RAW - vs - red filter & white balance

[aquayle]

Expert opinion sought - I normally shoot in RAW & then set white etc. in photoshop. Is using a red filter & setting white balance then shooting in RAW better ??

[Rod]

I do the same as you currently do and it works for me.

[ChristianG]

Originally Posted by aquayle

Expert opinion sought - I normally shoot in RAW & then set white etc. in photoshop. Is using a red filter & setting white balance then shooting in RAW better ??

In a word? NO!

Filters, of any type, remove ambient light and particularly if you're not shooting with a strobe that is critical.

[Cussy]

Originally Posted by ChristianG

Filters, of any type, remove ambient light and particularly if you're not shooting with a strobe that is critical.

Aquayle,
As it says your location is Tenerife then you will probably have enough ambient light to use a filter; Magic Filters are cheap and seem to produce good results. If you were in the UK I would echo Christian's comments. Filters do have their place, but as with anything in underwater photography they aren't the answer all of the time.
Rob

[String]

Raw and photoshop for me. Not owning a strobe all my photography is ambient light and in the UK that means not a lot. The last thing i need is a filter further reducing that forcing me to further decrease shutter speed and so on.

[infernalzen]

i havent got strobes.
use alot of wb cal when in the tropics.
i find most picts need no adjustment +save alot of time.

but shooting in raw will give superior results? if any adjustments are reqd

[Mike Ward]

Give it a try and see. You don't need a proper underwater red filter for a quick experiment, any transparent red item will do, Quality Street used to have a very nice deep red sweet wrapper that was ideal. If it looks like there are benefits, get the proper filter.

[witchieblackcat]

I subscribe to the theory that you get as much right as possible in the camera therefore I set the white balance manually underwater and shoot in raw.

I get to tweak the white balance on the computer later if necessary.

As said before: filters remove light not change the colour. Using them will mean you have less light to play with giving longer exposures etc. Personally I never bother with them.

[northerner]

Originally Posted by witchieblackcat

I subscribe to the theory that you get as much right as possible in the camera therefore I set the white balance manually underwater and shoot in raw.

I get to tweak the white balance on the computer later if necessary.

I don't really see the point of supposedly 'getting it right in camera', and then tweaking later. Surely that means that it's NOT right in the camera and you are making work for yourself!

I shoot RAW with auto white balance and CS3 - that means you can concentrate on taking shots rather than messing with too may settings.

Regarding the red filter - if you are using RAW I see no benefit at all and as others have said it will just cut light out.

Cheers,

Graham

[infernalzen]

auto-wb means the camera is making adjustments,
by doing a wb-cal, i get quicker individual shots! +wb im happy with.
i found my cals, were more accurate too.
i've missed too many shots due to digi lag with auto wb