I wanna take it back (Black and White)

RioRico · 04-13-2010, 08:52 AM

Originally posted by Ira

Masks frighten me.

I used to have a Nixon mask that was pretty scary.

Originally posted by FHPhotographer

Jeff, GerryIt's many things, and used on the right image and done well, it can be a wonderful treatment, but sepia isn't B&W

Call it instead, monochrome. Back in the day, I mail-ordered many cheap outdated rolls of photo print paper from Freestyle. Among those were some labeled warm-tone or cold-tone, as well as neutral-tone. From the same monochrome Panatomic-X negative, I could make prints that were sepia-and-white, blue-and-white, or black-and-white. All monochrome, but with different toning.

B&W is a convenient tag to apply to any monochrome or grayscale image. It doesn't reflect TRUE high-contrast black-white. Digital B-W is a 1-bit rendering with no intermediate tones, no grayscaling. B&W isn't B-W. Taken to an 4-bit (16 color) standard, the ON pixels in a B-W image could be rendered as any of the 15 standard colors, and the image would still be monochrome: one color, plus white. Taken to an 8- or 16- or 24- or 32-bit standard, if the ON pixels are rendered as only one color amongst the 256-gazillion available, the image is still monochrome. But if you've rendered the image as grayscale, and those shades of gray are rendered as something other than #000000 or #FFFFFF, then the image isn't monochrome, isn't black-and-white. Grayscale isn't B-W.

So, how sloppy can we be when applying that B&W tag? Is it restricted to grayscale, which isn't B-W? Is it applicable to any one-color (monochrome) rendering, even when that one color isn't dead black? Image printers have for a long time, since the beginnings of the craft, rendered monochromatic images in tones. Do we retroactively de-classify their work as non-B&W?

vize · 04-13-2010, 09:00 AM

I tried for a little bit to pad my post count as well, but as you can see from my post count, I haven't had much success. All this contest does is lead to some meaningless dialog, sacrificing quality for quantity.

GerryL · 04-13-2010, 09:30 AM

Originally posted by FHPhotographer

Jeff, Gerry If you think its b&w and run it through any kind of digital color correction, the brown/purple colors are deleted and you have b&w.

Sepia is a B&W print additive process that started out the pigment made from a cuttlefish applied to the B&W print. Latter it was replaced by a three-step wet development silver halide process , other times various dyes and chemicals were used including ferricyanide were used, but generally it it was an unpleasant and unhealthful process. However, all digital conversion, no matter the software, uses a variation on the basic duo-tone additive system of applying a tone to an image. It's many things, and used on the right image and done well, it can be a wonderful treatment, but sepia isn't B&W,
Brian

That is why I said "can be considered" and it is treated as "duotone".
If you want to be strictly B&W, therefore it is just the pen and ink illustrations and linear drawings much like woodblock prints that are really B&W as it is strictly without any tones.

This is from the Wikipeadia : All photography was originally monochrome, or black-and-white. Even after color film was readily available, black-and-white photography continued to dominate for decades, due to its lower cost and its "classic" photographic look. It is important to note that some monochromatic pictures are not always pure blacks and whites, but also contain other hues depending on the process. The cyanotype process produces an image of blue and white for example. The albumen process, first used more than 150 years ago, produces brown tones.

Many photographers continue to produce some monochrome images. Some full color digital images are processed using a variety of techniques to create black and whites, and some manufacturers produce digital cameras that exclusively shoot monochrome.

Here's the link if you want to read it yourself: Photography - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

FHPhotographer · 04-13-2010, 10:26 AM

Originally posted by Ira

This is unbelievable, but I swear:

As I was posting that last night, this "idea" came to my head as well. (Don't have the Efex though.) In addition, couldn't you actually convert it to CMYK as well, to give you an extra channel to play with?

But let's say just RGB--you would simply add 3 layers, one channel for each, and delete the background image?

