Mono-in camera or not?

[Stephen]

Re: Mono-in camera or not?

Thanks for your input on this one Patrick Better late than never I suppose Seriously, many here may not know about your penchant for B/W and how you have strived to get the perfect digital B/W print, coming from the standpoint of a film/darkroom background.

[Patrick]

Re: Mono-in camera or not?

Thanks for your input on this one Patrick Better late than never I suppose Seriously, many here may not know about your penchant for B/W and how you have strived to get the perfect digital B/W print, coming from the standpoint of a film/darkroom background.

[rogleale]

Re: Mono-in camera or not?

Hi DTD,

Have you tried the beta of CS3? The new 'convert to B&W' (File>black and white) in that is terrific, giving you far more options than the channel mixer.

Roger

[rogleale]

Re: Mono-in camera or not?

Hi,
Seen my answer to dtd above? Channel mixer is dead!

Roger

[rogleale]

Re: Mono-in camera or not?

Hi George,

I happen to disagree with you there. Shooting to a raw file gives you all the captured information that the camera captured, and that means that you can make all the transformations that the camera software did, or any others that you would like to try.
When you select mono, or b&w, for a shot, the sensor still gathers the same info from the scene I think.

Roger

[Steve40]

Re: Mono-in camera or not?

Ok let me fire my cannon. The image that started this shot, "mono distant lands" is a good example. I don't know if anyone else has noticed this phenomenon or not - but it does not respond to all methods of B&W conversion. Probably it has to do with its limit of 256 shades, as compared to 24 bit color which is quite a few more than 256 shades.

I have three different methods in my editor, plus at least 4 plugins to work with b&w. None of them would do what I wanted to do with it. My only resort was to play around with the brightness, and contrast. Which I could not get to produce a really good range of gray tones.

However I can take a color image, and convert it with any of the methods at my disposal, and control the range of grays to suit. So using color has proven, at least to me, that this is the best method.

I don't find it confusing to use color, I think light and shadow when going after b&w shots - not color. So in effect I can ignore the colors I see, and concentrate on the two components that make b&w images. That's why I said in the other thread, all color images a good b&w image they do not make.

[chryslerchick]

Re: Mono-in camera or not?

i did take notice of what steve40 & others said about my mono distant lands pics & went away to fiddle with some of my colour pics [as in my "the woods" posting], & i must say after using my photoimpact [which is quite realy ] it did convert my colour pic much better than my camera did,so i suppose anyone with decent photo editing software could certainly by looks of things get better mono pics via using software to convert rather than camera.but it also could depend on your actual camera & how it converts the image realy to wether you get a good quality shot via the camera or via software.it seems to me its all a game of trial & error & what you the photographer is looking for in your picture.
cc

[Steve40]

Re: Mono-in camera or not?

You are right about photoimpact being . I use PhotoBrush to which I have about 70 plugins, and Adobe Elements. And you are right for the most part, about the Photographers choice in editing. For instance I like most of my B&W a little on the dramatic side. I really love to emphasize the shadow to highlight areas.

[Ian]

Re: Mono-in camera or not?

Ulead Photoimpact isn't bad, in fact it has a nice user interface. It's just a little behind the times. I see that Corel has acquired Ulead through the purchase of another company that was buying Ulead!

Ian

[chryslerchick]

Re: Mono-in camera or not?

steve ,ian yer photoimpact is ok for me coz its simple to use but looking at some of the photos in the galleries & forum that have used editing software theres just make for better pics no sorry not better erm just a bit more interesting sometimes,i also use fuji's own photo forums & nearly all use photoshop i think it is & produce some amazing effects on their pics,but i think it wise i stick to getting my settings & pics right before i start trying to do fancy stuff with them cc

[Steve40]

Re: Mono-in camera or not?

Don't get me wrong there are a lot worse than PhotoImpact, like AC-DC which I always thought was a rock band. My main complaint is, that it is so slow, but that was on my 650. I am now running 1.2 gigs, and I havent tried PI to see if there is any diffrence.