Reading mode: Light Dark

B&W manual processing

  • Thread starter Thread starter NickM
  • Start date Start date
Go to last post
N

NickM

Guest
I have been interested in the results of the recent black and white photos posted using special plugins. I haven't money now to splash out on plugins and am not proffesional enough to quantify this. So I am going to play with some pictures with methods in photoshop and possibly other programs to compare results.

To do this reliably however I need to have the results from said plugins to compare with. Would anyone who is interested in assisting me with this simple experiment be willing to send me any pictures in original and processed format that I can play with the settings to see if I can make a fixed process producing similar results. I'd prefer people pictures right now. If anyone is willing just send to the email below or send links. Also send any special process settings made. For now don't get too fancy :)

Any other suggestions on this most welcome, just a bit of me wanting b&w in a cheaper process, might benefit others if the results are satisfactory.

Thanks, Nick
[email protected]
 
Nick,

I would be happy to work with you but I am traveling now and it would be awkward. If no one else comes through, send me an email in a week.

Just one point...it is not up to me to spend your money, so I say this with all due respect.

The Silver Oxide Plug-ins are only $35 each. That pays for a lot of experimentation. And while I would like to have all of them, so far I have only purchaed 1 (Ilford FP4) and been very pleased. It will also give you an oppostunety to do your own experimentation with other methods compared to SO.

I have been succesful in B/Wconversions, by using the Mezzotint filter and the Noise filter (very sparingly) to give the effect of grain. I have used this in conjunction with SO. Both are included with PS

Here is an example of adding a very small amount of Mezzotint and using the FP$ conversion filter...



Larger imgae in my "retouched" album...
http://www.zing.com/members/michaeltapes

MichaelT
NickM said:
I have been interested in the results of the recent black and white
photos posted using special plugins. I haven't money now to splash
out on plugins and am not proffesional enough to quantify this. So
I am going to play with some pictures with methods in photoshop and
possibly other programs to compare results.

To do this reliably however I need to have the results from said
plugins to compare with. Would anyone who is interested in
assisting me with this simple experiment be willing to send me any
pictures in original and processed format that I can play with the
settings to see if I can make a fixed process producing similar
results. I'd prefer people pictures right now. If anyone is
willing just send to the email below or send links. Also send any
special process settings made. For now don't get too fancy :)

Any other suggestions on this most welcome, just a bit of me
wanting b&w in a cheaper process, might benefit others if the
results are satisfactory.

Thanks, Nick
[email protected]
Click to expand...
 
If you are on a budget (or on a mac) and not scared of a little photoshop, don't worry about these filters. You can use automation to create your own custom color -> b+w conversions.

An old trick for converting b+w to color is to examine the different color channels. The R, G and B channels will all have vastly different records of the scene informations - much like putting colored filters on your lens before shooting real b+w.

So if you want to get what this filter does, play around with recording an action to blend the chanels in a way you find pleasing. For instance to get a tri-x like look, mix the channels manually but underemphasize blue. You can make your own set of filters to produce different effects.

Granted, you loose the preview, that the filters give you, but that is all. There is no magic they have to provide information not in your color picture - they just do a custom conversion from color to b+w.

Andrew
 
Nick,

Did you try the free download trail of the Tri-X filter? Although you can't save the filtered images and the view area is small, you should be able to see all the tonal changes the filter gives while you still have the origianl colour and/or B&W sitting in the background. This should let you make any colour channel mods to achieve similar effects as the filter.

Mike.
NickM said:
I have been interested in the results of the recent black and white
photos posted using special plugins. I haven't money now to splash
out on plugins and am not proffesional enough to quantify this. So
I am going to play with some pictures with methods in photoshop and
possibly other programs to compare results.

To do this reliably however I need to have the results from said
plugins to compare with. Would anyone who is interested in
assisting me with this simple experiment be willing to send me any
pictures in original and processed format that I can play with the
settings to see if I can make a fixed process producing similar
results. I'd prefer people pictures right now. If anyone is
willing just send to the email below or send links. Also send any
special process settings made. For now don't get too fancy :)

Any other suggestions on this most welcome, just a bit of me
wanting b&w in a cheaper process, might benefit others if the
results are satisfactory.

