[ QUOTE ]
I'm confused how you and the others are assumptions on how CWB works. My impression was that it basically creates a filter when you take the test shot. All that happens next, irregardless of the image, is this filter will be equally applied to each image.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have reproduced the process using only the information in the CRW file, so I know that my explanation is "correct" at least to the extent that this thread has discussed.
[ QUOTE ]
As an aside, when PS CS first came out I found that its raw converter could not read manually set WB's (I do this often). Adobe confirmed this to be a "feature." Adobe also told me that they can't read canon's WB setting or don't want to take the time to make their converter work with every camera with raw capability (I got conflicting stories from the help line). Therefore, they do their own. Hence, why many people (eventually) found colors to be slightly different using adobe raw vs canon's converter.
[/ QUOTE ]
I can show you where this data is kept, at least on the D30 and the D60 CRWs. My understading is that Adobe used David Coffin's code as a basis for their converter - but only as a starting point, and David's code does not deal with all the metadata in the CRW files. His latest dcraw.c code is much improved in its support of a very wide range of proprietary formats, and I will be updating my published data to make this information more available to others soon.
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
[ QUOTE ]
All this filter does is take the compliment of the color it's trying to correct for and apply it to the test shot just enough to make the test card correct. This "setting" is then applied to each succesive image. Again, and hopefully, without any consideration for your mistakes.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's my understanding. (That is, it applies the same correction to each successive image so long as you still have CWB in effect.)
Best regards,
Doug
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
OK, so I quickly glanced through the thread, and I didn't see a mention for this: in the EXIF data there is an entry for the WB "mode" utilized.
Now, as per a "coordinate" or tag of the actual white balance temperature used by the Digic processor, if it does exist, I'd think that's proprietary. It is frustrating to see that even with RAW pics looking up this information is not immediately evident when using the AWB setting.
It would be nice to have that as part of the file info when it is converted, for the 10D applies WB not based on the image cast itself, but on its light sensor, so going about by looking at an image cast that's already been processed makes it difficult to guess.
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
The WB used is in the EXIF structure, but it is in a "proprietary" tag. Many applications will understand this though, including IRFANview and others.
In terms of the post-conversion WB, I use Breezebrowser for normal work, and that does not alter any of the metadata (except for rotation ?). I agree that sometimes it would be good to know what the converter used in addition to the camera settings, but as there is no agreed standard for this, any application author will have to do it themselves.
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
Linear Mode
