My digital B/W workflow, any comments?

[eeyore_nl]

After having worked with some complicated workflows, including the channel mixer, dedicated plug-ins and filters, the last months I have come to a very simple workflow. Far less work, and more natural looking results, in my opinion:

When I go out shooting B/W pictures, I put the camera in RAW mode (of course), and I enable the B/W preview setting. Usually with a digital color filter.

In my RAW Converter, Canon DPP (but it will probably work similar for Nikon and other cams), I take the B/W preview setting as a basis, and I use the other parameters, like contrast and exposure compensation for tuning the photo. This means that I am never distracted by the color version of the picture (Canon DPP uses the camera settings for previewing the RAW).

I don't do any noise reduction, since digital noise in a B/W picture looks better than the smoothness that noise reduction easily gives you. At least, my opinion.

Essentially, I do all of the B/W conversion in the RAW converter, with the standard color filters (Y/O/R/G/B) and no post-processing in Photoshop. In my opinion, this delivers more natural pictures, it makes (almost) your complete workflow B/W, and it saves a lot of time.

My guess is that part of the more natural look comes from the fact that you are dealing with the RAW file, and not with the converted JPEG picture.

Some results of this:







Any comments or suggestions for improvements? Would you prefer to look at more contrast-rich or more extensively processed pictures? Or do you think working in B/W straight from the camera is just fine?

[my_photography]

I seldom shoot B/W but when I do, I will shoot in Raw and turned on monochrome in channel mixture in PS.

[fatdeeman]

I tend to use the black and white adjustment layer in PS to give the most contrast between different colours, it's like using several colour filters at once.

[cooltouch]

I also shoot RAW and use Canon's DPP. I'll have to give this a try. Your photos certainly look film-like enough at web resolutions.

In the past, I've converted from color film scans to b&w in post processing, and I've taken digital photos and converted them to b&w in post processing as well, but these were shots of the moon, so I just used the 16-bit grayscale conversion, which worked fine.

[eeyore_nl]

Here is a full-size version of a picture that I took today:

http://u1.ipernity.com/14/66/66/7086666.408ddb72.jpg

Monochrome setting in DPP, Orange filter, contrast +2, sharpening +4, WB Daylight.

[martinsmith99]

I use Adobe Bridge to convert as it allows you to tweak the brightness of individual colours.

I sometimes use the gradient map in CS3 to convert as this can give pleasant results quickly.

[eeyore_nl]

[my_photography]

[womble]

Lovely conversions.

Personally, I prefer to use the BW adjustment layer in photoshop 3. It is simple to use, allows quick appreciation of the effect of different filters, and can fine tune the image by dragging the mouse on areas you want to lighten or darken. I can do exactly the same in lightroom although without the preset filters, and of course is non-destructive editing of the RAW file allowing me to revert back to the original file with no hassle.

At the end of the day, as long as you are comfortable with your method and get the results you want, the method itself is not so important.

K.

[francotirador]

those on the right track. Beautiful B & W, my only opinion is ... congratulations

[cooltouch]

One of the good things about doing the B&W tweaking in Canon's DPP is you're working with a RAW image, so all the manipulations are non-destructive, that is, one can always revert the image back to its original state, if so desired.

[martinsmith99]

[eeyore_nl]