Thanks, Nick
[email protected]
Click to expand...
 
I've been playing with the channel mixer as you suggested and it's great, much better than greyscale or desaturate.

Here's a picture I took this afternoon, and modified using your technique.

Thank's

François



Canon 80-200 at 200; f11 at 1/325 iso 200
Andrew Scholer said:
If you are on a budget (or on a mac) and not scared of a little
photoshop, don't worry about these filters. You can use automation
to create your own custom color -> b+w conversions.

An old trick for converting b+w to color is to examine the
different color channels. The R, G and B channels will all have
vastly different records of the scene informations - much like
putting colored filters on your lens before shooting real b+w.

So if you want to get what this filter does, play around with
recording an action to blend the chanels in a way you find
pleasing. For instance to get a tri-x like look, mix the channels
manually but underemphasize blue. You can make your own set of
filters to produce different effects.

Granted, you loose the preview, that the filters give you, but that
is all. There is no magic they have to provide information not in
your color picture - they just do a custom conversion from color to
b+w.

Andrew
Click to expand...
 
Nice shot Francois!

Here's one I've made using the following channel settings:
Red: 60%
Green: 58%
Blue: -12%
Constant: 0


Francois Ratte said:
Here's a picture I took this afternoon, and modified using your
technique.

Thank's

François



Canon 80-200 at 200; f11 at 1/325 iso 200
Andrew Scholer said:
If you are on a budget (or on a mac) and not scared of a little
photoshop, don't worry about these filters. You can use automation
to create your own custom color -> b+w conversions.

An old trick for converting b+w to color is to examine the
different color channels. The R, G and B channels will all have
vastly different records of the scene informations - much like
putting colored filters on your lens before shooting real b+w.

So if you want to get what this filter does, play around with
recording an action to blend the chanels in a way you find
pleasing. For instance to get a tri-x like look, mix the channels
manually but underemphasize blue. You can make your own set of
filters to produce different effects.

Granted, you loose the preview, that the filters give you, but that
is all. There is no magic they have to provide information not in
your color picture - they just do a custom conversion from color to
b+w.

Andrew
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Nick,

Naviagte to the follow post:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=708881

It contains the SilverOxide Ilford FP4 B&W version of the following original color image:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=730082
NickM said:
I have been interested in the results of the recent black and white
photos posted using special plugins. I haven't money now to splash
out on plugins and am not proffesional enough to quantify this. So
I am going to play with some pictures with methods in photoshop and
possibly other programs to compare results.

To do this reliably however I need to have the results from said
plugins to compare with. Would anyone who is interested in
assisting me with this simple experiment be willing to send me any
pictures in original and processed format that I can play with the
settings to see if I can make a fixed process producing similar
results. I'd prefer people pictures right now. If anyone is
willing just send to the email below or send links. Also send any
special process settings made. For now don't get too fancy :)

Any other suggestions on this most welcome, just a bit of me
wanting b&w in a cheaper process, might benefit others if the
results are satisfactory.

Thanks, Nick
[email protected]
Click to expand...
 
Check out what I did with the image linked below using just a few minutes of Channel Mixing:



For full comparison album, see:

http://members3.clubphoto.com/mike268457/Grayscale_vs_Channel_Mix/

Mike.
Michael Greer said:
Naviagte to the follow post:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=708881

It contains the SilverOxide Ilford FP4 B&W version of the following
original color image:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=730082
NickM said:
I have been interested in the results of the recent black and white
photos posted using special plugins. I haven't money now to splash
out on plugins and am not proffesional enough to quantify this. So
I am going to play with some pictures with methods in photoshop and
possibly other programs to compare results.

To do this reliably however I need to have the results from said
plugins to compare with. Would anyone who is interested in
assisting me with this simple experiment be willing to send me any
pictures in original and processed format that I can play with the
settings to see if I can make a fixed process producing similar
results. I'd prefer people pictures right now. If anyone is
willing just send to the email below or send links. Also send any
special process settings made. For now don't get too fancy :)

Any other suggestions on this most welcome, just a bit of me
wanting b&w in a cheaper process, might benefit others if the
results are satisfactory.

