Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-18-2020, 04:08 PM - 2 Likes   #46
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
ramseybuckeye's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hampstead, NC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 17,276
I went out this morning with the same parameters on the monochrome custom image that I set for the Christmas lights, daylight is a little more "fair" to test the settings. There was a little fog and clouds this morning, with occasional sun peaking through. Again shooting Raw+ so I also have a raw version, but i was pleased with the look of these SOOC monochromes, here's a couple of them:
The Sun through fog, K-50, DA*300 with DA 1.4 Converter:


K-50 and DA 20-40:




12-18-2020, 04:33 PM - 2 Likes   #47
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Lancaster
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,821
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
Thanks to everyone who responded thus far. I really appreciate your views and input

By way of further explanation, and to address one of the more common points raised in the responses, I have been shooting only raw for five or six years now, and for most of my day-to-day photography I wouldn't want to use anything else. I'm not intending to shoot B&W JPEG only in the long term... that's not even a consideration.

My interest in conducting this little experiment lies primarily, I think, in the discipline it'll require... greater awareness of light and shadow with respect to composition of B&W images; the need for accurate exposure to avoid losing important shadow or highlight detail (and deciding when and where I'm happy to compromise one or the other); restricting myself to in-camera results rather than post-processing... essentially, working within unfamiliar limitations and outside my comfort zone. I love the flexibility of raw files, but at times I think I allow myself to become complacent or lazy, given the latitude for correction in post Working with restrictions isn't new to me... I do it frequently, choosing my older cameras and lenses instead of my K-3 and DA Limited glass, for instance; but this would be an entirely different set of restrictions than I've shot with before.

I'm not so concerned about achieving optimum image quality, nor even the nicest possible B&W "look". Of course, I'd intend to set the camera up as best I can for appealing output to suit a range of uses (this, in itself, would be an interesting challenge), and would allow myself the flexibility to choose different filter colours in the settings appropriate to given scenarios... much as any B&W film photographer would choose an appropriate filter in the field. I don't mind that I could achieve much more nuanced tones if shooting raw and converting to B&W in post. This isn't about getting "ideal" B&W photos, I think, but working with whatever I've got available in-camera, free of post-processing "responsibilities"... for a while, at least.

If I carry through with this (and I'm not completely decided yet), I think I must choose JPEG only rather than raw + JPEG. There's a chance I'd regret it, but that in itself would be a valid outcome from the experiment. If I shoot raw+, I have a feeling I'd be tempted to try processing the raws to see how much better (or at least "different") they would be.

Thanks again for your feedback. If I go ahead with this (and I suspect I will), I'll endeavour to update you
Why not do a sic or dic jpeg only for the whole month that’d test your resolve
12-18-2020, 04:40 PM - 1 Like   #48
Digitiser of Film
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 20,571
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Cerebum Quote
Why not do a sic or dic jpeg only for the whole month that’d test your resolve
Funnily enough, in my last post I almost compared what I'm thinking of doing to the "Single In" challenges I mean, it's not a single lens (although it could be... hmmm ), but it's a similar limitation of scope, right?

I might have to do it for more than a month, though, given how little I've been out shooting recently
12-18-2020, 05:13 PM - 2 Likes   #49
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
robgski's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,759
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
but it's a similar limitation of scope
Not a limitation, a challenge!
Several of us SIC Pentaxians observed MoNovember for the entire month. I enjoyed it quite a bit, though I wish you'd suggested the in-camera version in October just so I could have tried it out over the past month.

12-19-2020, 12:11 AM - 2 Likes   #50
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Lancaster
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,821
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
Funnily enough, in my last post I almost compared what I'm thinking of doing to the "Single In" challenges I mean, it's not a single lens (although it could be... hmmm ), but it's a similar limitation of scope, right?

