Photoskeptic Posted April 25, 2007 Share #1 Posted April 25, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Okay, this is the first of two threads. In this one are two images taken by M8: one is color dng converted to bw and the other was taken in the bw jpeg mode. I'll give more details later in the thread. Comments? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 25, 2007 Posted April 25, 2007 Hi Photoskeptic, Take a look here B&W comparison: M8. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
stunsworth Posted April 25, 2007 Share #2 Posted April 25, 2007 A lot depends on how the conversion was done. The second one is obviously more contrasty, less 'smooth' than than the first. It almost looks as if it's been converted using one of the Alien Skin nigher contrast films such as Neopan 1600 or pushed Tri-X. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elopezso Posted April 25, 2007 Share #3 Posted April 25, 2007 I agree with Steve. If you sent me the original dng, I could do a conversion that would be less contrasty and that would have alot more detail. Edwin:) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoskeptic Posted April 25, 2007 Author Share #4 Posted April 25, 2007 The first one is the bw jpeg. Both received a levels adjustment and a black point compensation. That's all. Yes, I could do more to the dng file but I wanted to compare them basically from the camera. The real difference is in the black point compensation. the problem is in the dng and the range of colors. What is rendered darker in the bw jpeg is actually a lighter color in the dng so I had to use different black point compensation targets resulting in a not too happy dng. I did try using the same ones, but the dng went totally dark on me. Friday I will have my film back and will post the comparison to film. If I hear from enough people I'll re-do the dng conversion but I believe the problem lies in the contrasty nature of the subject. My bottom line results seem to favor the bw jpeg from the camera so I would not be so hasty as to completely dismiss this form of bw. yes, I know the dng has more information, but still the jpeg handled the scene better. (IMO) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffreyg Posted April 27, 2007 Share #5 Posted April 27, 2007 I agree - here are some other BW jpgs from the camera, unprocessed. They are abit dark, and the sky is rendered nicely. I like the tone, and if necessary, they can be lightened up. A couple of these are with the CV 15 - a real joy to shoot with quickly. Geoff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted April 27, 2007 Share #6 Posted April 27, 2007 My humble experience is that most of the eye-pleasing B&W renditions on screen don't end up well in print. I'm betting the Leica in camera JPEG will have more visual impact on paper. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted April 27, 2007 Share #7 Posted April 27, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) John, I doubt that you are comparing like with like. I'm assuming that you are desaturating the DNG to do the basic conversion to b&w. That's probably not how the in camera processing works. There could well be an adjustment of the spectral response when the camera does the conversion. The more sophisticated Photoshop plug-ins do the same in an attempt to mimic the response of 'real' b&w films. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.