Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 06 Nov 2004 (Saturday) 17:03
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

A Comparison: Color, 20D B&W, Processed B&W

 
Scottes
Trigger Man - POTN Retired
Avatar
12,842 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Nov 2003
Location: A Little North Of Boston, MA, USA
     
Nov 06, 2004 17:03 |  #1

A recent topic, B&W: Camera vs Post Processing, talked about comparing the 20D's Black & White mode to a processed B&W. I gave it a shot, just to see.

Since I've never ever ever "thought" in B&W before this was a stretch for me.

Here's the 20D's B&W mode image, from Large Fine JPG. Very little was done to this, with the thought being that B&W mode would be used if one was in a rush. This image got Level'd because it looked a bit underexposed, and a small amount of Curves was done.

IMAGE: http://www.itsanadventure.com/postimages/IronWorks_54177.jpg


This is the processed image. It was taken in RAW and converted in PS CS. It was a straight convert - I didn't change anything from the defaults. Strangely, even though this image had the exact same settings as the B&W, exposure looked correct.

Once converted I pulled the full gamut of processing. Some Shadows & Highlights, Levels, and Curves. I then proceeded to convert to B&W using this (external link) tutorial on Adobe's site, done by Russell Brown. This was not an extensive conversion since, as I said, I don't think in B&W. I moved sliders around, and got *some* idea of what I was doing after a couple minutes. I then proceeded to muck with the Hue & Saturation of the Blues to bring out the sky, and tried mucking with the Greens to change the grass. (The grass didn't change much.) I got it to a decent point, and then played for a bit without improvement so I called it Done.

IMAGE: http://www.itsanadventure.com/postimages/IronWorks_54176bw.jpg


Personally, I think that the sky alone was worth the extra effort of processing to B&W. I think the trees in the background look a little better in the processed version, but could still use some improvement. I think the wood in the processed version looks a little better but not by much. I'd still do a processed version if I ever did this again.

But I'd really like to see a comparsion done by someone who knows what they're doing, and using an image more appropriate to B&W. The B&W of this version doesn't do much for me.


For the curious, here's a fully processed color version which was used to create the second image. I like the color version a lot better - but I'm just not a B&W kind of guy. (Yet?)

IMAGE: http://www.itsanadventure.com/postimages/IronWorks_54176.jpg

You can take my 100-400 L away when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
Scottes' Rum Pages - Rum Reviews And Info (external link)
Follower of Fidget - Joined the cult of HAMSTTR©

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drisley
"What a Tool I am"
Avatar
9,002 posts
Likes: 108
Joined Nov 2002
     
Nov 06, 2004 18:47 |  #2

Very nice. Yes the sky is nicer in the second image.
However, I wonder what result you could have got using one of the 20D's b&w filters?


EOS R6 Mark II - Sigma 50/1.4 Art - Sigma 14-24/2.8 Art - Canon EF 70-200/2.8L Mark III - Godox Xpro-C - Godox TT685C x2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PacAce
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
26,900 posts
Likes: 40
Joined Feb 2003
Location: Keystone State, USA
     
Nov 06, 2004 21:16 |  #3

And just for comparison purposes, here's the image shot with a Red filter (simulated by just using the Red channel of the color picture above).

IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

...Leo

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
timmyquest
Goldmember
4,172 posts
Joined Dec 2003
Location: Outside of Chicago
     
Nov 06, 2004 21:24 |  #4
bannedPermanent ban

Ya know to be honest with you the B&W photos from the 20D that i have sen are fantastic.

However, now that i have learned how to have so much control over my B&W's thorugh PS. I dont think that i'd ever use it.

That said, again...canon did a nice job here with this.


Capturing life a fraction of a second at a time

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DeeplyDigital
Senior Member
Avatar
270 posts
Joined Jun 2004
Location: Dublino - IE
     
Nov 07, 2004 08:51 |  #5

The home spun BW images are definitely better.

A quick example

camera bw small jpeg

IMAGE NOT FOUND
Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE


homemade bw on the quick (from raw)
IMAGE NOT FOUND
Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE


a different version
IMAGE NOT FOUND
Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE


original
IMAGE NOT FOUND
Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE


Sometimes I know what I am doing. Can't see well enough today though..

J.
-



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

2,488 views & 0 likes for this thread, 5 members have posted to it.
A Comparison: Color, 20D B&W, Processed B&W
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Thunderstream
1857 guests, 99 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.