took advice" the woods"

[chryslerchick]

ok i took your advice from my previous mono thread about not using the camera to convert to B&W but to use the computer so im posting the original colour pic & the camera B&W & then finaly the pic that i used my comp to convert. & yep i now totaly agree you can realy see the difference,so in future will take in colour & then convert as it certainly adds more texture & tones

[Steve40]

Re: took advice" the woods"

That's kind of weird, you cameras version almost looks infrared. At any rate the convert from color has it beat. I don't know how my camera records B&W, I have never used it.

[chryslerchick]

Re: took advice" the woods"

maybe i had camera on wrong settings steve thats why it looks infrared ? as i havnt realy got to grips with getting the absolute correct setting for the picture yet,but i will keep trying. but after fiddling about i could def see the disadvantages of using the camera B&W settings[ unless if i had it on correct setting it would have come out better ]??

[Ian]

Re: took advice" the woods"

The camera has brought out more shadow detail, but the effect, as Steve said, is to make it almost luminous. There is still a bit of colour left in your computer mono version

Ian

[chryslerchick]

Re: took advice" the woods"

ahh yes i see it now ian,thanks for that. i have not used software before exept to reduce or crop for uploading my pics so is a bit of trial & error as well as that i realy should get better software at mo just got photo impact 10.but will keep experimenting with it,thanks cc

[Tinka]

Re: took advice" the woods"

Hi Chryslerchick,
I actually like the color image, a well spotted and composed landscape, you certainly have the ability to see and compose a photograph, however, as you have discovered, the converted image is far superior to the in camera mono. Nicely done.

[lumix]

Re: took advice" the woods"

ahh yes i see it now ian,thanks for that. i have not used software before exept to reduce or crop for uploading my pics so is a bit of trial & error as well as that i realy should get better software at mo just got photo impact 10.but will keep experimenting with it,thanks cc

Have a go with this programme. Picasa2 has some very easy to use B&W conversion options which include filter effects. It's free and you can get it here http://picasa.google.com/download/

[Steve40]

Re: took advice" the woods"

I really like to play with stuff, here is another option. That's why the caption under my avatar says "Expert Photo Fumbler".

[rogleale]

Re: took advice" the woods"

Hi Steve,
Your camera always records the same data. It then processes this data in the mode that you have requested, ie black and white, in the process dropping lots of information. The same data is recorded by the sensor regardless of the output that you have programmed but a lot of it may be discarded if you don't also have a raw file saved.
I hope that helps you.

Roger

[Steve40]

Re: took advice" the woods"

Roger.

RAW of course is not an option with most compact, or even bridge cameras. I feel the B&W, and Sepia modes on them are just bell & whistle selling points, I don't know why they even bother. Using the color mode, and doing a later B&W conversion is the only answer in this case.

However my son used to have a Olympus made way back when, one megapixel camera, that actually had RAW options. I really don't see why - the memory cards way back when could only hold about one RAW image.

[chryslerchick]

Re: took advice" the woods"

thanks 4 that ron have downloaded didnt realise how many pic files we're in my comp..thats my flamming girls & their pics for their piczo websites..hardly any of mine,will have a good look around the programme later

steve to be honest im not actualy sure if i like your conversion,i know you're a proffessional but cant quite make up my mind

thanks tinka for a change i actualy like the colour one as well

[Steve40]

Re: took advice" the woods"

PROFFESIONAL!? - I wish.

[Archangel]

Re: took advice" the woods"

ok i took your advice from my previous mono thread about not using the camera to convert to B&W but to use the computer so im posting the original colour pic & the camera B&W & then finaly the pic that i used my comp to convert. & yep i now totaly agree you can realy see the difference,so in future will take in colour & then convert as it certainly adds more texture & tones

Hi chryslerchick,

The version transformed to B&W (Grayscale) in the computer has left some color as Ian stated.
Also have in mind this in order to perform the test you conducted exactly as it should be done:
When the camera is switched to B&W, the camera uses a standard preset of settings to take the photo. When you want to take the same shot in color, see what are these preset settings that the camera used for B&W and matched them also in color (e.g, WB, Saturation Control, Contrast Adjustment, Image Sharpening). If you don't match these settings in both color and B&W, you will end up with two different images in terms of similarity of exposure, detail and WB, apart from the color difference of course.

For the specific B&W image you supplied, I think there is a difference in WB.
Maybe you used custom WB for the color version, but when switched to B&W the camera automatically switches to "AUTO WB" for example.

Personally I've seen exactly the opposite in my tests compare to your findings.
If you shoot in RAW, then shoot in color and transform the RAW to jpeg.
If you shoot in jpeg, then it is better to have the camera shoot straight in B&W. That is my personal opinion.


Regards

George