wide angle white balance
Posted 27 May 2005 - 06:10 AM
Just go to my gallery at http://www.reefpix.o...ery/underwater/ and you can find the photo there - without the black scribbling on it.
Dual Ikelite Strobes
Photo site - www.reefpix.org
Posted 28 May 2005 - 02:55 AM
But don't trust my memory - check the manual!
RAW makes it less essential to do this on stills while underwater because you can set the WB in ACR or equivalent.
Read the manual!?!? Oh how anti manly that is...
But guess i will dig it out of whatever box it is in and have a look
So am working on PS at the moment and converting RAW files, however can't find an eyedropper for the WB in the PS RAW plug in. Maybe in Nikon Capture there is a WB eyedropper?
What i usually do is once the image is in PS i go to curves and open the info box and then either set a black point (changed the default to 8) or a white point (changed that default to 244)
Works pretty well most of the time, and definitely gets rid of the sort of cloudy sheen so often prevalent on images, especially scanned ones.
Guess i am dragging this thread off topic now eh? oops
Blog and Photo Archive/Portfolio Site www.mikeveitchblog.com
Learn underwater photography in Indonesia or Join me on a trip www.underwatertribe.com
Posted 28 May 2005 - 03:08 AM
I don't see this as off topic at all. Lots of useful info being exchanged in this discussion. Keep it coming!
p.s. Sorry about suggesting the manual. It was sunny here on Friday - a rare event in England - and clearly I wasn't thinking straight!
Posted 28 May 2005 - 05:36 AM
Despite a background in zoology and medicine (?!) I thought that this was an artistic endeavour?
I've been using an entirely subjective method, shooting in RAW, optimising and converting to a Photoshop compatible format, and then using "channel mixer", usually swapping some green channel data into the red channel.
Shallow reefs and sharks have come up very well, very comparable to URPro filtered images that I've seen, and avoiding the necessity of finding a white/neutral grey target.
Perhaps I'll try the "objective" method too. The camera never lies (!).
Posted 04 July 2006 - 11:36 AM