Ira, I guess you could do all three layers, I've never tried it. Generally (mostly, usually, regularly

) I find I don't need the green channel because it brings in too much noise without adding a lot to the conversion. The hard part is figuring out then the stacking order for the R/B channels and the opacity and fill for each. In my experience, it varies from image to image, like this...

Red Channel on top of stack

Blue Channel on top of stack

Then, Red channel on top of stack, Multiply Mode @ 80% Opacity and 60% Fill

FHPhotographer · 04-13-2010, 10:51 AM

Gerry,Jeff,Rio... perhaps the problem is using the term sepia that I originally challenged in the context of digital B&W. It doesn't really fit in the digital context. Perhaps it's better to use the fairly standardized Adobe definitions, "The Black & White adjustment lets you convert a color image to grayscale while maintaining full control over how individual colors are converted. You can also tint the grayscale by applying a color tone to the image, for example to create a sepia effect." and later in the Help Menu "In Photoshop, duotone refers to monotones, tritones, and quadtones as well as duotones. Monotones are grayscale images printed with a single, non-black ink. Duotones, tritones, and quadtones are grayscale images printed with two, three, and four inks. In these images, colored inks, rather than different shades of gray, are used to reproduce tinted grays."
It's pretty clear that Adobe considers sepia to be a additive toning effect,
Brian

NecroticSoldier · 04-13-2010, 01:12 PM

I'm still really really confused how you can make a natural black and white photo out of a digital... even having read all these posts.

CWyatt · 04-13-2010, 02:27 PM

Originally posted by NecroticSoldier

I'm still really really confused how you can make a natural black and white photo out of a digital... even having read all these posts.

I would be too! I say get Nik Silver Efex Pro. If you can't get that, use the black and white conversion sliders in photoshop, and just play around with that.

**rparmar** · 04-13-2010, 02:45 PM

Originally posted by Ira

Masks frighten me.

You say that with the avatar you have!

Originally posted by CWyatt

I would be too! I say get Nik Silver Efex Pro. If you can't get that, use the black and white conversion sliders in photoshop, and just play around with that.

Yes, don't get caught up in all the complexity. The B&W adjustment layer offers all the options you need most of the time. It's easy to use.

JeffJS · 04-13-2010, 02:58 PM

Originally posted by rparmar

You say that with the avatar you have!

Yes, don't get caught up in all the complexity. The B&W adjustment layer offers all the options you need most of the time. It's easy to use.

It's easy to use if you have Photoshop. I doubt he (the OP) does. All the discussion of photoshop and fancy add-ons or stand alone programs is nice but without the coin to purchase the software, not of much use to some. Which is why I suggested originally, trying a de-saturation and playing with the shadows and highlights and other simple adjustments. If someone has any ideas on how to accomplish it with the pentax software (I don't) or freebie software, I'd bet the OP is all ears.

**rparmar** · 04-13-2010, 03:36 PM

OK, good point. NecroticSoldier, what software do you use? For high-end use you can get Gimp, which is free and open source. Does pretty well anything Photoshop does. So money is not a reason to lag behind on image processing.

Then, you can follow this tutorial, which offers no less than six ways to get the job done.

Had I 20 years experience in Gimp, I would stop talking about Photoshop altogether. But, alas, no.

NecroticSoldier · 04-13-2010, 03:40 PM

Originally posted by rparmar

OK, good point. NecroticSoldier, what software do you use? For high-end use you can get Gimp, which is free and open source. Does pretty well anything Photoshop does. So money is not a reason to lag behind on image processing.

Then, you can follow this tutorial, which offers no less than six ways to get the job done.

Had I 20 years experience in Gimp, I would stop talking about Photoshop altogether. But, alas, no.

I... Don't use anything... I have Gimp on my computer and Pentax software... as well as photo.net thing. I will try to learn, you guys can call me Justin... NecroticSoldier is such a weird name...

