Loading your original XMP, I read 28, 30, 34 (locked values in color picker). Picking with color balance I get 30, 30, 29. I’m wondering why you get might higher values, and so far away from grey.
Kofa, sorry about the exposure readings, I keep on resetting the history stack and adjusting the exposure… but I’m still getting a CCT of around 4400 K at best, with or without noise reduction. (I tried removing chroma noise early one, forgot to mention it. It doesn’t change much. I use the preset wavelets: chroma only. Darktable doesn’t have profiles for the x100v or x-pro3 yet.
We seem to be getting very different readings. I am on a Mac. Does it have anything to do with display profiles ?
I have another raw file, taken in better light with the same white balance issue between the legacy mode and the new color calibration, I’ll try to post it with a couple of screen shots.
white-balance2.raf (56.3 MB)
A new image with a lower ISO and the same problem.
First with the color calibration tool, exposure set at +1.5 and white balance taken from card (in center) The gray card reads (47,49,46)
@nwinspeare What do you have as your histogram profile…those numbers don’t match up with the image…no way your gray is 50-60…something is not right it is way brighter than that…just opening your image with no corrections at all no exposure or tone curves of any sort and the WB as you shot it… I get around 115-120 for your white card
I get the following numbers just pulling in your image…no exposure or anything…no filmic as shown above…
Camera WB as shot 4903 Gray card 114 116 112
Spot WB on whole image 4328 107 114 120
Spot WB on Grey card 4786 115 115 115
Color Calibration
Activated for the whole image 3688 113 121 127
Activated selecting gray card 4051 119 119 120
Others can try and share but your values loading into DT seem very low…
Adding around 1 ev give me the same trend with the gray now reading around 160…
I use export profile as my histogram profile and that determines your histogram and picker values …my export is usually sRGB…I think maybe you are on working profile which may be Rec2020 and this will give you lower values…
Perhaps someone can take a run at a better explanation. I want my histogram to match my exported file so I set it this way… There may be other or more correct uses…but I think this is you discrepancy when you are looking at C1
Ok, set histogram to export profile, soft proof profile to srGB, the other two are on system display profile. I now read (102,101,99) but when I copy the screen to affinity and get a colour picker, I read (134,135,133)
So then I discarded the history, and in darkroom switched off filmic and colour calibration.
With white balance module :
Camera WB as shot : 4903 grey card (102,101,99)
Spot WB on whole image : 4329 (95,99,107)
Spot WB on Grey card : 4596 (98,100,103)
With color calibration module on again , white balance set to camera reference:
Auto (just switched on) : 4047 (105,105,103)
AI detect from surfaces : 5002 (114,103, 87)
Spot WB on whole image selecting gray card 3875 (101,106,103)
Other question : the order of modules in the history stack is very different to yours…
History stack order means nothing. The left most tab in the modules group will give you the order that the modules are applied. This is the default if you set processing to none ie not legacy and not scene referred. I like to add what I want so I don’t commit to any preset. Also you dont need softproofing on thats just where you set the profiles. I may have had it selected in a screen shot after playing around with the settings. I selected a range on the gray card so we may get different values slightly…not sure. You can try the AI modes but AP has said mileage may vary with those. How are you spot WB with a range or single point?? You have sharpen on which might change the values slightly and the Affinity profiles are not a direct match they use some custom profiles so you would need to match up your icc profiles and even then I am not sure going between software like that you will get the same numbers. In the end what is more important is the channel balance that your arrive at not the numbers …if you add or subtract exposure you will bump the numbers up or down…Also unless you go in and turn it off Affinity adds a tone curve when you load a raw. Did you turn it off??
I think it should be shot closer as a larger image instead of a tiny patch in the screen and it should have even lighting no glare or shadows…for the best results anyway.
If you load it in affinity then it takes these default actions …if you paste it then you will likely get sRGB but its not going through the cms correctly so its not a good comparison to do it that way. If you disable all the affinity stuff and open the file then it should be closer although again not sure of the reference for their picker vs Dt picker etc…
Thanks everyone. The conclusion I came to is that the card is too small on the photo. I tried on a couple of photos where the card takes up a sizeable portion of the image and it works fine. I think I was a bit naive.
