Thank you www.cameracanada.com for the Canon loaner! Let's all go to Camera Canada tonight! If you buy today's gear through my affiliate links, I can go to white balance college to learn the ways of our world. It's about cameras trust me. White balance card amzn.to/3CmfisD Fuji XH2s amzn.to/3BS5ciT or bhpho.to/3N637ms Zeiss Touit 12mm f2.8 amzn.to/3ccbVK9 or USED amzn.to/3Qz9nEN or bhpho.to/3BIqLmg or USED bhpho.to/3Sqk91B Canon 6D II amzn.to/3v3QGjQ or bhpho.to/3PrdaDE or USED bhpho.to/3IUuhLG Canon 16-35mm f2.8 III amzn.to/3v6E0sB or RENEWED amzn.to/3Ps8hKw or USED amzn.to/3RNrpEz or bhpho.to/3PIfuWD or USED bhpho.to/3IWa5Jt Sony A7S III amzn.to/3RJ4lXo or USED amzn.to/3J9yD1T or bhpho.to/3yeUW0q or USED bhpho.to/3v0Ql1l Sony 20mm f1.8 amzn.to/3RQ4jNG or USED amzn.to/3v0QBNR or bhpho.to/32ZbD4l Olympus EM1 III amzn.to/3x914Za or USED amzn.to/3NM6nTZ or bhpho.to/3dp7UPL Olympus OM-1 amzn.to/3gW4dCT or bhpho.to/3H2adVf Olympus 12mm f2 amzn.to/3aiz1NS or USED amzn.to/3MaMDrO or bhpho.to/3utrUKK Instagram instagram.com/vegetablepolice/ All my gear and recommended products can be found in my affiliate shop, thanks for shopping around! www.amazon.com/shop/vegetablepolice
Great stuff from you as usual thanks a lot. I just thought about it and realised that its really only half the problem because after white balancing and then perhaps colour correcting there's another great hurdle to jump and that is the screen the final production is viewed on. Be it a phone, computer monitor or large TV. They all have there own colour casts and inaccuracies even the few that may of been critically calibrated.
Have you tried correcting the white balance using a X-Rite ColorChecker? Would be interesting to see if that would get them to all be the same... or would the result still be different over the different footage.
In the film era, with the C41 negative process, Fuji was a warmer process and Kodak produced a colder output, despite both being calibrated every few hours with a pre-exposed negative film test strip and the resultant colours read by a sophisticated colour measuring device. Photographers used to choose where to get their film processed (Fooj lab or Kodak lab) based on the intended final tone of the image. The Ph value of the developer was one of the main deciding factors, slightly more alkali (controlled by adding sodium hydroxide in 5ml amounts to 20L) made the process warmer, and adding a small amount of acid would make it colder. I can't remember a time when when white balance 'standards' were anything but different, which stings a bit if you shoot more than one photo system from different manufacturers and try to put together a portfolio of images of one subject shot with different cameras, trying to achieve a uniform look.
@Phillip Banes I think it was more than just film type. If you shot Fuji daylight balanced C41 and Kodak Daylight C41 colour neg under the same conditions, and then processed them in each process you get a different version each time. We tested it years ago when I was a commercial film processor at a pro lab in the eighties. We shot Fujicolour 200 daylight of a studio subject twice. We processed one film in house in our Fuji accredited process and sent the other to the local Kodak lab and the results were different. Kodak results were always cooler looking. The same was true when repeating with Kodak film. In both cases the processes were controlled to a pre exposed test strip of each film base
Anthony La Pani recently had a video about one of his computer programs he bangs on about - I think Cinematch - can match any cameras white balance and color science. This topic about wonky white balance could be irrelevant for videographers, but not so much for photographers. You've got to understand that the piece of glass that sits on top of the sensor - called the low pass filter - is a combination UV/IR and blur (AA filter). So it is supposed to cut out Ultra violet light rays from 300 Nano meters to 700 Nano Meters - which is all that humans can see between 300nm to 700nm. Okay but they put in crappy Low pass filters that might let in more UV light, but they definitely have the Infra Red set beyond 700nm to perhaps 780nm to enable the camera user to put on an Infra Red filter that cuts out light below 700nm (Visible light) - and infra red is heat (Temperature). That is used for INfra Red photography, but it requires very long shutter speeds. So our cameras can record things our eyes can't see........... Now this is part of why the White balance is messed up in so many cameras. The cameras are recording false colors from non-visible light. I've seen things on insects - paterns - that the naked eye see's, but the camera does not record. Where's the color science in that scenario. Thats because the low pass filter combo UV/IR is cutting out at the wrong points in the visible light spectrum. Get a Hoya UV/IR cut filter which properly cuts out UV and IR at the right points. Of course the white balance is off because the camera is also partly seeing and recording heat or UV rays in a colorful way. If you replaced your Low Pass filter with a piece of glass you will have a "Full Spectrum Camera" and could potentially capture ghosts.
