A7iii: Help me get the AWB right

[Bennel]

Hello all,

I have a really strange problem. Iam shooting landscape and general outdoor footage and often enough the AWB of the Sony is very yellow. I just dont get it right or Iam missing the correct setup in the camera. I shot a lot A/B comparison pictures with different systems to see how often it happens, and sadly, it happens a lot!

Examples can be seen in the attachements. The warmer/yellower pictures are not how it looks in nature. The cooler one's are nearly spot on.
Is there any way to get the Sony to not change into the warmer setting?

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[adwb]

are you aware that you can adjust the colour temp of the average white balance setting as well as all the other pre made ones?

[Bennel]

Yes I am. The problem is the camera gets the WB right in, lets say about, 3 of 10 pictures/Scenes. Then I would have to change the fine tuning again. That's not really satisfying.
In my attached pictures it would have been possible, but not in the forest between these two locations (because of the shadow and not sunlight lighting).

These strange White Balance shifts also occur often when shooting close up's of people. Suddenly the WB gets way more yellow.

I really dont get what is going on with the WB. Sometimes it's spot on but way more often it's warmer then it should be. It's driving me crazy the last weeks. ?

[tinplater]

RAW or JPEG?

[Bennel]

RAW.

[adwb]

can you please tell us if you use a fixed one; cloudy is a favorite catch all one; will the same shifts take place?

[sixzeiss]

Yeah, to stop the Sony choosing a AWB setting you need to set the WB manually. If its sunny, set Sunny, if its cloudy, set Cloudy ... and so on.

The fine tuning can help adjust for any bias that might exist in the system. But that is not your problem.

 

The AWB is trying to guess the correct WB setting by making the scene overall neutral (yellow-blue and green-magenta) so if you have a dominant color (autumn leaves) then it will probably get the WB wrong. If the camera can  guess what the scene is, then its AWB guess will be better.

 

Grey cards help.

[adwb]

Never loose sight of the important fact that both the exposure meter and that average white balance “ think “ in monochrome. 

The exposure meter  is looking for mid tone grey in a presented scene and adjusts  settings that will capture that grey in the best contrast available. That implies the blacks will be black and the whites will be white but  the blacks and white will contain detail.

The white balance as already mentioned also looks for mid tone grey and when it gets that right or wrong it sets the colour cast you see or not  see. 

So remember, green grass, skin tones, tarmac all are mid tone grey if they dominate an image they will be the colours that ,if correctly exposed , will look right and sometimes others can be off a bit. That is why all editing software has means to correct white balance either in Jpeg or Raw.

Now of course non of that explains the yellow tint you are seeing but does explain the variation in shots.

 

[Bennel]

Thank you all for your detailed information and knowledge.

Iam aware that the WB is just a guess from the camera and that the camera maybe doesnt have all the information it would need to set the correct WB. With my grey card I get better results overall, yes. But that should not the be necessary for okay-ish WB for travel and walk around. Some variation in WB wouldnt bother me either.

But, like I said already, the AWB gets way to warm/yellow in different lighting conditions. Not only in sunny daylight. Its around ~500K to warm.

Just recently I discovered the "PRIORITY SET IN AWB" Option. I set it to white and indoors its just perfect the most time. (If you want to see the difference here is a link: http://enthusiastphotoblog.com/2018/02/23/sony-a7riii-priority-auto-white-balance/ )

When changing this option from "White" to "Standard" it seems its exactly what happens under different lighting conditions. I would need this function for ALL circumstances, not only for artificial lighting. But it seems this isn't an option right now?

[sixzeiss]

Sony is a bit funny with WB ... right now, with lots of Autumn colors, I get no love with AWB. And in general its never really right, often OK, but does not cope well with non-normal situations.

And the typical Sony solution is to solve such problems with another menu setting!

 

Its a lost cause ... IMHO.

[Bennel]

13 minutes ago, sixzeiss said:

Sony is a bit funny with WB ... right now, with lots of Autumn colors, I get no love with AWB. And in general its never really right, often OK, but does not cope well with non-normal situations.

