What WB to use for the golden hours (sunrise and sunset)?

[Hjalmarg1]

I ramdomly get good WB on my pictures taken during the golden hours so I have to post process many of them later. What is a good Kelvin temperature for WB?

 

[Marsu42]

I ramdomly get good WB on my pictures taken during the golden hours so I have to post process many of them later. What is a good Kelvin temperature for WB?

You're doing no postprocessing at all, but only use straight out of camera jpeg? Well, that's tough I have to admit since I find wb changes quickly in these hours, so I cannot give you a direct answer (but others surely will).

My personal approach is to shoot raw with auto-wb and worry about the wb later, more important to put the correct gel on the flash(es): full cto or at least half cto. The other method is to shoot a grey or combined color/grey card and then determine the correct wb in post if your camera auto-wb fails a lot... note that the exact "correct" wb might not look best in a subjective way, and if you do postprocessing you can do local wb adjustments.

 

[Zv]

I leave my WB set to Daylight to record the scene almost as you see it. The scene changes of course and you'll get different WB as it does but you can easily change it in post by applying the change to similar photos via sync or copy function in LR.

I usually find that when the sun has set I prefer cooler tones to bring out the blue and reds in the sky more. It's all down to personal pref though.

 

[Click]

My personal approach is to shoot raw with auto-wb and worry about the wb later

+1

 

[neuroanatomist]

I vote: Shoot RAW, set WB later.

 

[eli452]

My personal approach is to shoot raw with auto-wb and worry about the wb later

+1 simplest approach

 

[mackguyver]

I leave my WB set to Daylight to record the scene almost as you see it.

+1, I shoot almost exclusively during the golden hour and always leave my cameras set to daylight WB. Auto WB kills the golden glow.

As for Auto WB + RAW, the only harm there is that your histogram isn't going to be as accurate.

 

[privatebydesign]

My general approach is to set WB at a predetermined value, I use 5,500ºK, this takes one inconsistency out of the equation. If you use Auto WB you have to adjust for the cameras idea as well as the actual light, in post processing I find it easier to adjust everything by the same amount than try to even out the inconsistencies Auto WB introduces, then just tweak in groups as the light changed.

As for sunsets, it depends on how you want it to look. Traditionally WB is used to make white toneless, but that probably is not the best way to reproduce a sunset, everybody knows the light is very orange, it has a low temperature of around 3,000ºK or lower. What people seem to miss is that when you put 3,000ºK on your camera WB it is adding blue to make the orange light appear white.

It becomes subjective, how orange do you want the orange light to look? If you want it to be "natural" a WB around 5,500ºK will be good, if you want it less orange then go lower, if you want it more orange then take it higher, go to 10,000ºK and it will positively glow orange!.

 

[dcm]

Appears that Canon recommends the cloudy setting (6000K) in the 6D Instruction Manual (below). Go for shade if you want a deeper orange.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

My general approach is to set WB at a predetermined value, I use 5,500ºK, this takes one inconsistency out of the equation. If you use Auto WB you have to adjust for the cameras idea as well as the actual light, in post processing I find it easier to adjust everything by the same amount than try to even out the inconsistencies Auto WB introduces, then just tweak in groups as the light changed.

As for sunsets, it depends on how you want it to look. Traditionally WB is used to make white toneless, but that probably is not the best way to reproduce a sunset, everybody knows the light is very orange, it has a low temperature of around 3,000ºK or lower. What people seem to miss is that when you put 3,000ºK on your camera WB it is adding blue to make the orange light appear white.

It becomes subjective, how orange do you want the orange light to look? If you want it to be "natural" a WB around 5,500ºK will be good, if you want it less orange then go lower, if you want it more orange then take it higher, go to 10,000ºK and it will positively glow orange!.

Many thanks to all of you for your feedback. It seems that I may try between setting the WB to 5,500K or to use Shade WB so, consistency in WB looks to be very benefitial for later post-processing.

 

[surapon]

Dear Hjalmarg1
For me, And I do not want to miss any Colors of the Beautiful Sun rise/ Sunset----If I have time, I just set the camera on the big tripods,( I shoot both High quality Jpg and Raw) and Shoot with all WBs, Include AWB too---That I will get the difference colors of the golden hours, But I shoot at - 0.33 and - 0.66 ( Under Exposure) to get the high contrast of colors, and Re-adjust as I like by Post Processing / Photoshop6.
Good Luck
Surapon.
PS, Just my Lazy habit and my Low Tech brain, Yes, I have Raw files back up, and Just put them in the Hard Drive for back up record--But I let the Camera( Largest Jpg file),take over my Dream/ My Skill----Ha, Ha, Ha.

PS-2, One thing that I never try before, to use Cir. PL Filter at The Golden Hours----I will try next time and report back to you.

 

[RLPhoto]

WB is subjective. I will lie with the true WB and sometimes keep it accurate. I'd always leave that to post now but have the camera on auto when shooting.

 

[mackguyver]

On more thought on this - don't try to shoot a gray card / manual WB at the very edges of the golden hour (aka the blue hour) or you'll get insane measurements of 11,000k and such that will make your photos look crazy. Yes, I've tried that

 

[privatebydesign]

On more thought on this - don't try to shoot a gray card / manual WB at the very edges of the golden hour (aka the blue hour) or you'll get insane measurements of 11,000k and such that will make your photos look crazy. Yes, I've tried that

That, I am sure you know, is because the camera is trying to add as much orange as it can to counteract the blue and make your grey card toneless, exactly the same situation but at opposite ends of the spectrum as before the sunset where the light is very orange and the camera, in Auto WB, tries to add as much blue as it can by setting the lowest possible WB.

