interesting b&w conversion method

[AusDLK]

Here's an interesting method for creating b&w conversions from color originals published on Martin Fuchs blog.

Takes the Lab lightness channel conversion method to another level.

Dave.

 

[John Friar]

To me this looks like the black and white conversion is simply taking the luminence channel of the LAB mode. Everything done after that isn't black and white conversion but simple contrast adjustment. Am I missing something here?

John

 

[40oz]

we should have a contest for the most convoluted method of desaturating a photo 🙂

 

[Hibbs]

I routinely use this method when preparing images for newsprint. However, I also have a couple extra steps.

1. Convert RGB to LAB
2. From Channels palette, delete all but L
3. Convert to greyscale.
4. Go to Layers palette, copy image to new layer.
5. Change layer mix to 'Multiply'.
6. Adjust layer transparency as required.
7. Flaten image.

I find this is a very quick and easy way to convert...but I use many methods.

 

[dmr]

we should have a contest for the most convoluted method of desaturating a photo 🙂

I'm really not trying to be a snot here, but I'm at a loss to really understand why some people swear by the incredibly complicated and yes, convoluted methods of doing this.

I haven't shot any B&W film for several years, but yes, I'll occasionally do a B&W print. Most of the time I just hit desaturate, tweak the levels a bit, and it looks very presentable, and yes, close to what I think a true panchromatic shot of the same scene would be, allowing for difference in film grain and such.

If it doesn't look right, I'll use the channel mixer, but that's as far as I've ever had to go to get a nice B&W print out of a color negative.

 

[charjohncarter]

I tried this method when I first saw it about a year ago. I then compared it to using a Tri-X preset that I have as a plugin from photo-plugins. Here are the two results the first is Fuchs' method the second is the Tri-X preset. I don't know which you like, but to me they are not very different, and I personally like the Tri-X preset better.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

It's an interesting way to do it, yes.

I think what's missing here is a quick explanation as to why this may be necessary.

A lot of people swear on 8-bit mode processing only. I process everything in 16-bit mode, and when there are some very problematic contrast problems, in 32-bit mode, so that there's a lesser chance for clipping values.

One way is not the only way. If you think that plain desaturation is enough, then that works for you. For some people, the extra steps are done for a reason that they feel is compelling enough to do in order to keep the detail, feel, whatever it is.

I use the Lab mode when doing some contrast changes, in order to preserve or not modify the tones and/or colors in the process. Yes, it's a pain, and takes time, but it's all a personal preference. Just like using Tri-X over Pan-F.

 

[John Friar]

There are countless ways of doing a black and white conversion. I like to pick the easiest (usually a way I can remember) method needed to get the result I want. This is typically using a channel mixer adjustment layer. Sometimes I will use 2 of these layers - one for the sky (using mostly the red channel) and one for the foreground (using mostly the green channel), for example. This is a bit like using a red and green graduated filter with conventional b&w film and, in this example, allows me to darken the sky and lighten foreground vegetation.

 

[peterm1]

I usually find most conversion methods too complex and cannot remember them when I come to use them. This is basically because I am self taught in Photoshop and still have trouble with some of its more advanced functions and features. I hope one day to rectify this. For now I either use the channel approach - using the green channel usually or an adjusted mix of channels if I want to tweak the result. Most often however, I have recourse to several downloaded freeware conversion filters, many of which work pretty well. Search on Google for "freeware photoshop plugin black white conversion." This should do the trick. (You will still get a lot of payware hits I have found.) However one I especially like is one: "Fotomatic Black and White plus" as it allows you to simply select from a drop down menu specifying which colour channel you wish to use and so is very quick and easy. And it usually gives very acceptable results which can be further enhanced by fiddling selectively with saturation in different channels prior to converting and similar techniques. There is no doubt in my mind though that the manual methods have th potential to give the best outcome as they cna be infinitely tweaked depending on the subject.

 

[AusDLK]

>I don't know which you like, but to me they are not very different,
>and I personally like the Tri-X preset better.

I, frankly, think the Fuchs conversion is much better. The blacks are richer.

I normally just use the channel mixed myself. But Fuchs does offer a downloadable action that does a lot of the finger-work. I haven't tried it yet and am not sure I will.

I merely pointed this out since I had learned about the Lab lightness channel method but had not been exposed to the other bell and whistles of the Fuch's method which, yes, goes beyond just a simple conversion into some image enhancement.

I do encourage the "I just hit desaturate" folks to try some other methods (at least channel mixer) since I have always found desaturated images to be rather flat in comparison.

 

[charjohncarter]

OK, try that, just a little curves. It took me less time to do the conversion including the curves than it did to read Fuchs' method or to down load these images. Again, first one is Fuchs' the second one is my plug-ins version