Black and White PP

Since getting my camera last year, i've wanted and hoped to take some good/beautiful black and white shots...

... it'd seem the best way is through post processing... to get the dramatic effects im after anyway... and im getting there.

but... stumbling across this persons flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/16536699@N07/

...this is what im after, the kind of monochrome black and white.

... i imagine this is intense PP and i'm not afraid to spends hours/weeks whatever, doing that. I see PP as how lightrooms were used with film... the more time you spend there.. the better results you get.

Does anyone on here create these kind of images? Or do you know of any tutorials of tips or anything?

Cheers again.

There's a few ways to approach mono conversions, but I think Nik's Silver Efex is the most enabling:

http://www.niksoftware.com/silverefexpro/usa/entry.php

--
...Bob, NYC

'Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't.' - Little Big Man

http://www.bobtullis.com

dmerc said:

Since getting my camera last year, i've wanted and hoped to take some good/beautiful black and white shots...

... it'd seem the best way is through post processing... to get the dramatic effects im after anyway... and im getting there.

but... stumbling across this persons flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/16536699@N07/

...this is what im after, the kind of monochrome black and white.

... i imagine this is intense PP and i'm not afraid to spends hours/weeks whatever, doing that. I see PP as how lightrooms were used with film... the more time you spend there.. the better results you get.

Click to expand...

Did you notice, neither the first nor second had any exif data, and the second image was in the Original Film Stills group. I suspect these are digital scans of film originals. And by the way, they were called darkrooms ...

I see that the camera has a setting for shooting B&W. Which way would give better results? Post processing or shooting in B&W?

Jimmytrees said:

I see that the camera has a setting for shooting B&W. Which way would give better results? Post processing or shooting in B&W?

Click to expand...

If you shoot normally, saving all the color data, you have more control of your black and white conversion. You can apply virtual filters and work with the individual color channels.

But shooting with the camera set to black and white has the advantage that you can see the black and white image in your LCD display. This may assist you with composition.

--
Leonard Migliore

This is properly called 'grayscale' and the capability is in almost all image programs. It's just a matter of adjusting brightness and contrast to obtain the desired effect, providing, of course, that you've taken a good photo to begin with. The following is a simple example done in free FastStone.

Another, in about three minutes:

Look, this can't be overstated enough....it's about the quality of light. You can tweak the sliders for hours, but if you merry just the right light + 4x5 = magic. Naaah, I'm not trying to sell film, it's just that all those conversions (even from higher quality DSLR's) have something to be desired.

Leswick

Leonard Migliore said:

Jimmytrees said:

I see that the camera has a setting for shooting B&W. Which way would give better results? Post processing or shooting in B&W?

Click to expand...

If you shoot normally, saving all the color data, you have more control of your black and white conversion. You can apply virtual filters and work with the individual color channels.

But shooting with the camera set to black and white has the advantage that you can see the black and white image in your LCD display. This may assist you with composition.

--
Leonard Migliore

Click to expand...

Could do both, Leonard? If you shoot RAW (with embedded JPEG) or RAW + JPEG, the camera will display the b & w shot on the LCD and even in Liveview but you actually have the RAW with full data. Using the relevant RAW processing program you can decide to apply the b & w effect to the output JPEG or completely ignore the effect.

--



Ananda
http://anandasim.blogspot.com
https://sites.google.com/site/asphotokb

'Enjoy Diversity - Live a Little'

palincss said:

dmerc said:

Since getting my camera last year, i've wanted and hoped to take some good/beautiful black and white shots...

... it'd seem the best way is through post processing... to get the dramatic effects im after anyway... and im getting there.

but... stumbling across this persons flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/16536699@N07/

...this is what im after, the kind of monochrome black and white.

... i imagine this is intense PP and i'm not afraid to spends hours/weeks whatever, doing that. I see PP as how lightrooms were used with film... the more time you spend there.. the better results you get.

Click to expand...

Did you notice, neither the first nor second had any exif data, and the second image was in the Original Film Stills group. I suspect these are digital scans of film originals. And by the way, they were called darkrooms ...