Thanks, Nick
[email protected]
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
David,

Here it is in just grayscale:



I like both, but the Channel mixing let me control the shadow & highlights more. With more playing, I'm sure I can get it even better.

See my album for another comparison to SilverOxide FP4 Filtering:

http://members3.clubphoto.com/mike268457/Grayscale_vs_Channel_Mix/

Mike.
DavidP said:
Mike Dobbs said:
Nice shot Francois!

Here's one I've made using the following channel settings:
Red: 60%
Green: 58%
Blue: -12%
Constant: 0

Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Mike,

I do like this image, it's been one of my favorite on the list for some days. However, personally I would like it more croped back to the hair just after the right eye, it gives a nicer picture in my eyes.

However, I am not willing to work with this one without Peter's ( the author) say so, he hasn't said we can tear the picture of his daughter apart, so just be careful.

Secondly, to do a fair comparison we would need the images after they've been through the NIC sharpener filter, but before the b&w processing. Otherwise this comparison is involving too many other processing steps. The NIC sharpener is one I won't deny is a splendid filter, pricey but the results are something I don't feel can be replicated as accurately.

Thanks, Nick
 
Last night, I played some more with the channel mixer and just like you discovered that we can control the shadows and highlights; also, just like adding a red filter to darken the sky, you can recreate the same effect with the mixer.

I also downloaded the test image from SilverOxyde and tried to match the Tri-X by playing with the mixer; I came quite close.

In conclusion, I don't think we really need that plug-in, and with the mixer you can refine your b&w picture; I rediscovered b&w to the point that before going to bed, I read an article about the Zone system... who knows there's maybe an Ansel Adams within one of us?

Thank's to whoever made that suggestion.

François
Mike Dobbs said:
Here it is in just grayscale:



I like both, but the Channel mixing let me control the shadow &
highlights more. With more playing, I'm sure I can get it even
better.

See my album for another comparison to SilverOxide FP4 Filtering:

http://members3.clubphoto.com/mike268457/Grayscale_vs_Channel_Mix/

Mike.
DavidP said:
Mike Dobbs said:
Nice shot Francois!

Here's one I've made using the following channel settings:
Red: 60%
Green: 58%
Blue: -12%
Constant: 0

Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Yes the channel mixer is the standard way to set a b&w picture, as in the actions of photoshop. What I would like to know is firstly do you find a natural setting that bring the same results most times to match a filter. And secondly, if not what other means can be used to make the match.

The samples that silveroxide shows as a comparison on the site is simply a greyscale conversion, harldly a good comparison, but like you say you can come fairly close doing it properly.

What I was hoping to eventually establish is a fixed routine to follow that can be made in to an action later, this would be ideal.

Nick
Francois Ratte said:
Last night, I played some more with the channel mixer and just like
you discovered that we can control the shadows and highlights;
also, just like adding a red filter to darken the sky, you can
recreate the same effect with the mixer.

I also downloaded the test image from SilverOxyde and tried to
match the Tri-X by playing with the mixer; I came quite close.

In conclusion, I don't think we really need that plug-in, and with
the mixer you can refine your b&w picture; I rediscovered b&w to
the point that before going to bed, I read an article about the
Zone system... who knows there's maybe an Ansel Adams within one of
us?

Thank's to whoever made that suggestion.

François
Click to expand...
 
Here is Adobe's own tutorial on how to use this method. I originally ran into it over at Micheal Reichmann's Luminance Landscape website but can't seem to find it there anywhere anymore. He appears to have gone the SilverOxide filter route.

http://www.adobe.com/web/tips/totalphs14/main.html

Danny
Francois Ratte said:
I also downloaded the test image from SilverOxyde and tried to
match the Tri-X by playing with the mixer; I came quite close.

In conclusion, I don't think we really need that plug-in, and with
the mixer you can refine your b&w picture; I rediscovered b&w to
the point that before going to bed, I read an article about the
Zone system... who knows there's maybe an Ansel Adams within one of
us?

