B&W conversion w/o PS

kenglade

I get the distinct impression from reading most of the posts here that virtually the only way to get a good B&W conversion is with PS. I use Capture NX2 rather than PS; I don't like PS and I don't want it. However, I wonder if I'm doing myself a disservice by not using PS. This is one that was post-processed in NX2 without channel mixing or any of the exotic techniques available in PS. Could it have been improved in PS?

BinaryFx

kenglade wrote: »

I get the distinct impression from reading most of the posts here that virtually the only way to get a good B&W conversion is with PS.

I would not agree with that Ken, however Photoshop and to a lesser extent Adobe Camera Raw/Lightroom offer many different native tools and methods for one to achive their "vision".

Then there are all the plug-ins that people use, some of which also work in say Gimp or other software that can use Photoshop plug-ins - or plug-ins that are specifically written to work with raw camera data and raw data processing software.

B&W conversion from colour is not so much about hard science - it is a very personal and subjective artistic issue (that vision thing again).

I use Capture NX2 rather than PS; I don't like PS and I don't want it. However, I wonder if I'm doing myself a disservice by not using PS. This is one that was post-processed in NX2 without channel mixing or any of the exotic techniques available in PS. Could it have been improved in PS?

It would probably be helpful to link up the full colour original.

Additionally, for those not familiar with NX2, a screen capture of the B&W conversion options would also be good too.

For my personal taste, the shot has many areas of blown highlights where I would wish to see some minimal detail - even if going for "high contrast", however that is personal and subjective!


Regards,

Stephen Marsh

http://members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/
http://prepression.blogspot.com/

kenglade

BinaryFx wrote: »

I would not agree with that Ken, however Photoshop and to a lesser extent Adobe Camera Raw/Lightroom offer many different native tools and methods for one to achive their "vision".

Then there are all the plug-ins that people use, some of which also work in say Gimp or other software that can use Photoshop plug-ins - or plug-ins that are specifically written to work with raw camera data and raw data processing software.

B&W conversion from colour is not so much about hard science - it is a very personal and subjective artistic issue (that vision thing again).




It would probably be helpful to link up the full colour original.

Additionally, for those not familiar with NX2, a screen capture of the B&W conversion options would also be good too.

For my personal taste, the shot has many areas of blown highlights where I would wish to see some minimal detail - even if going for "high contrast", however that is personal and subjective!


Regards,

Stephen Marsh

http://members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/
http://prepression.blogspot.com/

Thanks, guys. I'm not trying to start an argument here, I'm just trying to get better and I'm not convinced that PS is the magic pill. I've just started working on B&W in NX2, so that may be part of my confusion. I also thought of Silver Effects Pro but, unfortunately, it doesn't have an NX2 plug-in. perhaps Nikon is working on an full-scale upgrade for NX2 and, from my point of view, that would be very welcome.

In any case, Stephen, here is the color original: NEF to JPG and resized.





And here is the direct conversion to B&W:




Just my luck it was a bright, sunny day with a strong beam of sunlight streaming down the center. I think it would have been better (or at least made a better conversion) if it had been overcast.

I very much appreciate your time and any advice you might be willing to offer.

Ken

BinaryFx

kenglade wrote: »

Thanks, guys. I'm not trying to start an argument here, I'm just trying to get better and I'm not convinced that PS is the magic pill.

No arguments (yet) Ken, just discussion! Reasonable people can disagree without having an argument. Many people make fine B&W images without Photoshop, while many do use native Photoshop routines and or other Photoshop plugs etc.

Photoshop and similar image editors offer many different ways to convert to B&W. Some may argue that one does not need many different ways.

This is a highly subjective and personal area of image processing (just like sharpening).

I've just started working on B&W in NX2, so that may be part of my confusion. I also thought of Silver Effects Pro but, unfortunately, it doesn't have an NX2 plug-in. perhaps Nikon is working on an full-scale upgrade for NX2 and, from my point of view, that would be very welcome.

I am not aware of what tools and options NX2 offers for B&W conversions, which is why I asked about seeing a screen shot of the controls. Beyond the dedicated tools in NX2, you could decide to set incorrect white balance as a pre-filter before the B&W conversion, or use highlight recovery or D-Lighting on the shadows or whatever.

In any case, Stephen, here is the color original: NEF to JPG and resized.

And here is the direct conversion to B&W:

Thanks Ken, I can see that there is highlight detail, so your conversion had your subjective taste applied, where you added contrast made the highlights lighter. I personally would not have done this to such an extreme, as I like highlight and shadow detail, even if minimally done in a high contrast conversion. This is what I mean about the conversion being done to your "vision", as you wish to portray the scene.

I am not sure where to go from here, I could produce many different conversions from colour to B&W and it they all would still be a subjective and personal interpretation (I would probably make a different conversion every time, depending on my mood etc).


Stephen Marsh

http://members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/
http://prepression.blogspot.com/

ziggy53

I think that there is little doubt that more advanced image processing software gives you more "control" over image processing. Whether the additional control amounts to an advantage depends partly on the subject matter but to a larger degree it depends on the individual controlling the process and the goals of the project.

In traditional B&W film and processing you could manage how particular color tones would translate into grayscale through the use of different types of film (with different sensitivities to color), photographic filters over the lens, processing technique (including different film developers and toners) and ultimately the print processing and paper/developer/toner selection. Some of these selections affect the color translation while other selections affect contrast, lightness/darkness and even the dynamic range of the end result. More advanced methods such as masking, dodging and burning allowed more localized image control and unsharp masking could help to define edges.

Gaining control and learning what methods work to help present your subject and tell the story of your images can take a lifetime in either film or the digital environment. I suggest embracing the challenge of constant improvement through whatever means, and that includes using advanced software and learning advanced techniques.

kenglade

BinaryFx wrote: »

This is a highly subjective and personal area of image processing (just like sharpening).

I understand, Stephan, but that doesn't mean I'm any less confused. The way I'm trying to improve -- on my own -- means I have to study what other people are doing and then try to mirror their results. In other words, i have to learn what the accepted method is before i can deviate and make decisions based on my own tastes.

In the climate that currently exists I'm finding that difficult to do. Currently, i'm working through a book entitled "Advanced Digital Black & White Photography" by John Beardsworth. He goes into great detail to explain how he achieved his results. My problem is his step-by-step instructions are all in PS-talk. It's not unlike trying to decipher an instruction manual written in German.

I've been trying to convert the PS steps into a system that makes sense to me (NX2), but I've been only partially successful. There are some steps that just defy translation.

As far as I can determine there is no extant book on b&w that is not written for anyone other than a PS user. The closest I've been able to find is "The Photographer's Guide to Capture NX2," an e-book by Jason Odell. It's an excellent source but it gives only cursory coverage to b&w.

I guess I'm a little sensitive about this because I'm an Apple user and I have experienced the difficulties of operating in an MS world. This is getting a little better but I don't see any dramatic shift in the near future. By the same token, I can understand the logic in concentrating on PS; like everything else it boils down to making money.

I digress. My apologies. But I really do appreciate your time and effort.

Ken

cmason

unfortunately, this is one reason I bought PS: all the tutorials online are oriented to PS. I originally bought Corel Paintshoppro, but found that I could not translate PS tutorials to PSP. I eventually got PS and have really gotten everything I wanted from it, especially working with a few books on key techniques. To me, it was worth it.

Frankly I rarely use it much, mostly to do things I can not do in Lightroom. But for the things I need, it is irreplaceable (large object removal, extensive background blur, background replacement, artistic mucking about). I have CS3, and don't see upgrading to CS5. I would only move if I eventually replace my Mac and am forced to move due to a support issue, or I get a new camera body (7D isnt supported in CS3 for example)

As for your B&W question, Lightroom is very capable, and there are thousands of 'filters" you can download to give you a headstart. Highly recommended.

Another option to try is the GIMP. It is a open source alternative to Photoshop that is very capable and for me, near impossible to use. However, there is a version call GIMPShop that provides a Photoshop-like interface that makes following tutorials much easier...give it a try:

http://www.gimpshop.com/

kenglade

cmason wrote: »

unfortunately, this is one reason I bought PS: all the tutorials online are oriented to PS. I originally bought Corel Paintshoppro, but found that I could not translate PS tutorials to PSP. I eventually got PS and have really gotten everything I wanted from it, especially working with a few books on key techniques. To me, it was worth it.

Frankly I rarely use it much, mostly to do things I can not do in Lightroom. But for the things I need, it is irreplaceable (large object removal, extensive background blur, background replacement, artistic mucking about). I have CS3, and don't see upgrading to CS5. I would only move if I eventually replace my Mac and am forced to move due to a support issue, or I get a new camera body (7D isnt supported in CS3 for example)

As for your B&W question, Lightroom is very capable, and there are thousands of 'filters" you can download to give you a headstart. Highly recommended.

Another option to try is the GIMP. It is a open source alternative to Photoshop that is very capable and for me, near impossible to use. However, there is a version call GIMPShop that provides a Photoshop-like interface that makes following tutorials much easier...give it a try:

http://www.gimpshop.com/

Many thanks for the tips and the links. I'll dig deeper. I tried Lightroom several months ago but found I liked NX2 much better (for reasons I've now forgotten).

Since then I've gotten very interested in b&w. While I'm now very comfortable with NX2 I'm not averse to giving Lightroom another shot to see how it handles b&w.

My daughter is a devoted PS user and never lets an opportunity go by to try to get me interested. I've just always felt I didn't want to pay the cost of PS for features I will never use and have a high-learning curve.

P.S. Like your blog.

Ken