My Fujis still baffle me with the white balance. Auto is always wrong, but every other setting also seems to have issues. For instance, if I set WB manually without a card, if good skin tone = awful greens... and vice-versa. When Greens look ok, blue skies also look purple. It's also painfully difficult to dial-in manual WB, especially on my X100V. I hate shooting RAW, but I tend towards it more often these days.
It has different algorithms. White priority gets a surgical white in warm lighting even though the eye neverr adapts, so it looks unrealistic. Ambience priority is more natural, closer to what the eyes sees. Auto is usually in the middle, so it works well when you have two types of lighting in the shot.
And btw, never custom bqlance. You cannot really calculate a new matrix from a single white because color error must be optimized for a range of colors, so the color matrix breaks. A proper custom setting requires a colorchecker card.
I just found you through your mini tripods video. I don't necessarily use my camera a lot but I thought you were funny and I liked the chill vibes of the videos. Not trying to be all extra energetic or anything. Had to subscribe after that even if I'm not super big into cameras.
Both white balance and tint can vary between two different copies of the same camera because of sensor differences. This is normal and it's why you always calibrate cinema cameras to each other in the prep before shooting.
Did you checked out the original look of the Astia film stock? Looks correct in my eyes! :) but it's a strong 'look' for sure... can you make the same video with all the log profiles? this would be a neutral starting point! Greetings from Berlin :D
I’m watching this video on my phone with night-mode turned on, with fluorescent lights in my peripherals in a neon pink room while periodically looking at another uncalibrated monitor just so I can be extra confused.
I've been playing with the Fooj's white balance for a few months . I set Kelvin value to something close to what it ought to be , EG 5000 - 5500 for mainly daylight scenes and then click right again in the WB menu to get to the correction value grid of B-Y and M-G and start correcting via the LCD to get the most natural looking output with respect to the different colours of all the different light sources within a scene. It seems to give better results than relying on auto or 'simple' Kelvin settings on their own
@@ared18t There seems to be enough of an adjustment latitude to improve the match between what you're seeing with your eye, and what the camera saves to the card in most cases.
aah .it seems Olympus are really capable at video.if they release ff with all of current tech i would buy it over r5c and any sony. look at that canon.glory upon us with poor 1080p
The former program analyst in me says that you need to test the bodies with the same lens, which would be the control, in order to really see what differences there are. That's obviously impossible. You could also test each body with several different lenses so you could see what color biases the lenses have. Failing either of those, you wind up just seeing which combo you like best. That isn't scientific but it's really the important point anyway. On a different note: WTF happened with the sound, especially the first half of the video? So hissy and lots of background noise.
And I think setting the cameras to their ‘standard’ profile would have been fair. And it is true and often overlooked, different lenses (especially from different manufacturers) will give you different colours.
Boy this proves sony color science sucks. If you pause it at the awb comparison the sony somehow manages to make the green leaves in the background green and orange at the same time. For not having nikon in the mix you should be cancelled. And no one shoots Olympus even though they have better color. And for your efforts you deserve one million likes and subs. Edit: AUTUMN leaves and cinetone is great thats why im getting a fx3 Sony cyan be damn
I’ve used the white-card manual white balance for years with my XT1 and now XT4. It’s always worked really well for me. When you did it, all three cameras ended up too yellow. Are you sure you didn’t over-expose the white card? Being a videographer, you might have resisted stopping down or using a high shutter speed. Also, on my Fuji, the instruction prompts on the screen make you think you only need to hit the OK, but you do need to actually release the shutter. I’ve made that mistake myself a few times. Or maybe it’s just a problem with all the these cameras?