Thank's to whoever made that suggestion.

François
Mike Dobbs said:
Here it is in just grayscale:



I like both, but the Channel mixing let me control the shadow &
highlights more. With more playing, I'm sure I can get it even
better.

See my album for another comparison to SilverOxide FP4 Filtering:

http://members3.clubphoto.com/mike268457/Grayscale_vs_Channel_Mix/

Mike.
DavidP said:
Mike Dobbs said:
Nice shot Francois!

Here's one I've made using the following channel settings:
Red: 60%
Green: 58%
Blue: -12%
Constant: 0

Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Francois,

Funny you should mention Ansel Adam's Zone system...I'm just in the middle of reading his "Basic Techniques in Photography" book for the first time...the Zone system is a little tricky to work out, but I've tried a few test shots with the D30 using it and I'm amazed at how well I can now judge my exposure compensations. This book and the others in the series are well worth the read for any photographer serious about making good pictures. It's amazing how much of the old methodologies still are highly relevant in the digital world!

Enjoy!

Mike.
Francois Ratte said:
I also downloaded the test image from SilverOxyde and tried to
match the Tri-X by playing with the mixer; I came quite close.

In conclusion, I don't think we really need that plug-in, and with
the mixer you can refine your b&w picture; I rediscovered b&w to
the point that before going to bed, I read an article about the
Zone system... who knows there's maybe an Ansel Adams within one of
us?

Thank's to whoever made that suggestion.

François
Mike Dobbs said:
David,
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Mike,

The interesting thing with digital is that you can take a picture without bothering with the "Zone system", then by playing with the mixer, you can transform your b&w picture; of course if the picture was already "well compensated", you have less work to do.

Tonight, I'm gone a try to modify some pictures I took last summer (with my Epson 3000Z) at Yosemite park... maybe I'm the next Ansel Adams ;-)

Cheers

François
Mike Dobbs said:
Funny you should mention Ansel Adam's Zone system...I'm just in the
middle of reading his "Basic Techniques in Photography" book for
the first time...the Zone system is a little tricky to work out,
but I've tried a few test shots with the D30 using it and I'm
amazed at how well I can now judge my exposure compensations. This
book and the others in the series are well worth the read for any
photographer serious about making good pictures. It's amazing how
much of the old methodologies still are highly relevant in the
digital world!

Enjoy!

Mike.
Francois Ratte said:
I also downloaded the test image from SilverOxyde and tried to
match the Tri-X by playing with the mixer; I came quite close.

In conclusion, I don't think we really need that plug-in, and with
the mixer you can refine your b&w picture; I rediscovered b&w to
the point that before going to bed, I read an article about the
Zone system... who knows there's maybe an Ansel Adams within one of
us?

Thank's to whoever made that suggestion.

François
Mike Dobbs said:
David,
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Daniel,

Thanks for the tutorial...I'll run it tonight when I'm home outside the firewall ;-)

BTW, I found the link to Reichmann's article:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/b&w_better.htm

Mike.
Daniel Lauring said:
http://www.adobe.com/web/tips/totalphs14/main.html

Danny
Francois Ratte said:
I also downloaded the test image from SilverOxyde and tried to
match the Tri-X by playing with the mixer; I came quite close.

In conclusion, I don't think we really need that plug-in, and with
the mixer you can refine your b&w picture; I rediscovered b&w to
the point that before going to bed, I read an article about the
Zone system... who knows there's maybe an Ansel Adams within one of
us?

Thank's to whoever made that suggestion.

François
Mike Dobbs said:
Here it is in just grayscale:



I like both, but the Channel mixing let me control the shadow &
highlights more. With more playing, I'm sure I can get it even
better.

See my album for another comparison to SilverOxide FP4 Filtering:

http://members3.clubphoto.com/mike268457/Grayscale_vs_Channel_Mix/

Mike.
DavidP said:
Mike Dobbs said:
Nice shot Francois!

Here's one I've made using the following channel settings:
Red: 60%
Green: 58%
Blue: -12%
Constant: 0

Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Hi Nick,

I haven't play a lot yet with the mixer and the differents settings, but I guess that if I apply the same values I used to approximate the Tri-X example to any picture, I will get results approaching the Tri-X.

