Santa is busy

[Bill Pierce]

One of the advantages the digital has given us over film is the ability to decide after we have taken the picture whether it is a color picture or a black-and-white. Of course, b&w copy negs could be made of color slides, and magazines often did that if your picture wasn’t on a fold with color advertising. But it was an arduous process, and, when most of us tried it at home, there was a loss of quality. When digital scanning came about, it became a lot easier to scan a color film image and convert it in the scan or a digital imaging program like Photoshop.

As digital images became the mainstay of photography, more and more processing programs included more versatile programs for converting and fine tuning digital images in black-and-white. Programs for which that was also the only function appeared. Over the years I’ve played with Photoshop, Lightroom, Capture One, Luminar, Affinity, DxO, Exposure X6, Silver Efex, Topaz B&W and Dfx. Hard to think that is probably just scratching the surface.

And I’m totally confused. I’ve asked this before, but is there an expert out there who can tell me what I should be doing? I’m still using Photoshop, the first program I used for digital images. I have no magic formula. I just twiddle things until they look right. I’d ask Santa Claus for a magic program, but he is busy these days.

 

[Dogman]

I muddle. Eventually it looks right to me. Then I print it.

 

[JeffS7444]

Lightroom, DxO and Capture One are primarily Digital Asset Managers, great for browsing and basic non-destructive editing or batch-corrections in a hurry. I don't have DxO or C1 handy, but Lightroom really isn't designed to make edits permanent, and unless you export your edited image, all it'll take to revert to original state is a single click of the "Reset" button. Usually this is a good thing, and DAMs in general spare you a lot of the drudgery of dealing directly with files, versions and folders.

On the other hand, if your edits represent a lot of work which must be preserved, then Photoshop + manual file management might be a better choice, if a potentially messy one.

 

[gavinlg]

I fiddle till I get ruin the photo and then put it back to the original conversion and leave it.
Alternatively, I scan film and feel satisfied without the need for editing :angel:

 

[Darthfeeble]

Clarity all the way up, Saturation all the way down, Bingo! If you really want to get kinky, go into the color sliders in the BW develop mode.

 

[Bill Pierce]

Clarity all the way up, Saturation all the way down, Bingo! If you really want to get kinky, go into the color sliders in the BW develop mode.

My vote - Clarity all the way up, Saturation all the way down, but contrast down also to balance the increased clarity.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I can't use PS. It takes me away from photography.

 

[shimokita]

The following works for me...

01) Color: Convert the image to b&w
02) Tone: Adjust the contrast
03) Shading: Adjust peripheral illumination
04) Fine Color Control: Darken the sky
05) White Balance Adjustment: Bring adjustments into line
06) Gamma: Enhance details in shadows

WB adjustment: Converting color information to b&w results in different colors being rendered at different levels of brightness, and consequently changing the color cast of the original changes overall contrast as well as allowing adjustments to the brightness of individual subjects. The effect differs from subject to subject within each image. Brightening greens and reducing their contrast while increasing the contrast of reds tens to result in more vibrant images.

Gama adjustment: The absence of color information makes tonal richness important to monochrome images. Everything depends on not blowing out highlights or blocking shadows.

Reference: Silkypix®

 

[Out to Lunch]

I just twiddle things until they look right.

Works for me.

 

[Timmyjoe]

I don't think there's a magic program for B&W conversion. I've asked a number of photographers whose work I respect, how they do their B&W conversions, and have tried their methods. While they work really well for them, not so much for me. So I just muddle thru, usually starting with Aperture, then Silver Efex Pro, then maybe Photoshop, till it looks the way I want it to.

Merry Christmas Everyone.

Best,
-Tim

 

[robert blu]

First I make a virtual copy in LR, than I use the SEP plug iin LR, starting with one of the preset which I usually modify more or less. YThe preset is only a starting point. Than back into LR and final tuning in the develop module. Sometimes a second virtual copy and try a different version...

 

[james.liam]

I can't use PS. It takes me away from photography.

My admiration for Ko.Fe. only deepens over time.

 

[zuiko85]

I can't use PS. It takes me away from photography.

Not sure what you mean. If you use any form of digital, direct from camera, or scanned film, then, if not you, then some software engineer decided for you what that string of 1’s and 0’s final form (the image) would look like. All pictures are processed, one way or another.

 

[hap]

Not sure what you mean. If you use any form of digital, direct from camera, or scanned film, then, if not you, then some software engineer decided for you what that string of 1’s and 0’s final form (the image) would look like. All pictures are processed, one way or another.

Don't take him literally. It's a heuristic..or a haiku rant.
But you do get the point..right?

 

[charjohncarter]

Santa may be busy these days, but he won't fix my photos; ever. Even though I use PSE from way back, I still like Henry Wessel's approach: let the negative sit for a year or two then take a serious look at it.

I don't really do this but I do go back on many negatives when I don't feel I perceived their real potential.