or maybe it just plain sucks compared to canon. if you've used one brand. sure, your world is small. but our studios rent different brands and we noticed similar results
Great topic and a timely reminder that I need to pack a white reference card in my bag, which brings me to… Which bag are you using these days? I remember you really liked the PGYTECH OneGo and after watching your review, I’m considering one. (Carrying a - yeah, I know - Olympus OM-1, a handful of lenses, travel tripod, and the usual odds and ends.)
I hope you were downloading WB with that gray card and not the white card you kept showing. The white card is for checking if the color is white but the gray is for WB download
I've learned to use Multi metering with AWB for wildlife photography. Please correct me if I am wrong and what other WB and metering settings for other types of photography. Cheers 🍕📸
And everybody sees different colors, brightness and contrast on his monitor or smartphone. The human eye fixes most of the smaller differences as long as you don't see the clips side by side.
@@Aksunkuvat The fun part on this is, that a lot of the creators are using calibrated monitors and equipment but none of the viewers. If you produce for cinema or Netflix-kind of content, it's obviously important but on RU-vid more than 50% are watching on smartphones and I'm sure less than 0.1% on calibrated monitors.
@@Ulrich.Bierwisch yay, I'm in the 0.1%. :P But I totally agree, I always used to grade my videos in sRGB and not AdobeRGB because I think 99% of people watch it that way.
You have to use the grey side of that reflector thingy for manual white balance not the white one. Also set the Sony AWB to white priority if you want accurate colours.
I just discovered your channel and it saddens me to think about all of the time I wasted watching any other camera channel. I'm not sure if there is any truth to what you're saying in any of these videos, but you make me laugh.
LMAO the 6D Mk II was by far the most natural looking colour. You must live on Mars if you think those 2 had better colours. The Fuji was actually all over the place and same with the Olympus. You might want to view the video on a calibrated monitor and not a smartphone.
Color is off because your are in a green environment. Your white balance card reflect some green at some point. You can put white foam boards on the ground around you like they do in cinema or fashion shoots.
White Balance was never meant to be a standard amongst all cameras. It is a level set respective to each camera/manufacturers color science and sensor. This is so the editor/colorist can color grade and match camera angles/scenes per project across the entire timeline. No one serious uses multiple cameras from different manufacturers in different color profiles and expects them to match. Yes it would be nice if there was a standard for RU-vid hobo scrubs, but the pros have this under control and is not a problem.
I'm assuimh you're referring to the color filter array (which is usally a bayer filter), do you have a source for that? I always assumed that all bayer filters are the same but perhaps not. Then again, you can see the same sensor look different on different manufacturers, because there's also color science. I'm betting most of the difference is the color science, if not all, and the sensor itself should also have some impact but I'm not sure what other contributing factors are there that impacts the colors than the CFA.
@@berkertaskiran The filters are massively different and lenses of each brand are a little different themselves. Then, the transformation to something with proper color on a display is a color matrix that can be calculated in many ways depending on the priorities of the brand. Then, there are different approaches to estimating the white temperature of a scene.
@@berkertaskiran If you google sensors, the datasheets typically include a graph with the filter responses. Some manufacturers go for high purity, some allow infrared and overlay. The color matrix is a mathematical transform that converts the sensor color components to a reference. What the press call color science is this transform which happens in linear light, any additional color controls, and the LUT used to map the linear light to the display gamma.
@@aristotle_4532 I don't see any information regarding the differences in individual bayer filters between different sensors. I can see wavelengths of colors in some data sheets but I am not able to find any information as to what contributes to that (or perhaps I'm not able to understand it as it is more math than I can comprehend.) Whether if it's the specific colors used in bayer filter or something else, like, say, electric voltage or something like that. How about you share some soures with us in this regard? IR filter is an additional filter used on sensors that is not a part of a CFA and it exists on most digital cameras if not all.