I might have to do it for more than a month, though, given how little I've been out shooting recently
Ah, in the daily in you can use any camera/lens combo I am trying to do both this month, because I am nuts! My new job means my shooting is limited to bailey walks, which cover the same area every day and are mostly in the dark! :0/
12-19-2020, 01:34 AM - 1 Like   #51
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Alex645's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,526
QuoteOriginally posted by ramseybuckeye Quote
I went out this morning with the same parameters on the monochrome custom image that I set for the Christmas lights, daylight is a little more "fair" to test the settings. Again shooting Raw+ so I also have a raw version, but i was pleased with the look of these SOOC monochromes, here's a couple of them:
Ok, but then did you post process the RAW files and compare them to these jpegs? The only times I've found the jpeg consistently outperformed my RAW Photoshop skills, were with high ISO and star fields.
12-19-2020, 04:25 AM - 2 Likes   #52
Digitiser of Film
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 20,571
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by ramseybuckeye Quote
I went out this morning with the same parameters on the monochrome custom image that I set for the Christmas lights, daylight is a little more "fair" to test the settings. There was a little fog and clouds this morning, with occasional sun peaking through. Again shooting Raw+ so I also have a raw version, but i was pleased with the look of these SOOC monochromes
Both beautiful shots. I thought I liked #2 best, then changed my mind to #1, and now I like both equally. They stand up well to large-sized viewing in your Flickr pool...

QuoteOriginally posted by Alex645 Quote
Ok, but then did you post process the RAW files and compare them to these jpegs? The only times I've found the jpeg consistently outperformed my RAW Photoshop skills, were with high ISO and star fields.
Carefully-processed raws are undoubtedly going to be better (assuming reasonable post-processing skills), but this begs the question, how good is "good enough"? As I mentioned in my previous post, my personal preference for day-to-day shooting is raw, but if (and only if) you can get the results you want using straight-from-camera JPEG, does the work required in processing raw files warrant your time? I'm not referring to you specifically, but to those who choose to shoot JPEG...


Last edited by BigMackCam; 12-19-2020 at 08:21 AM.
12-19-2020, 04:50 AM - 2 Likes   #53
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
robgski's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,759
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
but if (and only if) you can get the results you want using straight-from-camera JPEG, does the work required in processing raw files warrant your time?
Great point, and it's the reason I primarily start by looking at the JPEG and making minor PP tweaks rather than jump into the deep end of RAW pool by default. Life's too short to be a pixel peeper.
12-19-2020, 05:28 AM - 2 Likes   #54
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2012
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,787
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
Carefully-processed raws are undoubtedly going to be better (assuming reasonable post-processing skills), but this begs the question, how good is "good enough"? As I mentioned in my previous post, my personal preference for day-to-day shooting is raw, but if (and only if) you can get the results you want using straight-from-camera JPEG, does the work required in processing raw files warrant your time? I'm not referring to you specifically, but to those who choose to shoot JPEG...
I don't know that I could get to a workflow with OOC jpgs that save me much time. It's pretty rare that I have a photo that I don't tweak just a little, even if it's just straightening the horizon or bumping exposure just a bit. And even the ones I don't touch have been run through a Squirrel Mafia RawTherapee preset to do some baseline noise correction, auto-tone curve, capture sharpening, etc. I guess I could set something like that up in camera?


The few times I've used RAW+JPG I find myself spending as much time figuring out the sorting and discarding and tweaking of the JPGs as I would post-processing the RAWs.

This may change when the K-3iii comes out with usable WiFi. I may use small JPGs to transfer to my phone for more immediate sharing. But we'll see how that goes...
12-19-2020, 08:03 AM   #55
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Baltimore
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,383
QuoteOriginally posted by UncleVanya Quote
That’s exactly how it works.
QuoteOriginally posted by Michail_P Quote
Yes indeed. If you shoot raw+ , you can get the jpeg to be bw or any other “filter”. The Raw is always Raw.
If you like in-camera processing, you may play with the image after the shot. Again, you are safe, you have the raw.
OK, thanks to both of you. Never really considered this---I've been shooting raw for so long I kind of forget about jpg's. Never use them outside of my phone for personal stuff, and at work only for installation time-lapses that move quick (so the buffer's too small for raw shooting....).

