If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
How to get good black & white from digital?
In article . com,
UC wrote: On Oct 14, 4:18 am, wrote: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - ? Oh, you were expecting *me* to supply some tips..? No, I'm a no-talent loser in this area! I was hoping to hear from those who have tried, successfully or otherwise, to get high quality black and white results from a digital workflow. I think it's a given that the printer is a big issue, and that you need a lot of resolution (eg 200 ppi is probably not going to suffice!). But I would like to concentrate on the *capture stage* - what is it that makes a superb b&w image? A great b&w has a 'look' to it that is often referred to, but rarely is an attempt made to explain *what gives it that quality* - is it the tone curve, the dynamic range, the nature of the media, ... I'm a bit sick of hearing "you just can't do quality b&w with digital" - while I agree that seems to be mostly true, I want to know *exactly why*...!!! Seems to me that if the issues can be defined, then maybe there are some workarounds and techniques that will help to let us digital-geeks begin to explore the final frontier... If the issues *can't* be defined, then that also tells me something.. (O; If I've missed a good site on this topic, *please* enlighten me!! PS - The answer "use film" - while technically correct - is not quite the answer I seek... PPS - Any attempts to answer this thread concentrating specifically on the issues while avoiding personality clashes, will be greatly appreciated. (O: For the original poster: there is an active thread on this subject at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/D...WhiteThePrint/ It is recommended there that you look at, http://www.imagenomic.com/products.aspx for adding the grain common to a number of films. HFL -- www.pbase.com/hlockwood Change hlockwood to hflockwood in email address |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
How to get good black & white from digital?
On Oct 14, 4:18 am, wrote:
1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - ? Oh, you were expecting *me* to supply some tips..? No, I'm a no-talent loser in this area! I was hoping to hear from those who have tried, successfully or otherwise, to get high quality black and white results from a digital workflow. I think it's a given that the printer is a big issue, and that you need a lot of resolution (eg 200 ppi is probably not going to suffice!). But I would like to concentrate on the *capture stage* - what is it that makes a superb b&w image? A great b&w has a 'look' to it that is often referred to, but rarely is an attempt made to explain *what gives it that quality* - is it the tone curve, the dynamic range, the nature of the media, ... I'm a bit sick of hearing "you just can't do quality b&w with digital" - while I agree that seems to be mostly true, I want to know *exactly why*...!!! Seems to me that if the issues can be defined, then maybe there are some workarounds and techniques that will help to let us digital-geeks begin to explore the final frontier... If the issues *can't* be defined, then that also tells me something.. (O; If I've missed a good site on this topic, *please* enlighten me!! PS - The answer "use film" - while technically correct - is not quite the answer I seek... PPS - Any attempts to answer this thread concentrating specifically on the issues while avoiding personality clashes, will be greatly appreciated. (O: It may be possible to duplicate the "tone curve" and dynamic range of B&W film in the digital workflow. IMHO, the difference is the final print. A B&W 'silver' print has a certain look to it that an inkjet or thermal type printer can't match. I had an instance where a customer brought me an old photo that was damaged. I scanned it, did the artwork and printed it on the inkjet. I didn't like it. I reversed it, printed it on transparency media on the inkjet, making a negative, took that into the darkroom and contact printed it. It looked good. Personally, I like the answer "use film"! |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
How to get good black & white from digital?
"Wilba" wrote in message ... that you have more options working with the source (the light in the scene), than you do working with a derivative image. How so? (polarising filters excepted) You talkin' to me? :-) I'll have a go, but I don't really know what I'm talking about. OK, I will accept that disclaimer. It makes sense to me via the general principle that the closer you get to the source of any signal, and the fewer times you transform it, the greater the fidelity. So adding glass filters is less harmful than manipulating pixels in your opinion? I doubt many would agree with you, and certainly not with any proof. In my limited experience, trying to enhance the contrast between clouds and sky via the channel mixer can only go so far - eventually I start to get visible artefacts, posterisation(?), whatever it is. Well a polarising filter is often the best choice there. Yes, I know that there are many other ways to get B&W, and that it's different with RAW, bla bla bla, but when I hit that limit, I'd like to have more contrast in the original image to start with. Does that make sense to you? :-) No, but feel free to do whatever suits you regardless :-) MrT. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
How to get good black & white from digital?
"UC" wrote in message ups.com... You can't. Use B&W film and a darkroom, DAMMIT! I'd have to agree, but only because printing digital B&W comes nowhere near real B&W photographic papers. MrT. |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
How to get good black & white from digital?