The key point to remember, and this is irrespective of the actual light source, set your WB low and the picture will be fed more blue, set the WB higher and it will go more orange.

This kind of knowledge really comes into its own when you start gelling light sources. If you want very blue sky, but it isn't, simply turn WB down to 3,000ºK and gel your flash orange with a 1/2 or full CTO, the subject will be "correct" ie a white shirt will be white, but the sky very blue. Conversely you can get a wonderful warm old film style background, or fake golden hour look and "correct" subject by putting WB up around 8,000ºK and gelling your flash blue with a 1/2 CTB gel.

 

[Marsu42]

I use 5,500ºK, this takes one inconsistency out of the equation.

I'm using a-wb in camera because if you set a manual value, you're throwing away potentially useful information, I often find it interesting to see why the camera chose what it did, the camera is more objective than my eye. If I want a common base, I can simply add a fixed wb to a LR import preset or copy/past the wb setting in LR.

 

[privatebydesign]

I use 5,500ºK, this takes one inconsistency out of the equation.

I'm using a-wb in camera because if you set a manual value, you're throwing away potentially useful information, I often find it interesting to see why the camera chose what it did, the camera is more objective than my eye. If I want a common base, I can simply add a fixed wb to a LR import preset or copy/past the wb setting in LR.

I'm sorry I don't understand. My assumption was we were all talking about a RAW workflow, this renders the "As Set" WB largely irrelevant for any individual shot and certainly any in camera WB setting doesn't throw away anything. My reason for setting a base, or manual WB, is for consistency across shots from a similar time and lighting scenario. A-WB will be different by small amounts during a sequence of shots, I have found it easier in post to not have to deal with these small variations, especially when you move to PS and save when the WB ºK and tint sliders are replaced with a +/- scale.

Obviously if you are shooting straight to jpeg then the WB setting does matter, but in these situations the camera will try to adjust the actual light to white, this means in our sunset scenario A-WB will tend to set a WB too low on the ºK scale and the sky won't be as orange as it appears to the eye because of the blue the camera adds to try to overcome the orange.

If you want your camera to reflect what your brain knows as realistic light colours, ie, candle light is orange and midday mountain light is blue, then setting a manual WB at 5,500-6,500ºK will get you there most of the time, if you want white shirts to be toneless then you need to add/subtract blue/orange (and a bit of tint) to do that. Incidentally, tint is the one weakness of the manual ºK in camera setting, auto and custom WB also do a tint calculation that is outside the functionality of direct ºK in camera input.

For a studio scenario custom WB per session/lighting setup is king, especially if you want whites and greys rendered toneless. For everyday shooting and atmospheric scenarios where I want the light to reflect its actual colour I find manual ºK to be "better", assuming a RAW workflow. If you are shooting jpegs then manual ºK to taste as the end image is entirely subjective.

 

[Marsu42]

I'm sorry I don't understand. My assumption was we were all talking about a RAW workflow, this renders the "As Set" WB largely irrelevant for any individual shot and certainly any in camera WB setting doesn't throw away anything.

Sorry, I should have been more verbose on this: If you shoot fixed wb you don't record the camera's potential a-wb decision, so that information is "lost". Of course with raw, no picture data is lost.

My reason for setting a base, or manual WB, is for consistency across shots from a similar time and lighting scenario. A-WB will be different by small amounts during a sequence of shots

Correct, this isn't really relevant and can potentially confuse postprocessing. What I find interesting about the camera's a-wb decision is when some outdoor "everyday" shots have a completely different wb because I can then look why that is - usually the light changed or I screwed up something, so I can then process this shot differently while with shots that have about the same camera a-wb you can usually simply bulk copy/paste development settings.

I have found it easier in post to not have to deal with these small variations, especially when you move to PS and save when the WB ºK and tint sliders are replaced with a +/- scale.

That's probably the difference between our workflows - I'm almost exclusively using LR, and it's very easy to copy/paste wb.

 

[privatebydesign]

Sorry, I should have been more verbose on this: If you shoot fixed wb you don't record the camera's potential a-wb decision, so that information is "lost". Of course with raw, no picture data is lost.

Ah I understand, and agree, but I find the cameras A-WB to be as easily fooled as auto exposure, it certainly doesn't know what "look" I am trying to achieve so I rarely find it of any practical use.

 

[Marsu42]

Ah I understand, and agree, but I find the cameras A-WB to be as easily fooled as auto exposure

But you're using older Canon 1d models, aren't you? From what I've heard awb has decisively improved recently like 5d2->6d/5d3, and on my 60d/6d it's consistent enough to give me hints in postprocessing when the lighting has changed w/o me noticing by looking with my bare eyes. And if awb screwed up, well, then I simply bulk copy/paste a fixed wb (which I usually do anyway).

 

[tron]

Too few choices in the poll. Anyway I leave it to Auto White Balance. I know it is not perfect but since I shoot raw I correct later.
In fact I find the Auto results rather pleasing for exterior environments. For interior environments I have to lower the temperature to make it look natural.