So, maybe during this winter season I'll try this to help review the raw shots for potential conversions.
12-19-2020, 01:24 PM - 2 Likes   #56
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Alex645's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,526
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
Carefully-processed raws are undoubtedly going to be better (assuming reasonable post-processing skills), but this begs the question, how good is "good enough"?
For years, news agencies like AP and Reuters allowed photographers to shoot RAW so that they could submit higher quality images. However, too many photographers over processed and edited their RAW files to the point that photos began crossing the line with reality.

Now, AP and Reuters only accepts jpegs (as shot in camera) because it deters the photographer from manipulation and the in-camera processing is pretty standardized and "good enough".
12-19-2020, 03:12 PM   #57
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Avalon Peninsula, Newfoundland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,777
QuoteOriginally posted by Alex645 Quote
For years, news agencies like AP and Reuters allowed photographers to shoot RAW so that they could submit higher quality images. However, too many photographers over processed and edited their RAW files to the point that photos began crossing the line with reality.

Now, AP and Reuters only accepts jpegs (as shot in camera) because it deters the photographer from manipulation and the in-camera processing is pretty standardized and "good enough".
Makes sense...but AP/Reuter's is not in the business of creating beauty. They are in the business of accuracy.
12-21-2020, 01:37 PM - 2 Likes   #58
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Kiddo70's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,399
QuoteOriginally posted by Kiddo70 Quote
I shoot jpeg B&w all the time with my K-70s. The filter effects including hard monochrome are very helpful and add some unusual effects. Some minor processing after downloading can increase contrast or add vintage effects. I don’t see the need for RAW processing.
SOOC - no post, just a jpeg.

Last edited by Kiddo70; 11-17-2021 at 10:28 AM.
12-22-2020, 08:01 PM - 1 Like   #59
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,990
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
If I carry through with this (and I'm not completely decided yet), I think I must choose JPEG only rather than raw + JPEG. There's a chance I'd regret it, but that in itself would be a valid outcome from the experiment. If I shoot raw+, I have a feeling I'd be tempted to try processing the raws to see how much better (or at least "different") they would be.
The most straightforward benefit to doing RAW+ is that you could then get 16-bit b&w out of them, as opposed to only the 8-bit JPG.

---------- Post added 12-22-20 at 08:04 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by ramseybuckeye Quote
Here is the SOOC jpeg followed by the LR processed raw file. Although it's a goofy photo, I think it's acceptable in both formats.
Both are good, though you probably could get more subtle tonal variation on the leaves of the middle tree if you converted to B&W from the RAW after-the-fact.
12-25-2020, 05:56 PM - 1 Like   #60
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
bkpix's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Creswell, Oregon
Photos: Albums
Posts: 568
Even though practically all my printed work for sale is in BW, and I quite like the KP's jpeg processor, I always shoot DNG for serious photography. That way I can do the conversion at my leisure in Darktable, which offers a range of BW conversion tools. Or, I should say I used to work that way. Lately I've found the in-camera jpegs so good that I shoot color jpegs and then do the BW conversion in darktable. Kind of strips down the file size, which makes a difference if I've shot 750 images in a day.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
colour, files, flickr, image, in-camera, jpeg, jpegs, kay, morning, photography, post
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Green Auto Setting....Does It Only Shoot In JPEG? BirdDude007 Pentax K-5 & K-5 II 3 01-12-2020 05:30 PM
For Sale - Sold: Samsung ECX 1 35mm Point & Shoot Film Camera - Coolest camera ever :) scottDee Sold Items 2 03-29-2019 01:47 PM
Anyone ever shoot NY Fashion Week w/ Pentax DSLRs? kenyee Photographic Industry and Professionals 2 09-23-2013 02:58 PM
Does anyone ever open up a 16-50 or 50-135 for servicing? lightbulb Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 12-03-2012 09:49 PM
Does anyone else ever wish....... Docrwm General Talk 16 10-07-2012 02:40 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:00 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top