Rumors say that Nikon was sulking in a corner as it was not invited to this very important White Balance meeting. Meanwhile, Panasonic doesn't care. They don't even care to launch a new FF camera. Jokes aside - would be nice if you could rent any Nikon and compare all five brands on colors/WB. Or just have fun tweaking settings to crazy(like a vlog in daylight at 4000 Kelvins)
Olympus seems to me the best..and Fuji close second. Sony is terrible and crushed? What is going on there? Canon is coolish but ok..(Canon is unsharp?)
It's the bayer sensor RGB isn't. The red doesnt just pass red the blue doesnt just pass blue and the green doesn't just pass green. each is mostly passing their primary colour but also some other wave lengths to an extent. In a Black Magic pocket Cinema camera it has very little IR cut which tends to add red into the blacks. The filters are different between brands maybe even between cameras to an extent. So everything is a bit different and brands tend to go for it looks good rather than accurate.
I'm not Sony family, but as my test Sony do the best WB maybe it does green reflex correction on your skin. Becose all other camera has this green and yellow reflex.
Glass can throw the camera's auto WB off. My 58 mm Voighty would notoriously do so; and when the main light source was hitting the lens within some specific range of angles, boy, things would turn orange. As to the footage: I liked Sony custom WB best after Canon. Oly tends to like yellowish greens too much for my taste, and Fuji takes it even further.
of all your videos i see your "red" t-shirt go from variance to variance of red, orange, weirdness as you go from camera and setting....but the enternal question i always ask is.... what IS the true representation of your real life red t-shirt ? which camera actually shows life in its true colours... only YOU can tell us. I can balance (in camera) for my reds and then i notice my greens are not the same as what "i" see. is there a camera that can show life as it is? On a side note do you use an x-rite colorchecker card along with the color balance for x-rite in davinci ?
Are you sure your white card is actually neutral? If you try it under artificial lights of various kinds, does it stay neutral? How much does it glow if you shine a UV light on it?
Different glass also produces different colors if not use color checkers. That sony thought, lmao. You had a lot green background grass trees which reflects from skin also, can try do same test in the city, results could be different. Fuuj was kinda on the warm side on custom wb, then again would had to be there psychilly to judge how u really looked at that moment and time.
to my knowledge every lighting condition needs its own white balance PLUS every camerasystems respectively. so a direct comparison is somewhat...rubytuby?
just a thought: maybe lens coatings and element materials will mess with the WB. I can't imagine my lens with an amber reflecting front element will render the same as the one that reflects greenish. But i agree, kelvin seems to be just as variable as ISO sensitivity. Change brands or even just camera bodies and all the numbers become nothing more than rough guidelines. just don't time shutter speeds...
WB is mind bugging and the green environment you are shooting in is notoriously a tricky one. What you see in the field is not what you see at home. I'm guessing 5800K to be good one for the Sony.
I'm waiting for the black balancing video. On a serious note, I wouldn't white balance on grass. I can see the green on people's skin and avoid shooting on grass if possible. I also hate trees and bushes as background.
This may sound counterintuitive, but, it is better to use the gray side of the card for setting white balance, especially when you're using auto exposure. Notice at 7:14 when you raise up the white card your exposure changes, which affects the colors, hence affecting your camera's attempt to AWB the image. The gray side of the card will have less of an effect on your exposure; making it easier for your camera to adjust the white balance.
@@Kenriko Still have a little bit of buyer remorse after jumping to A7Siii, stay for the spec but I definitely miss my Canon quality of life aspect Edit: A7Siii not FX3
My Cannon M50 say's to take a picture of something white before assigning it as a custom white balance... IDK ? would a white A4 sheet of paper do? Thanks
@@jlinc187 thanks for your reply. I'm new to the Art. I've been using ISO/Shutter/Aperture for exposure in manual mode.... I'm just not sure what the best settings are for WB or how to correct in while shooting. Thanks
@@jlinc187 What? Absolutely 100% wrong, white balance assumes 18% as natural, so set’s the rest of the colour temps around it. You obviously don’t shoot mate….dear me…. Look on every RU-vid channel on white balance and they use 18% card (grey).
@@FreshnessStudio1 Yes because the camera accounts for that during the conversion process. But manual WB is pick something middle gray and balance of that. It’s super easy….the reason everything was skewed in this video is that he used custom balance (which looks for 18% grey) to balance out and he used white which sent it wobbly.