And the typical Sony solution is to solve such problems with another menu setting!

 

Its a lost cause ... IMHO.

The warmer tones aren't not always bad, sometimes it even looks better. But as you know, thats not the point of AWB. As can be seen in my 2 examples the greens are not green and often enough the blue sky is more to the magenta then blue. I dont like it at all.

Maybe someone will find a solution for it or Sony is reading this forum.

[VTC]

I find a trip to the color wheel keeps me from fretting too much about color. If I see a repeatable trend towards a certain direction I fashion a preset that takes care of it forever more with a click. (Ever consider using a color target?)

Edited November 14, 2018 by VTC

[LiveShots]

 

[Bennel]

Thank you for your additional ideas. ?

The point is I dont want to use a grey card/color checker anytime iam out shooting, it disturbs my creative process if you want to call it this way ? (Although I always have one in my bag)
And it's not a matter of color perception, it's a constant shift to the warmer tones in AWB.

Maybe you can try it for yourself: shoot a nice outdoor scene with AWB (all without fine tuning) and the same scene with sunny/daylight. You immediately should see the shift to the warms. I just dont get why the camera is off by this margin and have to admit I personally didnt see it without having the possibility of an A/B comparison.

But with the second system I got for a few weeks it was so frustrating seeing it spot on in AWB (nearly) all the time that iam loosing my fun shooting with my beloved Sony's now.
The only thing iam hoping right now is that Sony is reading this forum and tries to get it better with a future firmware update.

[adwb]

One last thought from me, I have not seen it suggested, or that you have, done a master reset.?

The reason I mention it is that one of my A7R2 bodies went "off" in awb after I messed with the settings in picture profiles, and despite returning them back to the default I had a blue cast.

The reset fixed that, but be warned all your button customisation ,function menus and memories get reset as well.

[Lescatalpas]

if you shoot raw, it makes no difference how you set the wb. when shooting raw you have to use a developer, like lightroom and here you set the color to your liking. wb settings are only  applied to the jpeg you see on your camera screen. 

[Bennel]

7 hours ago, adwb said:

One last thought from me, I have not seen it suggested, or that you have, done a master reset.?

The reason I mention it is that one of my A7R2 bodies went "off" in awb after I messed with the settings in picture profiles, and despite returning them back to the default I had a blue cast.

The reset fixed that, but be warned all your button customisation ,function menus and memories get reset as well.

Thank you for your advice, it's the first time I hear about this bug.
I have access to 2xA7R3 and 2xA7 3 and they all behave the same. So I dont think it's something in the settings what could be wrong. 

Lescatalpas: I know I can set the WB afterwards. CO get's it often enough quite good with the automatic options. (not always) But that's not the point of the AWB especially when other systems are getting right "out of the box". 

[adwb]

And one final comment on this topic, I used Various Pentax bodies for years and never ever had a problem with AWB, to the point where I never had to adjust even when I used a  colour checker.

But since I went over to Sony I have had several bodies and  have always had a slight issue with AWB and never had one that consistently agrees with a colour checker.

[EchoAlpha]

Your colors will be different per program, Lr does it's thing and Aurora HDR it's or even Capture One!! Just learned that Aurora HDR process in 36 bit (way more colors) where Lr 16 bit and Ps can be upped to 24 bit. Ok the Sony camera raw uncompressed 14 bit color!!! RAW lets you adjust the color to your eye. Most all monitors are 8 bit! I have found SpyderCube 

https://www.datacolor.com/photography-design/product-overview/spydercube/   with a monitor callabrated with the Spyder 5 Pro to start.

When processing the photo with the cube you need to follow a tutorial (watch a lot) the steps have to be followed for not only color but brightness. Then sync to your photo. You will be surprised. But another twist ISO invariance of the Mark 2 and 3 cameras know the ISO that would make a good bright image then the ISO you shot at and pre-brighten the stops you shot down to get rid of noise in post.

I can shoot a - 2 ev shot at ISO 50 then brighten to ISO 300 or 400 ev steps and colors as well as detail are way better than just a Auto shot. 

