Opening monochrome images in SFXpro

[jpattison]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi,

I have seen this thread from Feb, but it looks like Adobe and Google haven't addressed the issue yet.

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/digital-post-processing-forum/273449-mm-silver-efex-pro-question.html

 

I import all my images from SD card to my mac via LR5, so haven't come across this problem. My MM DNGs open into SFXpro ( "edit in...SFXpro") OK. LR must convert them to RGB on the fly for SFXP to work on them.

 

If I open an MM DNG in PS CC it keeps it as a greyscale image. Then edit in SFXP from PS and SFXP is greyed out. I have to convert the file to RGB to be able to get SFXP available to edit it in.

 

Has this bothered anyone? or like me you go from LR directly?

 

This really annoys me, as SFXPro is a featured download along with LR when you buy a Monochrom. (now you get the whole Google kit) and it needs to recognise a greyscale file when presented with one.

Even PS creates an RGB if you "edit in PS" from LR5. These files are 3 times as large as the Monochrom files, so I always convert back to greyscale before saving in PS. This also sucks!

 

John

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[250swb]

I don't use Lightroom and open my MM .dng files through ACR specifying RGB at that point. The default 'Greyscale' is a red herring, being taken up the garden path, etc.

 

From my point of view B&W never has been unadulterated B&W. Photographic papers have never been monochrome in terms of being purely tones of neutral grey. Compare them and some will exhibit a cool tone in the paper and emulsion, and some exhibit a warm tone. These tones have further been modified in the use of different developers. So it's 150 years of the language of B&W that says B&W has never been greyscale. And it is a language, because the subtle background tone, or prominent tone if you like, can change the way the image is read and thought of by the viewer. It can reinforce the emotion of an image, crudely put you might say cool blue-ish tones for war or gritty social documentary, warmer tones for romance, benign scenes, the pictures of the new baby, summer landscape etc. You can still aim for neutral somewhere in the middle. You can also aim for duo tone, tri tone or quad tone images. You will find most fine art B&W books are printed in at least quad tone to represent the very subtleties and richness I'm talking about.

 

So while SFX has always assumed a colour image will be used, and hence needs to operate in RGB, a Monochrom file should also be in RGB so the toning commands can be used (and saved) as well as the normal contrast, brightness etc. The only thing that can't be used are the traditional 'colour filters' as no colour information is being imported into SFX.

 

Now I always raise my eyes heavenwards when we get on LUF the usual 'why would you' responses, like 'why would you use a cheap xxx after paying so much for the camera?'. But in this case I'll do it. Why would you pay so much for an MM and worry about file size? Monochrom files should be RGB!

 

 

Steve

[jpattison]

as no colour information is being imported into SFX

 

Thanks, but what then is being imported into SFX?

Monochrom files are not RGB. I take your point that SFXpro can be used to tone, hence requires bogus RGB info that has been created from true Black and White data which is what I have been calling Greyscale (from the camera), but how were those RGB individual data created? Are each R, G, and B pixels created by PS, or even when LR sends the file to be edited in SFX, to be identical at the same point? Fair enough, if that is so.

 

By the way, you should try Lightroom.

 

John

[jaapv]

Monochrom files are whatever you assign to them in raw conversion. It is most practical to convert to RGB. Colourspace is obviously irrelevant.

[250swb]

 

Thanks, but what then is being imported into SFX?

 

 

Potential

 

noun: potential; plural noun: potentials

 

1. 
   
2. 1.
   latent qualities or abilities that may be developed and lead to future success or usefulness.
   

As for Lightroom I have tried it, that's why I use Photoshop.

 

Steve

[jpattison]

tried

 

Dictionary, Encyclopedia and Thesaurus - The Free Dictionarytried‎

Thoroughly tested and proved to be good or trustworthy

 

 

John

[jpattison]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Enough of this stupid banter, Steve. Why don't I come around and you can show me your method with PS? Or you come over to Manchester. I have used PS and LR since their Beta introduction, but find LR so much simpler to use with a Leica. There is no need for hardly any manipulation in my images and no sharpening. I don't work professionally, though. I do shoot 5x4, 6x12 and 35mm film and prefer landscape and architecture as my subjects.

 

Cheers,

John

[250swb]

There's nothing to show you John, you won't see a difference converting an image to RGB (instead of Greyscale) unless you want to use RGB for what it can do. But in any case it is two seconds work to quickly convert a Greyscale to RGB so it can be worked on in Silver Efex, and two seconds to convert it back again. Even a clock watching professional isn't going to baulk at four seconds and describe it as a major inconvenience.

 

Happy Hols

 

Steve