If you watch a lot of Tv, YouTube and even movies with a critical eye, something becomes apparent after a while.
What you are told to do and what you see can sometimes be a long way apart.
Take for example the shower curtain.
If a DP wants to reduce light in a scene from a window or other strong light source, they will use a lot of tools to get the job done. A multi hundred dollar sheet of balanced white cloth to a cheap shower curtain. Can you ever honestly say you could tell the difference.
The internet is full of examples of people jury-rigging or even flat out cheeping out on gear to show it can be done, but they probably still spent hundreds on the “real” thing.
Lenses are amazing, even bad ones. Every lens has a point of use-ability, better lenses have more, last longer and in the video world tend to come in matching sets, but if the film is shot, the look accepted by the viewer and the elements sharp enough, do we care beyond that?
I still find it bizarre that the better our lenses, cameras and processing techniques are becoming, the stronger the reflex is to reduce that contrast, sharpness and overall quality to emulate a more organic, less perfect look.
White balance is another tricky one.
There is perfect white balance, where you make the scene look “right” or more specifically to match a sheet of white paper for example look accurately white, but how often do you see perfect white balance in cinema, documentaries or even adds. Getting it right aides processing, but that processing these days seems to be aimed at a distinct look, often the “teal-amber”, glowy look or a washed out one that defies not only natural light, but also superior sharpness and contrast.
The most important thing is skin tone. They must look right to the eye in the light they are in.
This file looks yellow, but the room is, the light was and the mood it invoked really was. I could have balnced it to a more neutral colour, but would that have been accurate or more to the point would it have looked how I wanted it to?
Light is light, white balance is in the eye of the colourist, lens quality is elastic, perceptions are the realm of the viewer.
This to me look right when we shot a promo video for the school. Pure white, slightly cool, but it suits the space that I am familiar with and what the white card reading coughed up.
This fits the common teal-amber look that can be all pervading. If you look at it for a while, you can and will normalise it.
This is what I submitted as it looks nice, if not accurate. If you stuff up your white balance too badly things get tough, but if you land close, even in a fairly restrictive base colour mode, there is room for some opinion to be added.
I guess where this random thought is going is, get your technical stuff sorted to the point you need, but do not ever let an obsession with technical considerations hold you back or dominate your vision.
Right is right, but it is also subjective.