Nikon, D750, how to see what value auto white balance chose in preview ?

[Darryl Kerney]

Is there any way to find out what value the camera's auto white balance chose in the image info on board the camera ?
By that I mean without transferring the image to computer to view the detailed exif data.
If there is I can't seem to find it.
I am considering getting a Luxli Viola M2 which is a light that can produce any color temp from 3000K to 10,000K, so it would be great to be able to check what value the camera's auto WB chose (for an image that looks right in preview) and then dial the camera and the light to that same value to provide some extra light at the same color temp as what the camera measured.
It seems to me that should be standard info that would be shown in the image info on board the camera, they show us all sorts of other info that is stored in the exif data but not the actual white balance value, surely it wouldn't be a problem to include that would it ?
I shoot only in RAW, but the preview image we see is of course the generated jpg based on our settings, with whatever WB setting we've chosen or whatever the camera's auto WB chose, it baffles me that we can only find that out (as far I know right now) by loading the image to computer instead of being able to find out on the spot like we can for most of the other parameters.

[Darryl Kerney]

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...era_rgbaw.html

[mikesan]

I am considering getting a Luxli Viola M2 which is a light that can produce any color temp from 3000K to 10,000K, ....

I shoot only in RAW, but the preview image we see is of course the generated jpg based on our settings, with whatever WB setting we've chosen

I don't have a direct answer to your question. But it seems to me that (provided the claimed specs are accurate) one would set the camera to the same WB temp as set on the lamp.

[Darryl Kerney]

I don't have a direct answer to your question. But it seems to me that (provided the claimed specs are accurate) one would set the camera to the same WB temp as set on the lamp.

Yes, but I want to know what the camera chose for white balance temp on auto, the only way I know of is to load the image onto computer and see what a raw file editor says the camera chose for "as shot" white balance, not possible in the field. I find it weird that Nikon would not show us that in the image info, it shows lots of other info much of which is not as useful as knowing what auto white balance decided was the right temp.

[dje]

Darryl

The only method I can think of doing roughly what you want is as follows:-

Take one shot of the scene you are interested in with WB set to Auto. Then change the WB mode to degK and take two or three shots with different temp and see how they look compare to the Auto WB shot (on the camera screen). You haven't got fine adjustment (or tint adj) with this but at least you should be able to find one image that looks close in WB to the Auto shot.

I don't think you'll get an accurate readout of Temp on the camera because I believe it actually uses WB multipliers for the red and blue channels rather than temp to adjust WB. These WB multipliers are contained in the file EXIF and are used to calculate Temp and Tint in the raw converter.

Dave

[Andrew1]

I haven't tried this with an unedited photo and I use "auto" for nothing so not too sure if it will give you what you want.

You don't say what editor you used. If you don't already have it, download Nikon's free processor Capture NX-D and open the picture.

Choose the white balance icon and you'll get the drop down menu on the right hand side. Out of the 20-something choices you'll see one option called Recorded Value. The slider shows the temperature. That Recorded Value is actually the temp for the stored photo so if you've changed it the value will be what you change it to.

To my thinking, if you open a raw shot that has not been adjusted it should show you what it was shot at. As I don't use Auto, all the raw ones I checked that have not yet been adjusted are all the same out of the camera. Again, it's a guess but maybe NX-D will show you what the camera's recorded WB was for each shot.

[Manfred M]

Darryl - I'm really not sure what you are trying to do here as absolutely nailing the colour temperature right on generally has very limited impact on your image quality.

Physiology has just as important a role in colour vision as physics. Our visual system is much more sensitive to changes in colour temperature at the low end (3000K) than at the higher end. Most people will not see a difference between an image take at a colour temperature of 5600K and 6500K. As you get up to the higher end of the range, our ability to detect the differences becomes even less sensitive (i.e. over 7500K or so).

I have found psychology also plays a role, especially in portraiture. I have found people prefer slightly warm skin tone to "accurate" skin tones.

Unless you are doing something quite unique, I suspect you are likely over-thinking this.

PS - I tend to avoid continuous light sources in my work and stick with flash. If I need to play with the white balance in a mixed light environment, I will gel my lights.

[xpatUSA]

Is there any way to find out what value the camera's auto white balance chose in the image info on board the camera ?
<>
I am considering getting a Luxli Viola M2 which is a light that can produce any color temp from 3000K to 10,000K, so it would be great to be able to check what value the camera's auto WB chose (for an image that looks right in preview) and then dial the camera and the light to that same value to provide some extra light at the same color temp as what the camera measured.
<>

If I were that bothered, my inclination would be to buy a colorimeter that can display temp/tint of a light source and plug those numbers into the Nikon.

Do many people here actually use AWB which, after all, is guesswork and quite easily fooled by many common types of scene?

[Manfred M]

If I were that bothered, my inclination would be to buy a colorimeter that can display temp/tint of a light source and plug those numbers into the Nikon.

Do many people here actually use AWB which, after all, is guesswork and quite easily fooled by many common types of scene?

I only know one person who owns one and he is a commercial food photographer and does work for the well known international brands. These tools are very expensive.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...ter_meter.html

[xpatUSA]

I only know one person who owns [a colorimeter that can display temp/tint of a light source] and he is a commercial food photographer and does work for the well known international brands. These tools are very expensive.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...ter_meter.html

Expensive indeed, Manfred - and overly accurate for what I had in mind, for example, sticking with B&H:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...ter.html/specs
.

[Manfred M]

Expensive indeed, Manfred - and overly accurate for what I had in mind, for example, sticking with B&H:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...ter.html/specs
.

As I don't own an iPhone I would have to buy one PLUS the attachment. Comes out close to the price of the Sekonic, I suspect. I'll bet the Sekonic lasts a lifetime and as Apple has been known to play with the connectors between models, I wonder how long the Luma Power will be good for.

[xpatUSA]

As I don't own an iPhone I would have to buy one PLUS the attachment. Comes out close to the price of the Sekonic, I suspect.

Comes out at half the price, even with a brand-new iPhone 8 plus.

I'll bet the Sekonic lasts a lifetime and as Apple has been known to play with the connectors between models, I wonder how long the Luma Power will be good for.

Well that does it, I suppose ...

... I fold, and retire beaten from this discussion.

[Manfred M]

Comes out at half the price, even with a brand-new iPhone 8 plus.



Well that does it, I suppose ...

... I fold, and retire beaten from this discussion.

Ted - don't bother folding. I can't see myself ever needing one (or buying an iPhone 8). Neither my equipment nor the type of photography that I do would benefit from a tool like this.

[xpatUSA]

Ted - don't bother folding. I can't see myself ever needing one (or buying an iPhone 8). Neither my equipment nor the type of photography that I do would benefit from a tool like this.

Manfred - in post #8, I was responding to Darryl, not to your good self ... I should have made that clear.