Does anyone use a Color Temperature Meter?

shimokita

shimokita

白黒
Local time
6:55 PM
Joined
Aug 2, 2007
Messages
972
Years ago I used one, but the purpose was to add adjusting filters when using reversal color film... now it would be to manually set the digital camera / digital camera back.

I am in the process of hands on testing CFV backs for the 500-series (500 C/M with CFV-16 and CFV-50c). Both backs allow you to set the color temperature in real time based a sampling shot of (for example) a gray card... my use of the 'white bal' category selections (e.g. 'daylight') seem to be a off, at least with the CFV-16...

Aside from my testing with CFV backs, does anyone have experience shooting digital using a dedicated / external Color Temperature Meter?

Thanks,
Casey
 
I owned a cfv39 back for several years. There's really no reason to set color temp. Shooting raw files you need to shoot a color checker and sample the gray. I use a color checker, build a profile, apply the profile and same a neutral patch. The color is superb when you create your own profiles.

When I started using my own custom profiles I was amazed at how inaccurate the color had been using stock Hasselblad profiles.
 
Unless shooting a scanning back, the general professional way seems to be to shoot raw and fix that in the postproduction - no single shot digital back I am aware of will do analogue stage colour balancing, and the internal image processors are bound to be years behind current software on your computer.
 
A color checker card is both a color temperature meter and a camera profile corrector. The color temperature meter would work only if the camera had a correct profile. My experience is with a Leica M9 and a Nikon D2x. I won't call any of the supplied profiles correct.

So in the days of film, one would measure the color temperature, select a filter, and live with the characteristics of the film, good or bad. With raw, you have complete control in post processing, only limited by patience and skill.
 
sevo said:
Unless shooting a scanning back, the general professional way seems to be to shoot raw and fix that in the postproduction - no single shot digital back I am aware of will do analogue stage colour balancing, and the internal image processors are bound to be years behind current software on your computer.
Click to expand...

The CFV series backs have an option to set color balance but all this does is preset it in the raw software. This can be over ridden by using the eyedropper or sliders. Nikon and canon do the same thing.
 
MRohlfing said:
I have one, but do not use it. I just was fascinated by that thing, so I bought it

It is the old Gossen Sixticolor, does not need batteries!

http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/ゴッセン_(カメラ)#/media/File:Thermocolorimètre_Sixticolor_Gossen_02.jpg
Click to expand...

They're beautiful, too (I have one) -- but they're not much use, as they are only 2-colour (red-blue). Three-colour meters are so expensive that most people would only buy one if they really needed it. Fortunately I got mine cheap at a closing-down sale, and it's quite useful for checking light sources. But I don't think I'd have bought it even then if I didn't write for the photographic press.

Cheers,

R.
 
Thank you for taking the time to comment... The more images that I post process from the CFV back the easier it is... but it's nice to be somewhat close right out of the camera. I am almost positive that the meter I was using in the late 50s was the Gossen Sixticolor, and I am still using my Luna-Pro light meter that was picked up in the 60s. And yes, the Sixticolor is a two-color meter... if I could find one I might give it a try, if for nothing else than benchmarking some typical lighting conditions ;-)

Today I did some testing... following the procedure from the CFV user documentation to manually set a white balance reference in-camera using a "gray card"... the results were quite good, but not something I want to do often as when the light conditions are not consistent... e.g. moving from outside, to inside, to the metro, etc.

I shoot mostly film, so my workflow is weighted toward using TIF files, a limited number of film types, and minimal post processing... In the next week or so I will be testing the CFV-50c.

Here is one of the photos I took earlier today with the 500 C/M, Planer 80 f/2.8 T*, and CFV-16...

A8441348.jpg


Thank you again for the comments...
Casey
 
If you're not willing to do a good bit of post processing the Hasselblad backs aren't for you. The files contain huge amounts of data well beyond most DSLRs and require knowledge and perfecting a workflow to extract it. If you want files out of camera with little processing get a consumer DSLR.