Ira · 04-13-2010, 04:07 PM

Originally posted by NecroticSoldier

I... Don't use anything... I have Gimp on my computer and Pentax software... as well as photo.net thing. I will try to learn, you guys can call me Justin... NecroticSoldier is such a weird name...

Mazel Tov! We know your name now!

Justin, that's why all of my screen names, for wherever I register and whatever I do, has my actual name, although I often have to add numbers to it in order to register. It just makes it more personal and easier for people to remember you.

NecroticSoldier · 04-13-2010, 04:10 PM

Originally posted by Ira

Mazel Tov! We know your name now!

Justin, that's why all of my screen names, for wherever I register and whatever I do, has my actual name, although I often have to add numbers to it in order to register. It just makes it more personal and easier for people to remember you.

Haha! Yeah, not used to using my real name, my name is also on my profile or something. MAZEL TOY?

**rparmar** · 04-13-2010, 04:38 PM

Can I suggest you put your name in your sig then? There are so many people here it becomes impossible for someone with my bad memory to keep track. But, welcome!

RioRico · 04-13-2010, 10:38 PM

Names: I yam wot I am and that's all wot I yam.

But I digress.

While we're talking how-to-mono, I'll volunteer that I've used PaintShopPro for many generations now. I usually keep its Channel Mixer preset to about 15% Red, 55% Green, 75% Blue; monochrome yes; Grey output channel. To mono-ize a colored JPG containing human features, I'll duplicate the background layer and invoke the Channel Mixer on the copied layer (which is on top). Then I switch to the background layer and convert it to Greyscale. Then I switch back to the top layer and turn the transparency slider to somewhere between 30-70%, whatever looks best. Then, merge the layers. I might then run the Clarify filter a couple times, which is sort of like a low-budget HDR. This tends to give a Tri-X'y sort of look. Ah, habit...

04-13-2010, 10:26 AM	#34
FHPhotographer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Fountain Hills, AZ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,297	R/B Channel conversion Originally posted by Ira This is unbelievable, but I swear: As I was posting that last night, this "idea" came to my head as well. (Don't have the Efex though.) In addition, couldn't you actually convert it to CMYK as well, to give you an extra channel to play with? But let's say just RGB--you would simply add 3 layers, one channel for each, and delete the background image? Ira, I guess you could do all three layers, I've never tried it. Generally (mostly, usually, regularly ) I find I don't need the green channel because it brings in too much noise without adding a lot to the conversion. The hard part is figuring out then the stacking order for the R/B channels and the opacity and fill for each. In my experience, it varies from image to image, like this... Red Channel on top of stack Blue Channel on top of stack Then, Red channel on top of stack, Multiply Mode @ 80% Opacity and 60% Fill

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Some Black and White	Pentastic	Post Your Photos!	3	09-08-2009 05:19 AM
Black and White	linuxpie	Post Your Photos!	5	05-09-2009 12:29 PM
Nothing but black and white	Eastern Shore Charlie	Post Your Photos!	6	11-10-2008 11:53 AM
some black and white	Tyler	Post Your Photos!	2	06-15-2007 02:42 PM

04-13-2010, 08:52 AM	#31
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by Ira Masks frighten me. I used to have a Nixon mask that was pretty scary. Originally posted by FHPhotographer Jeff, GerryIt's many things, and used on the right image and done well, it can be a wonderful treatment, but sepia isn't B&W Call it instead, monochrome. Back in the day, I mail-ordered many cheap outdated rolls of photo print paper from Freestyle. Among those were some labeled warm-tone or cold-tone, as well as neutral-tone. From the same monochrome Panatomic-X negative, I could make prints that were sepia-and-white, blue-and-white, or black-and-white. All monochrome, but with different toning. B&W is a convenient tag to apply to any monochrome or grayscale image. It doesn't reflect TRUE high-contrast black-white. Digital B-W is a 1-bit rendering with no intermediate tones, no grayscaling. B&W isn't B-W. Taken to an 4-bit (16 color) standard, the ON pixels in a B-W image could be rendered as any of the 15 standard colors, and the image would still be monochrome: one color, plus white. Taken to an 8- or 16- or 24- or 32-bit standard, if the ON pixels are rendered as only one color amongst the 256-gazillion available, the image is still monochrome. But if you've rendered the image as grayscale, and those shades of gray are rendered as something other than #000000 or #FFFFFF, then the image isn't monochrome, isn't black-and-white. Grayscale isn't B-W. So, how sloppy can we be when applying that B&W tag? Is it restricted to grayscale, which isn't B-W? Is it applicable to any one-color (monochrome) rendering, even when that one color isn't dead black? Image printers have for a long time, since the beginnings of the craft, rendered monochromatic images in tones. Do we retroactively de-classify their work as non-B&W?