Dude, white balance won’t be the same on all cameras if you apply filters over it. Though it still balances the colour it does so under the effect of the filters applied. In theory, need to shoot them all in RAW, balance with the Grey Card and then compare. They still won’t be the same…ideally, you need to build an individual profile from a colour card for each camera then apply in post for them all to match, then apply filters in post.
@@DrunkDelilahBrewery I've done both, they are very different. Been doing the grey side for years, figured I'd try the white. Regardless, they would have all had the same differences and that's the point of the video, to see how different cameras balance the whites.
@@DrunkDelilahBrewery You seem to change your point. Initially you say the filters are an issue and then you say that it’s balancing off a gray and not white card that is a problem…
@@gunn1ng All filters colour the picture to some extent, so I chose not to argue on that point. I am correct in my claim on 18% Grey Card. Unless your camera uses White to set it’s balance and some camera software allows for this, there is a reason why 18% grey exists….but you do you mate.
@@chefineer it might be so. Also first versions or first generation cameras are always the best. I heard this in one video here on youtube. A6400 first versions were good, newer versions probably have "improved" color science but are not as good are older one. I have frist version of A6400 and also bought last batch of it. Last batch is not good as first one. Poorer color IMO.
No one would hate us if we weren't so good. No one cares about the runner that comes in 7th place, but they do care about the runner that wins almost every race.
Differences in WB are not that pronounced with these cameras. Not as big as differences in colours at least. Of course DR17 even this out more precisely, but differences in colors between these cameras cannot be solely attributed to differences in WB. BTW Fuji looks much cooler @5200K and Olympus is not that much cooler than Sony and Canon and that would explain why it is so warm after custom WB. Something is f.. up in Fuji.
Getting white balance correct is a bit tricky in run n gun situations. Thankfully, on the GH5M2, GH6, and S5, one has a Vectorscope that is displayable while you tweak the Kelvin value and tint etc. It could be my monitor a bit out of calibration, but I found that turning down the Kelvin value by 200 degrees in the cooler direction from "perfect" white (achieved with on screen Vectorscope) seemed to mesh better with my eyes auto adjusting to the scene, which is very subjective. Still need more tests. I make my own corrective LUTs (not creative) which is critical to getting the most out of your camera. Look at my cinema like highlights on this footage ... it's not even log footage: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-69__eIq6ZN0.html - I'm still learning. My color chart of choice is the DSC Labs ChromaMatch Pro and I expose a test / calibration source shot in controlled lighting to middle grey for the 6th swatch as defined in the documentation, then in Resolve I can neutralize inaccuracies in white balance throughout the exposure range (white balance can be correct in mid tones for example but could be off a bit in highlights), and a quality color chart can show you this. You then generate LUTs for each of your cameras. So long as your white balance is correct in the field, you can then apply the LUT and things look correct. In my case, I remove in camera tone mapping from various color profiles, such as Natural. One might wonder why you'd use Natural as opposed to a Log profile. Well, in lower light conditions or in conditions where the extra dynamic range isn't warranted, or in situations where you want to shoot slow motion but are limited to 8-bit, my method allows me to convert Natural to log luminance and then do exposure tweaks (offset) in my own log space, then convert to a Rec709 like look with another LUT. Normalized gain in a node prior to the log LUT. Then my own custom tone mapping in the Rec709 space. I can replicate that nice highlight rolloff you'll get scammed $20,000 for by Canon (within reason) ... because I'm understanding how the camera works. The techniques I've developed on my own (none of the RU-vidrs had the answer they just said buy even more expensive cameras) aids in matching colors too, you get a much closer match in post and then can do minor tweaks. I can match GoPro flat profile to S-LOG. I can match your Sony colors to Canon color science, so color really doesn't matter too much. Don't be a scrub. So long as your camera isn't a potato you are good to go. Learn how to get the most out of your camera. Don't get scammed by upgrading to something else (Citation, Exhibit A: the devastated look on Kasey's face after his new Fuji purchase). Kasey, I hope you did leave it by the garbage bin where it belongs. I'm just trying to help.