Click to expand...

no i didn't notice... but then again i didn't think to check the exif data... i thought they may have been film but wasnt sure. really want to replicate that sort of image

oh and thanks for the darkroom heads up... but i did know that and it was purely a miss-wording as I was looking at tutorials for lightroom at the same time.

Leswick said:

Look, this can't be overstated enough....it's about the quality of light. You can tweak the sliders for hours, but if you merry just the right light + 4x5 = magic. Naaah, I'm not trying to sell film, it's just that all those conversions (even from higher quality DSLR's) have something to be desired.

Leswick

Click to expand...

ye i get that... even with my attempts so far, its obvious that some pictures just either dont suit black and white... or that I just havent got the light right for the conversion.

this is the closest i got to getting the 'look' that i wanted:





this is the original:

You may find grayscale conversions satisfying, but they're limited in the potential expressions one can pull from them. If you come to want more out of your mono photographs, there are many resources that speak of the differences, as well as offering advice on techniques one can utilize.

When utilizing JPGs out of camera, shooting for visual feedback usually suffices. If shooting RAW, understanding the data the sensor captures (and how that relates to the histogram) is more important - a good exposure may not be visually pleasing until converted and the tones are adjusted.

--
...Bob, NYC

'Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't.' - Little Big Man

http://www.bobtullis.com

As previous posters mentioned, shooting RAW is a good start -- you get more bits to play with, which is important since you may be doing some severe edits to your images which could cause banding and noise.

Monochrome images have inherently less contrast than color images, so good black and white conversions usually ought to have lots of contrast to make a good final image.

Be sure that your final image has all tones from pure white to pure black. Be especially certain to have pure white and don't be afraid to adjust your image so that non-significant highlight areas get blown. This can be bad for color images (since you can have color shifts) but is much less a problem for black and white.

A good candidate for monochrome conversion will have plenty of shadow detail. This is an area where film is usually considered superior to digital -- be aware that digital usually needs flatter lighting. Your sample images show good shadows.

There are many techniques for bringing up shadow detail, and be aware that typical digital images have lots of shadow detail normally not visible. Aggressive shadow-lifting often looks poor in color images, but will look fine when converted to monochrome. Noise too is less of a problem with monochrome. You might want to do the shadow-lightening before you convert to monochrome, even though the results might look poor at first.

Local contrast enhances details and textures, as your example images show. There are lots of techniques and plug-ins for local contrast enhancement.

There are many ways to convert to monochrome, and some are better than others. By all means, use a plug-in if you have one, but also explore other options. In Photoshop, you can use Channel Mixer, Desaturate, and Black and White.

After you convert to monochrome, you may consider adding subtle color tones to bring out the tonal depth of the image. This is especially helpful if the tones change from cool shadows to warm highlights.

--
http://therefractedlight.blogspot.com

I'm not against using Silver Effects (sp) software, etc. that enhances B&W. I use D700 and I'm only getting about 10% of conversions that I'd consider excellent....the other ones don't matter. And, what I was talking about it's that the converting process is bit of a disappointment for me. But, it doesn't mean that one shouldn't experiment....and perhaps find a good way out of this conundrum.

Leswick

Leswick said:

I'm only getting about 10% of conversions that I'd consider excellent....the other ones don't matter. And, what I was talking about it's that the converting process is bit of a disappointment for me.

Click to expand...

What do you find disappointing? Perhaps you could post some images that were converted poorly.

--
http://therefractedlight.blogspot.com

The B&W conversion on my Nikon is pretty good, but I still like to do in manually in Photoshop. I understand that a lot of folks don't like wasting time on the computer, though.

--
http://therefractedlight.blogspot.com

AnandaSim said:

Leonard Migliore said:

Jimmytrees said:

I see that the camera has a setting for shooting B&W. Which way would give better results? Post processing or shooting in B&W?

Click to expand...

If you shoot normally, saving all the color data, you have more control of your black and white conversion. You can apply virtual filters and work with the individual color channels.