04-13-2010, 09:00 AM	#32
vize Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 45	I tried for a little bit to pad my post count as well, but as you can see from my post count, I haven't had much success. All this contest does is lead to some meaningless dialog, sacrificing quality for quantity.

04-13-2010, 09:30 AM	#33
GerryL Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: CA Posts: 2,731	Originally posted by FHPhotographer Jeff, Gerry If you think its b&w and run it through any kind of digital color correction, the brown/purple colors are deleted and you have b&w. Sepia is a B&W print additive process that started out the pigment made from a cuttlefish applied to the B&W print. Latter it was replaced by a three-step wet development silver halide process , other times various dyes and chemicals were used including ferricyanide were used, but generally it it was an unpleasant and unhealthful process. However, all digital conversion, no matter the software, uses a variation on the basic duo-tone additive system of applying a tone to an image. It's many things, and used on the right image and done well, it can be a wonderful treatment, but sepia isn't B&W, Brian That is why I said "can be considered" and it is treated as "duotone". If you want to be strictly B&W, therefore it is just the pen and ink illustrations and linear drawings much like woodblock prints that are really B&W as it is strictly without any tones. This is from the Wikipeadia : All photography was originally monochrome, or black-and-white. Even after color film was readily available, black-and-white photography continued to dominate for decades, due to its lower cost and its "classic" photographic look. It is important to note that some monochromatic pictures are not always pure blacks and whites, but also contain other hues depending on the process. The cyanotype process produces an image of blue and white for example. The albumen process, first used more than 150 years ago, produces brown tones. Many photographers continue to produce some monochrome images. Some full color digital images are processed using a variety of techniques to create black and whites, and some manufacturers produce digital cameras that exclusively shoot monochrome. Here's the link if you want to read it yourself: Photography - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

04-13-2010, 10:51 AM	#35
FHPhotographer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Fountain Hills, AZ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,297	Gerry,Jeff,Rio... perhaps the problem is using the term sepia that I originally challenged in the context of digital B&W. It doesn't really fit in the digital context. Perhaps it's better to use the fairly standardized Adobe definitions, "The Black & White adjustment lets you convert a color image to grayscale while maintaining full control over how individual colors are converted. You can also tint the grayscale by applying a color tone to the image, for example to create a sepia effect." and later in the Help Menu "In Photoshop, duotone refers to monotones, tritones, and quadtones as well as duotones. Monotones are grayscale images printed with a single, non-black ink. Duotones, tritones, and quadtones are grayscale images printed with two, three, and four inks. In these images, colored inks, rather than different shades of gray, are used to reproduce tinted grays." It's pretty clear that Adobe considers sepia to be a additive toning effect, Brian

04-13-2010, 01:12 PM	#36
NecroticSoldier Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Scarborough, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 488 Original Poster	I'm still really really confused how you can make a natural black and white photo out of a digital... even having read all these posts.

04-13-2010, 02:27 PM	#37
CWyatt Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 1,291	Originally posted by NecroticSoldier I'm still really really confused how you can make a natural black and white photo out of a digital... even having read all these posts. I would be too! I say get Nik Silver Efex Pro. If you can't get that, use the black and white conversion sliders in photoshop, and just play around with that.

