Yes Frank you are totally correct - in theory.UncleFrank said:Let's take the leaves on a tree, illuminated by the sun at 3PM. They are a specific shade of green. Myrealeyz said:Yes but the point of my post was that "accurate" color balance doesn't really exist unless
you use something other than the human eye to measure the colors of not only every color in the scene
but also the picture in order to match them perfectly - even this won't matter much as each person
viewing the photo will perceive it a bit differently.
eyes/brain may see it as blue-green, while yours see it as red-green. But if you have the proper white
balance on your camera, the result will satisfy each of our senses of reality, even though they differ. Right?
Let me give an example:
Take 20 very high color standard photographers to the scene of the tree and leaf and sun and have one take a photo with the best white balance that can be achieved. Now all 20 photographers go back to the house and they open the file on the computer and all look at it. Do you think all 20 of them will see the same exact color balance as the scene and agree the white balance is spot on? In theory they absolutely should yes IF each persons brain did the exact same trick in the fild as it did at home looking at the monitor, but in reality each persons brain works differently in different situations in altering colors to more closely make lighting look neutral.
And when you add in the fact that a scene is composed of so many different lights and temepratures and reflections and bounced light with different temperature and you eye/brain combination doing many different tricks to alter each of those lights to become more neutral you have an exercise in futility to try and get your camera to white balance most scenes properly.
Am I making any sense or am I totally out in left field?