Skip to main content

"2:25"


"2:25"

Color balance is always relative, and subjective.

There are a lot of things in this photo, supposed to be "white", yet none really is. The only way they all will be white, is to decolorize.

Comments

  1. If that's a doctor's office waiting room, the cold balance plays well into the atmosphere.  Creeky voice calls out, "next!"

    ReplyDelete
  2. You Nailed it Askewed View Photographic Arts photos by Keith A. Russell, It's the "Pain Clinic" where I get my spinal injections. And, can be quite creepy, indeed!

    ReplyDelete
  3. That picture will be in my nightmares, thank you Oshi Shikigami

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hmm.. lettsee.. three or four different colour temp in the lighting.. the bright white pain on the trim has brighteners and UV inhibitors.. the 'white daylight' fluorescents in the office have that sickly colour on the glass and what? warm floro in front of the clock and daylight streaming on from the right? This is why huge strobe packs were invented..

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yuppers, shoulda taken my studio strobes with me to the Drs. office. LOL Nothing like having my petite, little, inconspicuous, Nikon A - with massive strobeage! I am sure the office and the other patients would be real happy with me... He he he.

    The only thing that came out vaguely white was the ceiling tiles. Everything else, that to the naked eye, looked reasonably "white', is often much further 'off-color' with digital or film. (Film usually is worse.)

    Oh, and with strobes, you can sometimes have "photo-flouressence" of things white, or light in color, where the Near UV sometimes in abundance with strobes, causes light colored objects, including some paints, to glow. But this glow is usually not white, but some value of light blue..

    A conundrum, that has driven many a photographer, to shooting Black and white.  :-)

    ReplyDelete
  6. yea.. the Near UV if the strobes his the UV Inhibitors in some fabrics and paints.. meets the slightly more sensitive to UV modern digital sensor..  Just makes me glad I dont do that kind of work.. I would still love a good set of strobes to play with.. 2400/4800ws and 4 heads.. and boxes and stands and.. and.. and.. and......  I think I might just buy me a mono unit to play with before too long.. they are not too very expensive these days..

    ReplyDelete
  7. Decades ago, I used "hot lights" (quartz halogens), and if necessary, conversion filters or Tungsten balanced film. When I did portrays or product shots. 

    I have a Nikon SB800 strobe that I use now for the heavy lifting. I have cables for off camera work. And a small Sunpack device that is about 6" square panel, that is a strobe, and runs on batteries.

    But most often, if I use strobe at all, I use the camera's built in one. Set for mostly for fill, or balanced with a negative compensation.

    If I routinely did portraits or product shots now, I would likely try to justify buying a good studio strobe setup.

    Although, those who want to go cheaper, or do movies at all, should investigate the hot light setups. The are way less expensive. And if you just do B&W a portable fluorescent tube device, or something to bank those CFL lightbulbs would also work, and be a lot more pleasant to shoot under.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I understand that an 8x8" led light is a pretty good alternative..

    ReplyDelete
  9. Yes, especially if you need continues lighting.  :-)

    ReplyDelete
  10. Teresa Prater, that is what drew me to take it in the first place. And I wanted th check out the "linearity" of the lens. (18.5 mm DX = 28 mm 135.) I think it does very well in that regard.

    Most all zoom lenses, including my Nikkors, have a noticeable barrel distortion. when they are on the wide end of the zoom scale.  Although all of them can be corrected for in Lightroom and Photoshop.

    However when you do, you loose a smidgen of image at the edges, so you need to shoot just a bit wider than what you think you have, in the viewfinder.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Oh, and speaking of barrel distortion, if you use an external viewfinder, or most built in optical viewfinder, again, almost all for wide angle have some level of the same distortion.

    I have an external optical viewfinder for my Nikon A, (designed specifically for this camera) which has thankfully only a small amount of the is viewing distortion as well. (Of, course it doesn't transition to the taken image.) Just another thing to note.

    But, if you want to use your camera in bright light, sometimes the monitor, on the back of the camera, gets difficult to see well, because of glare and a relatively dark image. So the external viewer is handy for this.

    It also lets you just concentrate on the image, with no distractions of all the display info, of the electronic one. That, and you can brace the camera more securely (less vibration) than holding the camera out, as to see the screen. So, you might consider one for these reasons.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Please comment! You may comment as "anonymous" if you would like. All comments will be reviewed before posting here.