Mr.T wrote:
Wilba wrote: Mr.T wrote: Wilba wrote: that you have more options working with the source (the light in the scene), than you do working with a derivative image. How so? (polarising filters excepted) You talkin' to me? :-) I'll have a go, but I don't really know what I'm talking about. OK, I will accept that disclaimer. It makes sense to me via the general principle that the closer you get to the source of any signal, and the fewer times you transform it, the greater the fidelity. So adding glass filters is less harmful than manipulating pixels in your opinion? Depends what you mean by harmful, and how much harm you are willing to tolerate to get what you want. I doubt many would agree with you, and certainly not with any proof. It's your claim so it's not for me to seek others agreement. :-) In my limited experience, trying to enhance the contrast between clouds and sky via the channel mixer can only go so far - eventually I start to get visible artefacts, posterisation(?), whatever it is. Well a polarising filter is often the best choice there. So adding glass filters is less harmful than manipulating pixels in your opinion? Yes, I know that there are many other ways to get B&W, and that it's different with RAW, bla bla bla, but when I hit that limit, I'd like to have more contrast in the original image to start with. Does that make sense to you? :-) No, but feel free to do whatever suits you regardless :-) Thanks very much. If you disagree with Ken Hart, or don't understand what he said, you'd be better off addressing your comments to him. |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
How to get good black & white from digital?
"Wilba" wrote in message ... You talkin' to me? :-) I'll have a go, but I don't really know what I'm talking about. OK, I will accept that disclaimer. In my limited experience, trying to enhance the contrast between clouds and sky via the channel mixer can only go so far - eventually I start to get visible artefacts, posterisation(?), whatever it is. Well a polarising filter is often the best choice there. So adding glass filters is less harmful than manipulating pixels in your opinion? I said I accept your disclaimer, no need to prove it. MrT. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
How to get good black & white from digital?
Mr.T wrote:
Wilba wrote: You talkin' to me? :-) I'll have a go, but I don't really know what I'm talking about. OK, I will accept that disclaimer. In my limited experience, trying to enhance the contrast between clouds and sky via the channel mixer can only go so far - eventually I start to get visible artefacts, posterisation(?), whatever it is. Well a polarising filter is often the best choice there. So adding glass filters is less harmful than manipulating pixels in your opinion? I said I accept your disclaimer, no need to prove it. LOL. Good one. I thought that's what this was about. I'm still happy to hear anything you have to add to the real discussion. |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
How to get good black & white from digital?
"Wilba" wrote in message ... LOL. Good one. I thought that's what this was about. I'm still happy to hear anything you have to add to the real discussion. If you don't understand why I excluded polarising filters from the start, and why they are the only real exceptions, then further discussion is pointless. However do feel free to provide any *proof* you have that filters, other than polarisers, are better used on camera. MrT. |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
How to get good black & white from digital?
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 14:43:03 +1000, "Mr.T" MrT@home wrote:
If you don't understand why I excluded polarising filters from the start, and why they are the only real exceptions, then further discussion is pointless. However do feel free to provide any *proof* you have that filters, other than polarisers, are better used on camera. The original scene has far more chromatic information than the recorded image. When using filters you are manipulating the entire spectrum. If you try to manipulate the image you're working with three spikes. Sometimes that may not matter, but other times it might. A tri-colour image may look similar to the original scene, but it's _not_ the original scene and it can't respond to digital filtration in the way that the original scene could. An orange filter, for example, doesn't do the same thing as cutting out the blue channel, reducing the green and boosting the red. That's not to say that there's no place for digital filtering, but a discerning photographer should be able to work out the right choice for each image and know _why_ it's the right choice. Sometimes the right choice is to filter the light before it's recorded. -- Matthew Winn [If replying by mail remove the "r" from "urk"] |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
How to get good black & white from digital?
Mr.T wrote:
Wilba wrote: I'm still happy to hear anything you have to add to the real discussion. If you don't understand why I excluded polarising filters from the start, and why they are the only real exceptions, then further discussion is pointless. OK. We'll not discuss it further. If you ever feel like helping me understand, you know where to find me. However do feel free to provide any *proof* you have that filters, other than polarisers, are better used on camera. That's not my position, so I don't need to prove anything. What are you trying to prove? :-) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How to find good black and white photo subjects? | Marion | 35mm Photo Equipment | 37 | February 27th 07 03:43 AM |
Good photo book printing in monochrome/black and white | jean.alain.le.borgne | Digital Photography | 1 | December 1st 06 10:40 AM |
Good Black and White Photography Sites | Scott Coutts | In The Darkroom | 6 | July 9th 05 03:06 AM |
Good Black and White Photography Sites | Scott Coutts | In The Darkroom | 0 | April 23rd 05 03:18 AM |
Whats a good *free* plugin or tutorial for converting color to Black and White? | GamePlayer No. 1058 | Digital SLR Cameras | 12 | March 23rd 05 12:58 PM |