That's a Bullshit reply Jim ;o) If you'd read the whole post you would have noted I referred to hi-bit (common parlance for more than 8-bit) image files. Digital cameras CANNOT process the flash information as it arrives (on the fly) to jiggle whatever: how would that work for tailflash? What they can do *FOR OUTPUT* is convert the "raw" internal files into WB-adjusted 8-bit per channel files. There, you have your jpegs ... Now if the user always downloads the raw anyway, what is the problem? Can't the software equally well post-process the 10-, 12- 16- or whatever they are bit per channel files to yield the shot with a different colour balance? I'm interested though: how do digital cameras "do" WB? When are the decisions actually made? When are they implemented by the system? Is any processing done before the data gets moved from the CCD to the "raw-file" or is it all as the monochrome R,G,B and G channels are translated into RGB. Bob > B <snapper@st-abbs.fsnet.co.uk> wrote/replied to: > > >Obviously once the flash has fired there's little time to do an "auto-colour-balance" on the fly. So if it's looking at ambient lighting before the > > Not true. A digital camera can easily change the image balance after > the shot is taken depending on the WB reading it's got from the image. > Amazing isn't it? > > Always set your WB to something other than auto and you'll get > consistant results that you can easily correct in PS. Otherwise you'll > never know if you really do have another problem like the strobes or > background. >
