| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/14/2005 01:23:11 PM · #26 |
I tend to shoot b+w with a mission. However, I do like to retain the colour for various reasons. One main reason is that a good black and white image is rarely a simple greyscale conversion, there are many additional tones that can create richness and depth.
Consequently I shoot RAW and b+w JPEG which allows me to get the right kind of view when reviewing the shot but allows me to the flexibility of 16bit RAW editing back on the computer. |
|
|
|
06/14/2005 01:29:17 PM · #27 |
| Simple answer... I can always convert from color to B&W, but I have a heckuva time converting from B&W to color. So I concentrate on getting a good exposure, shoot in color and worry about which one looks better later. The only exception I can think of is if you KNOW the final image will be B&W, and you want to use a filter (like yellow to deepen the sky), but even that can be done in PS. |
|
|
|
06/14/2005 01:40:10 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by mavrik:
Now, I'm all about a new technique - but I tried this and now I have questions.
I tried a blue solid color, a red solid color, and a yellowish solid color. In all 3, what I got was just contrast differences. I was able to fully replicate ALL of my conversions with brightness/contrast adjustments so that they were dead-on exactly the same.
I guess my question is - what am I missing in this conversion? My Nik filter does tonal range and dynamic b/w conversions, so maybe I should stick with that... I get the "spectrum" thing - maybe that's what it is .. maybe that's how the Nik filter works?
*confused in Syr* |
The bottom line is, I guess - results. If you really feel you can't improve on what your Nik filter provides in-cam, then there's no point applying some lengthly conversion method. I would recommend to try the same experiment with a real photo though. I'd choose one with much variation and tonal gradation rather than focusing on solid colours alone. ?
|
|
|
|
06/14/2005 01:43:30 PM · #29 |
Sorry I didn't explain better. Nik Color Filters are a PS filter set that does b/w "conversions" out of camera too.
By "solid color" I meant that in the step where it asks for a solid color adjustment layer, I chose a blue adjustment layer, a red adjustment layer, and a yellow adjustment layer - not solid color pictures. I did it on two different "real" photos.
|
|
|
|
06/14/2005 01:46:28 PM · #30 |
I tend to think of b/w as the easy way out. Color is harder to master. B/w has it's on appeal in certin situations and sure it's great to use it then. However, starting out with a photo with good color is nicer than having to convert to save a picture from the trash bin.
|
|
|
|
06/14/2005 02:03:22 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by mavrik:
Sorry I didn't explain better. Nik Color Filters are a PS filter set that does b/w "conversions" out of camera too.
By "solid color" I meant that in the step where it asks for a solid color adjustment layer, I chose a blue adjustment layer, a red adjustment layer, and a yellow adjustment layer - not solid color pictures. I did it on two different "real" photos. |
Well, I could have read your post more thoughtfully too. :-)
I am, as you are, still experimenting with conversion methods myself and have no definitive golden means. I still use the channel mixer too, very intuitively too, as I can't, possibly, pre-visualize the millions of options it can provide.
Many pros today use Greg Gorman's method. Some of them, including G.G. himself (although he employs someone to photoshop his images) have created stunning black and whites. Your mileage may vary.
|
|
|
|
06/14/2005 02:12:54 PM · #32 |
Thanks very much, I'll download it and save it for future good use :o) |
|
|
|
06/14/2005 02:14:15 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by buzzmom:
to do black and white or color...
do you just go out and say today i will shoot only black and white ?
or is it a post processing decision? |
The decision between B&W or color for printing is subjective. Sometimes you know specifically that a particular subject you are going to photograph is best presented in B&W rather than color. Other times at the moment you take a specific image you realize it is best as B&W though you may not have been thinking of B&W at all before you shot it.
In both cases they are still normally shot in color. Digital conversion tools to B&W are incredible and color retains vastly more tonality data than an image shot strictly in B&W.
In workflow process all images for color first. Then add a couple extra layers for B&W conversion if you want to go that route. Then you can easily print it either B&W or full color if desired with just a couple clicks.
|
|
|
|
06/14/2005 02:22:13 PM · #34 |
I hope you're trying to cover all bases with this comment ("certin situations'). ;^) I also hope you don't vote the same way (thinking B/W is an "easy way out") and mark B/W images down automatically.
There have been numerous times when approaching a shot that B/W was the obvious choice. I think lighting is the strongest element to any successful image, B/W or color. If that's not right...well, find the trash bin. ;^)
Originally posted by kyebosh:
I tend to think of b/w as the easy way out. Color is harder to master. B/w has it's on appeal in certin situations and sure it's great to use it then. However, starting out with a photo with good color is nicer than having to convert to save a picture from the trash bin. |
|
|
|
|
06/14/2005 03:29:50 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by RonBeam:
Originally posted by Kavey:
Originally posted by RonBeam:
If you shoot only in color, you can only HOPE a scene will translate well as a B&W, unless you have it in your mind to do a lot of "doctoring" to the shot, which is always simpler to do in B&W. |
I don't agree with this at all. Most photographers who work frequently in black and white are very much able to previsualise what a scene will look like in black and white without reference to an LCD panel showing them.
Think back to pre-digital days - how do you think professional film photographers (such as Ansel Adams) coped? Do you think they simply took images and "hoped" they'd look good or do you think their experience allowed them to "assess" the scene infront of their camera well enough to know how it would translate into black and white?
|
Kavey, this was exactly the point made in my post. The part you quoted was in response to those who recommend shooting only in color. If one wants to acclimate their eye to seeing a B&W shot instantly in nature, one must practice by shooting and evaluating with the camera set to B&W. Otherwise one will only "hope" the shot will translate well to B&W from color. Reread my total post in context of those that went before and I believe you will find we are both in agreement as to their being a knack to recognizing a good scene to be interpreted in B&W. |
I did read the whole post, I just didn't want to quote all of it when I was responding to one bit. :o)
But I must still be misreading this.
It's my opinion that someone does NOT need to shoot with the camera set to B&W in order to be able to previsualise how a scene will turn out in black and white because that previsualisation happens in their head not via the LCD screen on the camera. It takes a bit of time to get used to looking in colour but understanding how it will turn out in black and white but I do think one can do it without switching to B&W mode in the camera. If I read your post correctly, you're suggesting that a photographer must shoot and evaluate with the camera set to B&W mode in order to be able to get a good shot by planning rather than by hope or luck.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/17/2025 05:23:46 PM EDT.