But shooting with the camera set to black and white has the advantage that you can see the black and white image in your LCD display. This may assist you with composition.

--
Leonard Migliore

Click to expand...

Could do both, Leonard? If you shoot RAW (with embedded JPEG) or RAW + JPEG, the camera will display the b & w shot on the LCD and even in Liveview but you actually have the RAW with full data. Using the relevant RAW processing program you can decide to apply the b & w effect to the output JPEG or completely ignore the effect.

Click to expand...

This may depend on the camera, but on my D300 (which Leonard also has) you select B&W by going to the Picture Control menu and selecting the Monochrome PC. Then when shooting RAW, the RGB image presented on the LCD and saved inside the RAW file are indeed B&W...so you can get an idea how it will look. The Monochrome PC has controls for Sharpening, Contrast, Brightness, a selection of filters (Y/O/R/G), and a wide selection of toning effects...so you can get really close in the camera. HOWEVER, when shooting RAW, the file is just a normal file. If you use the Nikon editors, View or Capture, the software is aware of these B&W presets and renders the RAW image as you have specified. Other editors don't do this...you will have to make choices on how to render the RAW image as a B&W again. Most editors give you finer control of the parameters than what is in the camera.

Thus, there is no need (at least on the D300) to resort to RAW + JPEG.

--
Charlie Davis
Nikon 5700, Sony R1, Nikon D50, Nikon D300
HomePage: http://www.1derful.info
"The voices in my head may be crazy, but they have good ideas!"

chuxter said:

AnandaSim said:

Leonard Migliore said:

Jimmytrees said:

I see that the camera has a setting for shooting B&W. Which way would give better results? Post processing or shooting in B&W?

Click to expand...

If you shoot normally, saving all the color data, you have more control of your black and white conversion. You can apply virtual filters and work with the individual color channels.

But shooting with the camera set to black and white has the advantage that you can see the black and white image in your LCD display. This may assist you with composition.

--
Leonard Migliore

Click to expand...

Could do both, Leonard? If you shoot RAW (with embedded JPEG) or RAW + JPEG, the camera will display the b & w shot on the LCD and even in Liveview but you actually have the RAW with full data. Using the relevant RAW processing program you can decide to apply the b & w effect to the output JPEG or completely ignore the effect.

Click to expand...

This may depend on the camera, but on my D300 (which Leonard also has) you select B&W by going to the Picture Control menu and selecting the Monochrome PC. Then when shooting RAW, the RGB image presented on the LCD and saved inside the RAW file are indeed B&W...so you can get an idea how it will look. The Monochrome PC has controls for Sharpening, Contrast, Brightness, a selection of filters (Y/O/R/G), and a wide selection of toning effects...so you can get really close in the camera. HOWEVER, when shooting RAW, the file is just a normal file. If you use the Nikon editors, View or Capture, the software is aware of these B&W presets and renders the RAW image as you have specified. Other editors don't do this...you will have to make choices on how to render the RAW image as a B&W again. Most editors give you finer control of the parameters than what is in the camera.

Thus, there is no need (at least on the D300) to resort to RAW + JPEG.

Click to expand...

It would work, yes, but I've shot black and white for over 50 years while looking at a full-color viewfinder or ground glass and I don't think I need to start looking at a B&W LCD now. I just offered that option in case it would be useful.

--
Leonard Migliore

Make an HDR image, then convert? It will provide lots of great shadows, if you tone map it correctly.

--
Charlie Davis
Nikon 5700, Sony R1, Nikon D50, Nikon D300
HomePage: http://www.1derful.info
"The voices in my head may be crazy, but they have good ideas!"

Leonard Migliore said:

It would work, yes, but I've shot black and white for over 50 years while looking at a full-color viewfinder or ground glass and I don't think I need to start looking at a B&W LCD now. I just offered that option in case it would be useful.

Click to expand...

Me too. It was mostly a comment about RAW + JPEG...

--
Charlie Davis
Nikon 5700, Sony R1, Nikon D50, Nikon D300
HomePage: http://www.1derful.info
"The voices in my head may be crazy, but they have good ideas!"