Lastly remember the final image will be just 8 bit jpeg if posted online only a TIFF image given to a printer will be at the bit color depth you ended with. If both jpeg and tiff are printed at the same printer they will be somewhat different. In that last printing your post processing image has to have the histogram bell curve almost centered for good brightness.

You also have to have a great monitor to start!!!!

Go out shoot a Milky Way in AWB it will be the most perfect jpeg and raw using an A7S/A7RM2/A7M3 as I have found. 

[Chrissie]

14 minutes ago, EchoAlpha said:

Just learned that Aurora HDR process in 36 bit (way more colors)

To avoid any misunderstandings/disappointments on this: Regardless which software processes an image, it can never increase the color resolution of the originally captured raw image. Resolution can never be increased during processing, only reduced.  (Where should the information for any increase in resolution come from, if it hadn't been captured by the sensor in the first place?)

[EchoAlpha]

Color range is also in the dynamic range if you can capture at ISO 50 you should get the most of all and with Mark 2 and 3 cameras you get ISO Invariance letting you shoot at a higher dynamic range at the lowest possible ISO. And yes I have not really figured the color bits from 8 to 36 bit without the best monitor to view. Just so much to play with and think of in post kinda takes the fun away, let the eye be happy - memory from a minute to a day or two later can not be verified for it is in the past and the photo is the only proof it ever happened - time stopped on paper!!!

[adwb]

And amen to that

[Bennel]

I have good understanding of color spaces and "color science" (whatever that means to anyone) and my monitor is calibrated of course. But I think this is not the point here and the last posts go a step further then needed.
When shooting with the mentioned different systems there is a clear difference in RAW. I only shoot RAW, no JPEG. I know that the EVF and LCD can represent colors different on different systems and I dont say that these are really accurate. But the difference stays and while viewing it in real life you can absolutely see the Sony's are way to warm in AWB often enough. (Not saying that the colder WB of the other system is spot on always!)

Iam working with CO and really like it. But it doesn't matter which RAW converter I use and tryed, the starting point of the other system is way better as the Sony's. Sadly. ? Iam hoping for a firmware update right now but iam sceptical it will happen anytime soon or with the Mark 3's in general.

Edited November 16, 2018 by Bennel

[Lescatalpas]

Let me try to say it in another way:

The white balance setting doesn't affect the image data in the RAW file.  Short answer: No, changing the WB does not affect the RAW image. It only effects the little jpeg you see on the back of your cam.  So, if you see different results then expected, it is your raw developer causing these differences. Probably some algorithm interpreting your raw file. For accurate wb settings, include a grey card in your photo and use that as a reference to set the wb right in your raw converter. In my opinion it is not your camera, but your software for post-processing. 

[Bennel]

4 hours ago, Lescatalpas said:

Let me try to say it in another way:

The white balance setting doesn't affect the image data in the RAW file.  Short answer: No, changing the WB does not affect the RAW image. It only effects the little jpeg you see on the back of your cam.  So, if you see different results then expected, it is your raw developer causing these differences. Probably some algorithm interpreting your raw file. For accurate wb settings, include a grey card in your photo and use that as a reference to set the wb right in your raw converter. In my opinion it is not your camera, but your software for post-processing. 

Sry if iam confused here. The image data in the RAW file is not changed, this is absolutely clear. But the camera has set a WB for the RAW. I think we all know this is a fact. I can set another WB for every image or use a preset and so on. But this is not what iam trying to achieve here. My problem is that the choosen WB is too warm in a lot of pictures while other systems get it way better. iam not talking of studio work but mainly for travel and landscape where i dont want to use my grey card all the time.

For the RAW converter: i just installed the trial version of ON1 Photo RAW 2019 just to test this out. Although iam not used to the software I gave it a short run and edited both files just for exposure and contrast very slightly. The difference in WB is the same as in Capture One although it looks different because the software starts the editing process from another point.

Again, iam sorry if iam understanding something wrong here, but I dont see it is only the RAW converters fault (or on my end).