WhiBal

[Digital]

I would like to hear from CiC members who use a WhiBal card.
Thanks.

Bruce

[Manfred M]

Bruce I do own one. Frankly it is no better or worse than my other gray card targets.

I do use it when I do some studio work, but frankly I find I usually use my x-Rite ColorChecker Passport. It is a more flexible tool and lets me create a custom colour profile for the shoot, if I need to. The WhitBal just gives me a single neutral target.

[DanK]

I've used one for years, and I consider it (or an equivalent) absolutely essential. I use an older version of the pocket card. Works flawlessly. The version I have has a lanyard and a little plastic case, so you can tuck it in your shirt pocket without getting it dirty.

I use it to get a neutral starting point, but I sometimes adjust to taste from there.

[rpcrowe]

I also use one because of a recommendation by Donald. It works well and is pretty indestructible. I purchased mine well over five years ago and it has been with me since... I also use it as does Dan, to get a neutral start point and then I adjust the image to how I like it...

[William W]

I have the one Dan described - pocket sized and on a lanyard. I use (use to use often) this tool on location at each change of lighting scenario, for me much easier than using the grey card I previously used, because the grey cards I have are A5 size.

For (critical) work which would always be under controlled lighting, I have similar to Manfred, but much older - I still use my "Kodak Professional Color Handbook" it opens to an A4 size of two A5 standard colour swatches.

If you're wanting something portable, sturdy and very unlikely to fade or change colour, then the little pocket sized WhiBal is a good tool.

WW

[Donald]

I also use one, which given my preference for B & W photography may strike people as odd. However, if you think that getting the raw file correct for the conversion process to B & W is important, then a WhiBal is, perhaps whilst not a necessity, a pretty important tool.

[rpcrowe]

When Donald originally recommended the Whibal card to me, I thought it was petty expensive. However after over five years of concentrated use, the card is still in good shape. The prorated cost of the card is pretty minimal.

[xpatUSA]

When Donald originally recommended the Whibal card to me, I thought it was petty expensive. However after over five years of concentrated use, the card is still in good shape. The prorated cost of the card is pretty minimal.

Good point! Over a similar period of time, I've worn out three 8x10 Kodak R27 gray/white cards.

[William W]

I'd like to mention in regard to this topic (my procedures) run into one of two paths:

1. > the WhiBal (or similar tool) can be used to set reference point which is a known constant for each lighting scenario

2. > a white table napkin, or sheet of white A4 paper, (or similar) usually easily obtainable at any location, can be used to set a constant for each lighting scenario

In view of the fact that Post Production (mostly always) has a (largely) subjective factor to its blend and also considering the (lack of) absolute necessity to always produce a Final Image consistent to the absolute correct colour (i.e. the known constant) or in other words, to produce a Final Image with Colour, Tone, and Hue as it is in 'real life'; then, in mostly all situations all I require is a means to ensure I can easily attain consistency of the same colours, when those colours appear in different lighting scenarios at the same shoot. For example we shoot inside and then move outside for a portrait session. In these situations a piece of white paper is a suitable tool.

On the other hand there are the true technicians who will (rightly) argue that if you're going to have a constant, then it might as well be a known constant the same for every day, for ever: and I am not ever going to opt to debate the other side of that argument.

WW

[William W]

Good point! Over a similar period of time, I've worn out three 8x10 Kodak R27 gray/white cards.

Mine have faded, not at the same rate across the G Card. The W Cards have yellowed, slightly, again not all at the same rate across the card.

I refuse to admit that I have worn them out: they got old all by themselves.

They're weak and were never robustly built.

In the old days we would have termed them 'sissy'. Chuck would never have used one, neither would Bruce.

But that's not allowable in this politically correct world. However I do understand that because the world is in turmoil and so many folk have heartache and worry, a sense of politically incorrect humour is allowable from time to time: surely we do have to keep laughing in the face of adversity.

WW

[xpatUSA]

I'd like to mention in regard to this topic (my procedures) run into one of two paths:

1. > the WhiBal (or similar tool) can be used to set reference point which is a known constant for each lighting scenario

2. > a white table napkin, or sheet of white A4 paper, (or similar) usually easily obtainable at any location, can be used to set a constant for each lighting scenario.

<>

WW

Interesting post, Bill, pardon the clip. Should work well so long as the spectral reflectance itself remains constant under different scene lighting. I've read that some kinds of paper and even some clothes washed in certain detergents can be influenced by UV, emitting low wavelengths to give a "whiter-than-white" look. Probably not enough to influence the dumb camera, though.

[xpatUSA]

In the old days we would have termed them 'sissy'. Chuck would never have used one, neither would Bruce.
WW

Tew roit, Brewce ...

You'd be proud of me. I just dug my 4x5 out of the camera bag and found it in pristine condition, having only used it twice since I bought it about 5 years ago.

Purpose was to shoot a gold ring headed for ebay and I needed to get the color close to correct.

[William W]

Interesting post, Bill, pardon the clip. Should work well so long as the spectral reflectance itself remains constant under different scene lighting. I've read that some kinds of paper and even some clothes washed in certain detergents can be influenced by UV, emitting low wavelengths to give a "whiter-than-white" look. Probably not enough to influence the dumb camera, though.

Yes. Good catch Professor.

I edited my original before posting it. What I had written seemed convoluted and lacking in simplicity of meaning. I was actually lost for a construction to make it better. As it stands, I think that what I did post also remains a bit convoluted; I am glad you made some sense of it.

I had originally written this (bold and underlined is what I deleted). . .

"In view of the fact that Post Production (mostly always) has a (largely) subjective factor to its blend and also considering the (lack of) absolute necessity to always produce a Final Image consistent to the absolute correct colour (i.e. the known constant) or in other words, to produce a Final Image with Colour, Tone, and Hue as it is in 'real life'; and to also ensure an exact relationship between those colours, then, in mostly all situations all I require is a means to ensure I can easily attain consistency of the same colours, when those colours appear in different lighting scenarios at the same shoot. For example we shoot inside and then move outside for a portrait session. In these situations a piece of white paper is a suitable tool."

Your comment allows my comment to make more sense - thank you.

WW