04-13-2010, 02:45 PM	#38
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,819	Originally posted by Ira Masks frighten me. You say that with the avatar you have! Originally posted by CWyatt I would be too! I say get Nik Silver Efex Pro. If you can't get that, use the black and white conversion sliders in photoshop, and just play around with that. Yes, don't get caught up in all the complexity. The B&W adjustment layer offers all the options you need most of the time. It's easy to use.

04-13-2010, 02:58 PM	#39
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Originally posted by rparmar You say that with the avatar you have! Yes, don't get caught up in all the complexity. The B&W adjustment layer offers all the options you need most of the time. It's easy to use. It's easy to use if you have Photoshop. I doubt he (the OP) does. All the discussion of photoshop and fancy add-ons or stand alone programs is nice but without the coin to purchase the software, not of much use to some. Which is why I suggested originally, trying a de-saturation and playing with the shadows and highlights and other simple adjustments. If someone has any ideas on how to accomplish it with the pentax software (I don't) or freebie software, I'd bet the OP is all ears.

04-13-2010, 03:36 PM	#40
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,819	OK, good point. NecroticSoldier, what software do you use? For high-end use you can get Gimp, which is free and open source. Does pretty well anything Photoshop does. So money is not a reason to lag behind on image processing. Then, you can follow this tutorial, which offers no less than six ways to get the job done. Had I 20 years experience in Gimp, I would stop talking about Photoshop altogether. But, alas, no.

04-13-2010, 03:40 PM	#41
NecroticSoldier Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Scarborough, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 488 Original Poster	Originally posted by rparmar OK, good point. NecroticSoldier, what software do you use? For high-end use you can get Gimp, which is free and open source. Does pretty well anything Photoshop does. So money is not a reason to lag behind on image processing. Then, you can follow this tutorial, which offers no less than six ways to get the job done. Had I 20 years experience in Gimp, I would stop talking about Photoshop altogether. But, alas, no. I... Don't use anything... I have Gimp on my computer and Pentax software... as well as photo.net thing. I will try to learn, you guys can call me Justin... NecroticSoldier is such a weird name...

04-13-2010, 04:07 PM	#42
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	Originally posted by NecroticSoldier I... Don't use anything... I have Gimp on my computer and Pentax software... as well as photo.net thing. I will try to learn, you guys can call me Justin... NecroticSoldier is such a weird name... Mazel Tov! We know your name now! Justin, that's why all of my screen names, for wherever I register and whatever I do, has my actual name, although I often have to add numbers to it in order to register. It just makes it more personal and easier for people to remember you.

04-13-2010, 04:10 PM	#43
NecroticSoldier Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Scarborough, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 488 Original Poster	Originally posted by Ira Mazel Tov! We know your name now! Justin, that's why all of my screen names, for wherever I register and whatever I do, has my actual name, although I often have to add numbers to it in order to register. It just makes it more personal and easier for people to remember you. Haha! Yeah, not used to using my real name, my name is also on my profile or something. MAZEL TOY?

04-13-2010, 04:38 PM	#44
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,819	Can I suggest you put your name in your sig then? There are so many people here it becomes impossible for someone with my bad memory to keep track. But, welcome!

04-13-2010, 10:38 PM	#45
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Names: I yam wot I am and that's all wot I yam. But I digress. While we're talking how-to-mono, I'll volunteer that I've used PaintShopPro for many generations now. I usually keep its Channel Mixer preset to about 15% Red, 55% Green, 75% Blue; monochrome yes; Grey output channel. To mono-ize a colored JPG containing human features, I'll duplicate the background layer and invoke the Channel Mixer on the copied layer (which is on top). Then I switch to the background layer and convert it to Greyscale. Then I switch back to the top layer and turn the transparency slider to somewhere between 30-70%, whatever looks best. Then, merge the layers. I might then run the Clarify filter a couple times, which is sort of like a low-budget HDR. This tends to give a Tri-X'y sort of look. Ah, habit...