Question about DSLR B&W v. Edit
- Thread starter Doog
- Start date
andephotographic
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 400
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- No
You shooting raw or jpeg?
Jpeg - can't comment too much as I don't do it but I'd guess it's going to be like hitting the monochrome button in photoshop, no adjustment, no control just a desaturated colour image.
Raw - depends on what camera brand and software you use. I shoot Nikon and use Adobe bridge and photoshop, I spent ages using Picture Control, getting a nice looking b&w image in camera but then realised that when I download the images bridge/photoshop don't see the Picture Control settings so I just get the basic colour raw file.
I now have a basic b&w shooting bank which just gives me a b&w preview - I find just having the preview in b&w can be useful as I work, it helps me envision what I'm doing sort of thing - and I do the onversion in Photoshop.
Quite often il make a b&w conversion layer and toggle it on and off and decide the colour image looks better, an option I wouldn't have had if I'd only recorded a b&w image.
Jpeg - can't comment too much as I don't do it but I'd guess it's going to be like hitting the monochrome button in photoshop, no adjustment, no control just a desaturated colour image.
Raw - depends on what camera brand and software you use. I shoot Nikon and use Adobe bridge and photoshop, I spent ages using Picture Control, getting a nice looking b&w image in camera but then realised that when I download the images bridge/photoshop don't see the Picture Control settings so I just get the basic colour raw file.
I now have a basic b&w shooting bank which just gives me a b&w preview - I find just having the preview in b&w can be useful as I work, it helps me envision what I'm doing sort of thing - and I do the onversion in Photoshop.
Quite often il make a b&w conversion layer and toggle it on and off and decide the colour image looks better, an option I wouldn't have had if I'd only recorded a b&w image.
- Messages
- 734
- Name
- Adrian
- Edit My Images
- No
When you shoot with your camera you get very limited B&W convertion options, compared to post-production where you have all the time in the world to choose between a multitude of different parameters and effects.
The main one being the abilty to control each channel of colour seperately, to create very diffent styles. Compare Ansell Adams to some contemporary wedding photography to get the idea.
That being said, what you do get from the camera can be nice if you have a good tinker with the settings. But why put the egg in the basket...
The main one being the abilty to control each channel of colour seperately, to create very diffent styles. Compare Ansell Adams to some contemporary wedding photography to get the idea.
That being said, what you do get from the camera can be nice if you have a good tinker with the settings. But why put the egg in the basket...
andephotographic
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 400
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- No
Please don't!
- Messages
- 734
- Name
- Adrian
- Edit My Images
- No
Adams did landscapes, weddings are of weddings.
There i did it, whacha gonna do about it?!!!
andephotographic
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 400
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- No
I shoot RAW and edit using Nikons NX2 Capture. I'm still very much a beginner when it comes to editing having only shot film before. There's so much to learn
If you're using Nikon software then the settings you make in picture control should be carried over with your images when you download them so there might be some value in spending some time getting a nice result from the camera.
If there was the option to retain the base colour raw file I would though.
If my camera didn't have shooting banks that can be changed between in a few button presses I doubt I'd bother.
- Messages
- 922
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Until last week I shot exclusively in RAW and converted with Adobe Camera Raw and Photoshop. RAW's great when you have 1-2 minutes per photograph to spend or when it's an important event, but if you're doing a hundred or so photos and it's just mum's/day out, JPEG is more than adequate! It took all my courage to turn off the RAW safety blanket but it's actually quite liberating.
Don't get too wrapped up in fine-art standard of image editing, focus on what's important - lighting and composition - just like with good ol' film
If you do shoot JPEG, try amending the settings to boost contrast and sharpness slightly and play around with the yellow/orange built in filters if you want to get a little creative (although I've found they make little difference).
You should pick times when the end results aren't crucial (i.e. not gran's 80th birthday) and try both. See which suits your workflow, goals and your taste.
edit: To answer your question, RAW does allow for better tones to be achieved but that relies on a bit of experience and knowledge of image editing. The end result may not look any better than JPEG and might end up being quite time consuming!
Don't get too wrapped up in fine-art standard of image editing, focus on what's important - lighting and composition - just like with good ol' film
If you do shoot JPEG, try amending the settings to boost contrast and sharpness slightly and play around with the yellow/orange built in filters if you want to get a little creative (although I've found they make little difference).
You should pick times when the end results aren't crucial (i.e. not gran's 80th birthday) and try both. See which suits your workflow, goals and your taste.
edit: To answer your question, RAW does allow for better tones to be achieved but that relies on a bit of experience and knowledge of image editing. The end result may not look any better than JPEG and might end up being quite time consuming!
Last edited:
dinners
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 15,745
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
In very simple terms think about the way your camera sees contrast.
Through the viewfinder - a green field against a blue sky may look striking however in terms of contrast / tone your camera may render them exactly the same when shot in mono.
Shooting in colour enables you to select the blue or green and darken or lighten to create contrast afterwards.
Through the viewfinder - a green field against a blue sky may look striking however in terms of contrast / tone your camera may render them exactly the same when shot in mono.
Shooting in colour enables you to select the blue or green and darken or lighten to create contrast afterwards.
- Messages
- 10,095
- Name
- Rob Telford
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't mind playing around editing RAW as I don't usually shoot hundreds of pics at a time. However I don't feel I'm getting the best from it yet as I'm still inexperienced. Maybe a little critique would help so maybe you could advise on this.
DSC_1488 by Doog E, on Flickr
Thanks for your thoughts so far.
DSC_1488 by Doog E, on FlickrThanks for your thoughts so far.
- Messages
- 10,974
- Name
- wayne clarke
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Why not shoot Raw+large jpeg? with the camera set to B+W, that way you get a full colour raw shot and a black and white jpeg, the advantage of this is you can see on the camera if the B+W works for a shot but still have a full colour shot to work from, you'll get a better B+W conversion from the raw than you will in camera usually.