Digital BW, The Print

Lincoln, I understand were not arguing, just stating observations. When I
did my test of the screen capture done two ways; 1) using the convert to
gray and screen capture that and 2) show only the red channel and screen
capture that. I got two very different results. And I'd love to see an
attributable adobe source that states that grayscale uses red channel only
or as ??? suggested a % of R, %G, and small % B. 

 

I rarely use the convert to grayscale unless I'm in a hurry. Each conversion
is specific to that image and what you want to do just as with each camera
exposure can have a red filter or orange filter or.

 

I have seen several people suggest that PS has a better conversion of RGB to
grayscale than does the scanning software, but I have not seen them mention
published test that show this. I have seen Epson and Imacon side by side at
demo events and they would NOT make the best scan they could and show the
difference. Why? Could it be that much of it is operator experience and an
equal part software/hardware driven? Could have simply been time.  

 

 Eric

 

 

Eric Neilsen

4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9

Dallas, TX 75226

214-827-8301

 

www.ericneilsenphotography.com

SKYPE ejprinter

 

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of outdoornm
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 4:34 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: B+W Scans from RGB Scanners

 

Eric,

I'm not arguing that direct grayscaling is the best method. I am just
stating what the 
default is in my CS2. If you do the check I mentioned it will show you that
is exactly the 
case. I have also read it elsewhere, but I can't find reference to it at
this point. You guys 
need to come up with some authentication for your opinion- it sounds to me
like you just 
think it is improbable. 

Personally, I choose to use direct grayscale because you can drive yourself
crazy seeing 
what tweak works the best using channel mixer. I have found it much more
effective to 
convert to grayscale directly Image>mode>Grayscale and then work on the
image in 
curves. I find it gives me much more control. You wouldn't think so, but for
me, it does. 
Like anything in Photoshop there are many ways to achieve what you want.

Regards,

Lincoln

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com> , "E Neilsen"
<e.neilsen2@...> 
wrote:
>
> If you have PS CS3 or CS4 why would you even consider just hitting
> mode>grayscale when you could convert to B&W with image>adjustment>B&W
> complete with preset that you can load for yourself? As for just using the
> red channel? I don't think so. It just does sound right at all. 
> 
> 
> 
> Just did a screen capture of a red channel only B&W, and a convert to
> grayscale screen capture and the numbers don't match. Close but not a
match.
> 
> 
> There are default setting lurking in PS and I think that you idea about
what
> is being done there is just that. I'd ask some Adobe folks about it. 
> 
> 
> 
> As for scanning, you can use the channels for sharpening, noise control,
etc
> in the scanner software. It is a whole new exposure of a scene. How would
> you like to render it? That is the first question and the beauty of it is
> there is no ONE answer, but many equally valid choices.
> 



.

Image removed by sender.
 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]