But what I looking for is not to emulate a Tri-X, FP4 or anyother b&w film, but a way to create b&w pictures with good contrast, detail shadows and highlights; by playing the mixer, you see "live" the results and can fine tune the results to your liking.

I guess the more you will play with it, the more you will find the ideal settings.

Good luck and have fun

François
NickM said:
The samples that silveroxide shows as a comparison on the site is
simply a greyscale conversion, harldly a good comparison, but like
you say you can come fairly close doing it properly.

What I was hoping to eventually establish is a fixed routine to
follow that can be made in to an action later, this would be ideal.

Nick
Francois Ratte said:
Last night, I played some more with the channel mixer and just like
you discovered that we can control the shadows and highlights;
also, just like adding a red filter to darken the sky, you can
recreate the same effect with the mixer.

I also downloaded the test image from SilverOxyde and tried to
match the Tri-X by playing with the mixer; I came quite close.

In conclusion, I don't think we really need that plug-in, and with
the mixer you can refine your b&w picture; I rediscovered b&w to
the point that before going to bed, I read an article about the
Zone system... who knows there's maybe an Ansel Adams within one of
us?

Thank's to whoever made that suggestion.

François
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I don't know how you found it. I have a heck of a time finding things on his website that I've seen before. Great stuff...but hard to negotiate. For example I know he did a review of the 100-400 IS lens but couldn't find that either. His site reminds me of John Cowley's LoneStarDigital. John did a review of the Sigma 50-500 but the only path I could fine to it was through his review of the Nikon D1.

Danny
Mike Dobbs said:
Thanks for the tutorial...I'll run it tonight when I'm home outside
the firewall ;-)

BTW, I found the link to Reichmann's article:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/b&w_better.htm

Mike.
Daniel Lauring said:
http://www.adobe.com/web/tips/totalphs14/main.html

Danny
Francois Ratte said:
I also downloaded the test image from SilverOxyde and tried to
match the Tri-X by playing with the mixer; I came quite close.

In conclusion, I don't think we really need that plug-in, and with
the mixer you can refine your b&w picture; I rediscovered b&w to
the point that before going to bed, I read an article about the
Zone system... who knows there's maybe an Ansel Adams within one of
us?

Thank's to whoever made that suggestion.

François
Mike Dobbs said:
Here it is in just grayscale:



I like both, but the Channel mixing let me control the shadow &
highlights more. With more playing, I'm sure I can get it even
better.

See my album for another comparison to SilverOxide FP4 Filtering:

http://members3.clubphoto.com/mike268457/Grayscale_vs_Channel_Mix/

Mike.
DavidP said:
Mike Dobbs said:
Nice shot Francois!

Here's one I've made using the following channel settings:
Red: 60%
Green: 58%
Blue: -12%
Constant: 0

Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Andrew, you made me rediscover b&w; here 's an example of converting a color picture to b&w using your method; total time: 2 minutes.

Compare to desaturate or grayscale, you have a lot more control over the shadows and highlights, also a lot lest noise. In this picture you get more details in the cliffs, the grass in the meadow is of a lighter grey and the sky as a lot less noise and a nice gradient that can't be obtain with desaturate or grayscale.

Thank's



Epson PhotoPc 3000Z... before my D30.
Andrew Scholer said:
If you are on a budget (or on a mac) and not scared of a little
photoshop, don't worry about these filters. You can use automation
to create your own custom color -> b+w conversions.

An old trick for converting b+w to color is to examine the
different color channels. The R, G and B channels will all have
vastly different records of the scene informations - much like
putting colored filters on your lens before shooting real b+w.

So if you want to get what this filter does, play around with
recording an action to blend the chanels in a way you find
pleasing. For instance to get a tri-x like look, mix the channels
manually but underemphasize blue. You can make your own set of
filters to produce different effects.

Granted, you loose the preview, that the filters give you, but that
is all. There is no magic they have to provide information not in
your color picture - they just do a custom conversion from color to
b+w.

Andrew
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top