What is more confusing is my initial observation that when in-camera WB is set to "flash" (5400K) the ACR "as shot" shows 6150K. Here the change in WB is in the opposite direction and amounts to +23 mired.

Actually the bottom line is that I'm not too distressed by this, simply because I always shoot in RAW and adjust the WB in ACR to remove any far out color casts and to suit my personal taste. But it is a bit disappointing when one considers that Adobe issues a new version of ACR to "customize" the software for each new camera. Makes one wonder.

Michael, thanks for your input.

[gaopa2]

bluesan, I have tried what you tried on both my Nikon D200 and D300 and did not like the color result.... too warm. I just use Auto WB with my SB-800 and then a custom WB set with an Expodisc for studio. Outside I use auto WB unless the light is very mixed and then I use the Expodisc. The Expodisc really works. However, a white coffee filter does a great job for setting a custom WB also. Cheers, Bill P.

[Nikonfreak]

Auto WB is much better on the D200 than the D300. The D300, I feel, I can't rely on Auto WB as much as I did on the D200. I find myself custom WB much more often with the D300.

Julio

[jfrancho]

ACR has never picked up the "As shot" WB correctly on my Canons, so it isn't just a Nikon thing. You'd think it would be simple to implement this, but apparently its not a priority.

[blumesan]

I am puzzled as to why or how either Auto WB or Custom WB can function correctly. Presumably, using either of these techniques, the WB is calculated by the camera and the value is written into the exif. If ACR has so much trouble interpreting the WB in the exif data it should be equally erratic using these methods. That said, I do notice that Auto WB does come fairly close most of the time.

[jfrancho]

I am puzzled as to why or how either Auto WB or Custom WB can function correctly

You would use the shot you took for the custom white balance. Click the WB tool, and click the target, and then copy and paste that setting to all the others from that shoot. Simple, but you have to remember to keep a shot of the target you used to calibrate the CWB in the first place, which can get dicey if you used a few different CWBs.

[blumesan]

Why bother to go thru the custom white balance routine. Just take a shot of a white or gray card; or more than one shot if lighting conditions change.

As I have said before, for me this is no big deal since I shoot only in raw and adjust WB to taste in ACR. I feel sorry for those who routinely shoot jpegs and are trying to get a decent WB out of the camera.

[jfrancho]

Well, I agree in practice. Using Auto WB should work well enough, and a reference shot would be for perfect calibration, assuming you use Raw mode. There is the one small point, and that's that the histo is based on the little jpeg preview, and it doesn't take a genious to see that sliding the WB around changes the exposure a bit. Probably not a big deal, but if you are dealing with high contrast scenes, it might. Auto works well in most cases for me, except mixed light with flash and gym lighting.

I feel sorry for those who routinely shoot jpegs and are trying to get a decent WB out of the camera.

For these people, that ACR doesn't come into the equation, and a CWB is a two second routine.

[gaopa2]

Guys, I am a jpeg shooter and have not had a problem with auto WB on either the D200 or the D300 and use it most of the time. It is just that when I want it spot on I use my Expodisc.

[cyclohexane]

I am a jpeg shooter and have not had a problem with auto WB on either the D200 or the D300 and use it most of the time.

I also am a JPEG shooter, and have not had any significant WB issues with the D300. Auto WB is indeed inferior to the D200, but it is still better than most other bodies that I have used. For one thing, it actually gets it right under natural light, something my D2HS sometimes struggles with (images are usually blue or yellow). Also, I'm getting accurate color in this candle-and-tungsten-lit photographic hell of a restaurant (the food's real good though) using Auto WB.

Fluorescents are a different story though; the same lights the D200 found appetizing and easy to adjust for using Auto WB turn a nasty urine yellow. Of course, now there's that huge list of fluorescent light types to choose from in the menu... though I find it faster just to shoot a WB preset target for most situations.