Silly B&W Question

[wilfredo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've had my M8 since December 26th, and most of you know I have a preference for shooting B&W. I have never bothered using the B&W JPEG mode on the camera but I decided today to try it, but can't find that option on the menu. I have flipped through the Instructions but can't find it. Sorry for being lazy, but can someone tell me where it is?

 

Thanks,

Wilfredo

Benitez-Rivera Photography

[Advertisement]

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

[jsjxyz]

 

menu -> color saturation -> Black&White

[Stevez4]

Curious about your workflow with B&W if you would share it. B&W seems to be stealth way to work. Most everything seems color related. B&W concerns relagated to the back row. I beta tested lightroom and find it the most intuitive and user friendly.. But no way to work with the JFI profiles. I am philosophically against over manipulation, regardless of supposed need. Less is more.

Hope youl'' share your thoughts

Steve

[wilfredo]

Thanks Jerry, that was simple enough!

 

Cheers,

Wilfredo

Benitez-Rivera Photography

[Skippy Sanchez]

Curious about your workflow with B&W if you would share it. B&W seems to be stealth way to work. Most everything seems color related. B&W concerns relagated to the back row. I beta tested lightroom and find it the most intuitive and user friendly.. But no way to work with the JFI profiles. I am philosophically against over manipulation, regardless of supposed need. Less is more.

Hope youl'' share your thoughts

Steve

 

Having not ponied up the dinero for Lightroom, I prefer to desaturate in Camera Raw, then go to the calibration menu to adjust the saturation and hue sliders for each color, depending on whether it want to lighten or darken a particular "shade" of gray. It's a handy & intuitive way to provide a selective midtone contrast. Then I'll switch to the curves menu to fine-tune the overall contrast.

 

It works for me.

 

Not meaning to be too philosophical here, but perhaps I don't understand what you mean by "over manipulation." Seems to me -- from the time we decide which ISO to shoot, deciding what to put in the frame and what to exclude, whether to use flash, etc. -- we're manipulating the image. And that's even before we press the shutter. Post-processing only gives us the finished image we intended.

[wilfredo]

My workflow is simple. I desaurate, play with the levels, curves, contrast, dodge and burn, etc. And add some tone using the color balance. That's it. I think this method is so simple most people ignore it. I use PSCS, I'll upgrade to CS3 soon.

 

Wilfredo

Benitez-Rivera Photography

[jsjxyz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My workflow is simple. I desaurate, play with the levels, curves, contrast, dodge and burn, etc. And add some tone using the color balance. That's it. I think this method is so simple most people ignore it. I use PSCS, I'll upgrade to CS3 soon.

 

Wilfredo

Benitez-Rivera Photography

Me too Wil,

 

I try to learn desaturate and all the hoopla of BW conversion, but it leaves the surprise element of like shooting with BW film. I am too just use the crop, level and curves of PS to edit my BW. My workflow is simple. Shot JPG (mostly BW), import to Mac's iPhoto, adjust in iPhoto or in PS, sync with my iPod so I can show them via my HDTV to my family automatically or upload them to the internet.

 

I'd rather enjoy the shooting process than the post processing.

 

JSJ

[lars_bergquist]

One traditional, pre-digital kind of 'manipulation' is of course the use of filters in the Y-O-R suite. As most of you know, they are sharp-cutting filters, removing entire sections of the spectrum, beginning in the violet-blue end.

 

People who shoot DNG can of course simulate these filters with the aid of the channels feature in PS. I see however that some people do JPGs. M8 JPG fine really doesn't deserve the contempt that has been showered on them. It is a useful format.

 

In that case you have to apply filtering before the lens, not in the computer. My impression is that with an UV/IR cutting filter, the effect is more or like that of an unfiltered panchromatic film. With no filter however, or with a traditional UVa-filter to protect the lens, the sensor responds somewhat like the old pan films of the 1930's and 1940's, with their extra sensitivity to red (like the original Panatomic). The effect is like that of a medium yellow filter: Darker blue, lighter red and somewhat lighter greens. Very pleasing. In this case, an Y filter on the lens has very marginal extra effect. Yellow-orange and red-orange filters however work more or less like they do on BW film.

 

The depressed blue sensitivity can be a drawback when doing portraits, afflicting the subjects with what in my youth was called 'the panchro complaint', a kind of visual anemia with pale lips and cheeks. Here, an IR/UV is clearly in place; in those days, yellow-green and pale blue filters were used in portraiture.

 

It is said that the M8 can be a very practical IR-camera. I intend to get myself an IR filter, not a black but a very deep red one, and see for myself.

 

The old man from the Age of Film

[johnwolf]

Curious about your workflow with B&W ...

 

After trying all the BW conversion techniques, I've settled on the two Hue/Saturation layers method. Create the two adjustment layers. Make the first one Color mode, and the second one Normal at -100 desaturation. To modify the tones, adjust the Hue slider on the Color mode layer. (This method also allows toning using the Colorize checkbox and Hue and Saturation sliders on the top layer.)

 

Then adjust contrast with Levels or Curves, and follow with local dodging/burning on a 50% gray-filled adjustment layer.

 

Very simple, fast, non-destructive, and allows modifications later.

 

Now with CS3 I like the BW adjustment layer function.

 

John

[Bob Ross]

M8 JPG fine really doesn't deserve the contempt that has been showered on them. It is a useful format.

 

In that case you have to apply filtering before the lens, not in the computer. My impression is that with an UV/IR cutting filter, the effect is more or like that of an unfiltered panchromatic film. With no filter however, or with a traditional UVa-filter to protect the lens, the sensor responds somewhat like the old pan films of the 1930's and 1940's, with their extra sensitivity to red (like the original Panatomic). The effect is like that of a medium yellow filter: Darker blue, lighter red and somewhat lighter greens. Very pleasing. In this case, an Y filter on the lens has very marginal extra effect. Yellow-orange and red-orange filters however work more or less like they do on BW film.

 

The depressed blue sensitivity can be a drawback when doing portraits, afflicting the subjects with what in my youth was called 'the panchro complaint', a kind of visual anemia with pale lips and cheeks. Here, an IR/UV is clearly in place; in those days, yellow-green and pale blue filters were used in portraiture.

 

 

The old man from the Age of Film

Hey Lars, thanks for your evaluations. You helped put the finger on what I was seeing, but couldn't quite explain and I was a Panatomic kind of guy, too:rolleyes: I now have IR cut filters, so will explore its affects, as well as dig out the UVA & Bs. Accidents are good, too. I had an 81A on my 135mm TE and with daylight WB it turned a very pleasing color rendition, that I didn't expect.

Bob