Not trying to be rude but the image you posted doesn't show you have command of your back or files. Your highlights are blown out and shadows are cold and bordering blocked. The cfv16 has large pixels which many prefer for the depth of image they produce. This image falls way short of what this back can do.

In all honesty and again not trying to be rude, you're probably better off with a 35mm format DSLR.

What are you processing your files in? I used both Phocus and LR. LR gave the advantage of more selective controll but Phocus was designed to just process the CFV files and could produce very rich images. Phocus though takes time to learn. Any raw converter takes time to learn how to extract the most from a file and every camera requires different treatment. My cfv39 was completely different than my M9 and my D880 and Df.
 
If you use strobe: flash tube age, flash duration, UV vs Non UV tubes ... will have a significant impact in color temperature.
There are several color meter apps available for iPhone and Android.
 
rlouzan said:
If you use strobe: flash tube age, flash duration, UV vs Non UV tubes ... will have a significant impact in color temperature.
There are several color meter apps available for iPhone and Android.
Click to expand...

The nasty problem with flash colour is that deviations there tend to be temporal (that is, exposure time or discharge cycle segment related) or out of spectrum (UV or banding related), rather than the spectral errors which a CTM can catch. Even Polaroid was no real safeguard due to its different response - you really had to run a test strip on flashes from a rental you had no long, good experience with.
 
Thanks rlouzan, sevo... your points about flash are appreciated and well-taken...
Not a big user of flash at the moment, but I have lick a few light bulbs over the years...

Certainly my recent testing and discussions (here and with others) have been, from my perspective, very useful. Most likely I will pick up (or app-up) some type of CTM device...

Again thanks to all who took the time to comment...
Casey
 
CTM for flash...

CTM for flash...

sevo said:
The nasty problem with flash colour is that deviations there tend to be temporal (that is, exposure time or discharge cycle segment related) or out of spectrum (UV or banding related), rather than the spectral errors which a CTM can catch.
Click to expand...

According to Sekonic, it seems that their C-700 SpectroMaster (available Dec 2014 in Japan) "can precisely measure LED, HMI, Fluorescent sources, new-style plasma lamps as well as tungsten lamps, natural light, and electronic flash." JPY 148,536 at one of the big electronic stores in Tokyo after discount (USD 1,235 at current exchange rates)...
 
shimokita said:
According to Sekonic, it seems that their C-700 SpectroMaster (available Dec 2014 in Japan) "can precisely measure LED, HMI, Fluorescent sources, new-style plasma lamps as well as tungsten lamps, natural light, and electronic flash."
Click to expand...

Right. But that thing is a the latest and greatest, a full spectral meter. Quite a way off the film age R/B or YUV colour temperature meters available used.

Live digital compositing ("virtual studios") has grown mainstream in TV, and it creates very high demands on colour matching the illumination, or the talking head will drop out of the CGI background. There is a market for a $1700 list light spectral meter right now - but it is outside photography (and even cinematography), where colour matching and adjustment in the post is easier than ever before...
 
sevo said:
Right. But that thing is a the latest and greatest, a full spectral meter. Quite a way off the film age R/B or YUV colour temperature meters available used.

Live digital compositing ("virtual studios") has grown mainstream in TV, and it creates very high demands on colour matching the illumination, or the talking head will drop out of the CGI background. There is a market for a $1700 list light spectral meter right now - but it is outside photography (and even cinematography), where colour matching and adjustment in the post is easier than ever before...
Click to expand...
YUV?

What does the new meter do that a Colormaster doesn't? I inquire from a position of genuine ignorance.

Cheers,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
YUV?

What does the new meter do that a Colormaster doesn't? I inquire from a position of genuine ignorance.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

It can alert to narrow-band spectra, and displays a continuous spectrogram. That (and the price) sounds as if it has a regular spectrometer embedded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom