Is anyone using JPEGs for B&W

[norm_snyder]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello all--

 

Earlier today, in part because of being in a rush to get a print out, I used the JPEG, rather than the DNG file [i've been shooting RAW +JPEG fine]. This, mind you, was for black and white [which is what was set in camera] , and I was more than a bit pleased with the result. Maybe less dynamic range, but on the whole, the final prints were hard to tell from those shot the same evening, in the same light.

 

If any of you have been shooting and using JPEGs as the starting point in your workflow, what settings have you found seem to be working best, in camera?

 

The attached is iso 1250, 35mm Summicron [type 4], @ f2.4. No sharpening in camera, normal contrast, set for B&W. In PS: resized, levels, USM.

 

Regards,

Norm

[LichMD]

Norm,

 

nice composition and framing of this shot. I especially like the interplay between the

the two musicians.

I only shoot DNGs, and do the B&W conversion in Aperture.

[norm_snyder]

Thanks, Jeff--

 

I have usually only been shooting RAW [DNG], and converting in Raw Developer, or using C1 for conversion to TIFF and then using channel mixer. Today I was in a rush, wasn't thinking, and rather than converting the DNG file, started with the JPEG which was produced in camera simultaneously. I was surprised at the quality of a 9x10 [approx.] print made with Piezography inks, and wondered what sort of experience others have had.

 

--Norm

[Guest Olof]

I used to use .jpg for B&W, but than i compared them with B&W pictures i converted from .DNG and their quality was so much better, that i only shoot .DNG now.

[SteveCook]

I am currently shooting JPEG only as it's a workflow that I'm used to from my DSLR's and I'm producing much better results with the M8 than the SLR's. Selecting WB manually and using levels for colour correction and channel mixer and levels for b&w (I always use adj layers for all adjustments).

 

I haven't had the chance to get to grips with Capture One yet and don't find it particularly easy to use, maybe Aperture is better?

[dr.khb]

I shoot always DNG.

Since AWB is still defined by accident (even with 1.092 in many cases) and the quality is much better, I will stay with DNG.

[wstotler]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If any of you have been shooting and using JPEGs as the starting point in your workflow, what settings have you found seem to be working best, in camera?

 

When I do shoot B&W JPGs in-camera, I leave the camera set to Sharpening Medium High, Contrast Medium High.

 

 

I haven't had the chance to get to grips with Capture One yet and don't find it particularly easy to use, maybe Aperture is better?

 

Don't know about better. I do know Aperture has taken a lot of justifiable heat from other posters but that's what I'm using on JPGs taken in camera--I like the workflow and results have been good enough for my eye. (When DNG support is there in Aperture I'll shoot DNG instead of JPGs--just to get more control over the final image. The Aperture/Digilux 2 RAW pairing was great.) Frankly, I like the way it handles organization and I'll live with its other warts.

 

Lately I've been taking shots in color (as JPGs) and using a combo of Aperture adjustments to get the look I want. (The in-camera B&W shots are quite good when compared to the Digilux 2, my frame of reference, but when I shoot in color I have more options for end-use later.)

 

I go B&W in Aperture vs. the camera for two reasons: (A) the shot just screams it's appropriate for B&W because of texture or composition. (2) I can't color correct the JPG because the magenta/IR problem (or color temperature from two or more light sources) is tainting the photo and making WB impossible to set without blowing something out in neon blue. (This problem should be mostly resolved when the IR filters/new firmware get here.)

 

Generally I perform the following adjustments for B&W, each to a small amount so they can work together:

 

(1) Exposure, adjust upward until histogram spans neatly left to right.

(2) Saturation, slight nudge upward for some images. Others, slight nudge downward.

(3) Brightness, adjust slightly upward.

(4) Contrast, adjust upward slightly.

(5) Shadows, bump more than halfway.

(6) Monochrome mixer, preset "Monochrome with Yellow Filter."

(7) Sharpen, slight adjustment over default settings.

(8) Edge Sharpen, slight adjustment over default settings.

 

Every photo is different so presets just won't give good results uniformly, but this general workflow and eyeballing results seems to be doing pretty well.

 

Take a look here:

 

Flickr: Photos from willstotler

 

"Tricycling Intersection" was an intentional "push everything" more than I thought I should to see how it would come out. "Competition Anxiety" is more conservative using this workflow. Both were taken with a coded Summicron-M 1:2/50mm ASPH and ISO 640 as color JPGs and converted in Aperture to B&W.

[norm_snyder]

Thanks to everyone for your thoughts.

 

Will--thanks for a synopsis of your workflow. The shots on Flickr are terrific, and have excellent tonality.

 

I suspect that I'll continue using mostly DNG files for printing, and find that if I separate the JPEGS in the folder ["Arrange by type" in OS X], I can then use the automated contact sheet function in Bridge/browser to print "hard copy" contacts. I still like to use these, maybe due to having used film for so many years. The JPEGS are handy for this, as well as quick review in camera, if I need it.

[blakley]

The quality is certainly better when I shoot DNG and convert, but the JPEG B&W quality is still very good. Here are two examples of B&W JPEGs cropped and processed for a bit of extra contrast in Photoshop (clicking the pictures will let you see larger versions on flickr). These print flawlessly at 8x10. Both shot at ISO 640 with a 50/1.2 Noctilux at f/1.2, the first at 1/45 and the second at 1/60.