Convert to B+W before or post shot?

Just curious what the best way to create a black and white shot is.. whether to set it to black and white in camera or take the shot as normal and convert to black and white in LR? Never been much of a fan but they're starting to grow on me.

The advice that I've seen is to shoot in color, process it to your satisfaction, and then convert to black and white.

Shoot RAW for the most options. If your camera allows you, you could shoot RAW+jpg and have the jpeg converted to mono in-camera so that you get an idea of how the shoot is looking.

Ed

Always shoot in colour. Convert to monochrome in post processing.

I always shoot in color and convert in PS. I find the camera B&W to be a little flat.

ok that's great.. thank you

d4, do you shoot in RAW?

Ed

If you shoot in Canon RAW, the original RAW folder will always stay as colour, no matter what you do to it.

Try it by changing your camera Picture Style to monochrome and then load the image to your computer and if you have used RAW, it will be in colour. So, if you want a monochrome image it is better to convert in PP.

yeah i shoot in raw, i didn't realise it stayed colour despite changing the setting in camera as i've never used any of the inbuilt filters before

Same here, do the B&W conversion in Lightroom. It offers so much more flexibility.

However I like to shoot in B&W mode on my camera in order to have a preview of the final result. Like the other said, the RAW file remains in colours.

Reiep wrote in post #17671995
Same here, do the B&W conversion in Lightroom. It offers so much more flexibility.

However I like to shoot in B&W mode on my camera in order to have a preview of the final result. Like the other said, the RAW file remains in colours.

My understanding is that RAW files are neither color or b&w...it's data. The software you use to access the RAW data and how you use that software determines whether it will be color, mono, b&W, sepia, colorized, or what have you.

I agree with you on having the camera produce b&W jpegs for in-camera viewing while shooting...it lets you see how the shots are working out in regards to contrast, tone, exposure, etc., so that you can adjust things in the direction you wish to go with the images.

Ed

I'm with Reiep. I shoot in RAW but have the camera set to B&W. That gives me a preview on the LCD in B&W which I like for judging tones. However I never actually use that jpeg preview as the in-camera B&W processing (like most in-camera processing) doesn't meet my style/artistic needs. Hence I always process the RAW myself in LR.

Neither, I shoot with a Leica MM but if I were to convert it would be in post. I only shoot raw.

I find use of in-camera Picture Styles a very creative resource. Exposing for JPEGs is good discipline, a lot like using slide film, which has more limited exposure latitude. Also certain high-contrast Picture Styles, particularly for black-and-white, give you access to whole new vistas of studio and speedlite lighting flexibility.

There is certainly more flexibility with RAW, but it also creates a post-processing burden after the shoot. My clients can far more easily use the JPEGs made directly by the camera, than RAW, esp. since the 7D2 RAW won't work with Photoshop CS5.

Think in B&W, shoot in color.

raksphoto wrote in post #17700486
I find use of in-camera Picture Styles a very creative resource. Exposing for JPEGs is good discipline, a lot like using slide film, which has more limited exposure latitude. Also certain high-contrast Picture Styles, particularly for black-and-white, give you access to whole new vistas of studio and speedlite lighting flexibility.

I feel a bit differently about the in-camera styles, tbh. I understand the point you're making, about the limitation forcing you to consider other elements more carefully (composition, lighting, careful control of exposure, etc) at the time of shooting, but on the other hand what you end up with is really just one possible rendering of the RAW data, and it's a rendering preset that Canon chose, not you. There is nothing wrong with imposing these limits on yourself, but I'd personally want to shoot RAW + JPEG in this case, so that I would have all the benefit of how the limitations affected the composition of the shot, but none of the drawbacks of possibly getting stuck with a photo that should be a keeper, but can't be saved due to technical limitations. Memory cards are cheap, and you can always through data away.

raksphoto wrote in post #17700486
There is certainly more flexibility with RAW, but it also creates a post-processing burden after the shoot. My clients can far more easily use the JPEGs made directly by the camera, than RAW, esp. since the 7D2 RAW won't work with Photoshop CS5.

Again, all of our cameras can shoot RAW + JPEG, and unless you need the highest possible framerates and buffer capacity for an action sequence, there is little downside to having the RAW data available. You can have SOOC shots for your clients, but still have the digital "negatives" available if they ask for changes. Post-process burden is all relative and totally in your control. You can tweak each shot for days, or you can just batch render the RAW to JPGs with a few clicks. Plus, pulling a shot by a stop or two, or correcting white balance is less of a burden than reshooting.