Digital BW, The Print

If I am ultimately going to convert a digital image (saved in Raw 
Mode) to B&W is there any point in worrying about getting the white 
balance exactly right or does it suffice to leave it on automatic?

Thanks,

Steve

Hello Steve,


> If I am ultimately going to convert a digital image (saved in Raw 
> Mode) to B&W is there any point in worrying about getting the white 
> balance exactly right or does it suffice to leave it on automatic?

My understanding is with RAW files none of the camera settings for
white balance, contrast, sharpening, etc has any affect on the image.
 We get what the sensor captured with nothing done to it.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

On Nov 7, 2004, at 11:29 AM, Stephen Kobrin wrote:

>
>
> If I am ultimately going to convert a digital image (saved in Raw
> Mode) to B&W is there any point in worrying about getting the white
> balance exactly right or does it suffice to leave it on automatic?

If you're asking about setting WB (color temp) in the RAW processing 
software, yes it will affect the B&W result - the quickest was to see 
this is to set your RAW image to the lowest saturation (-100 in Adobe 
Camera RAW) and then tweak the WB setting - you'll see the B&W mix will 
change.

If you're asking whether it matters to do a proper WB in your camera, 
if you're shooting RAW for B&W results, then the answer is no, since 
you can always tweak the WB/temperature during processing.

Thanks Clayton and Roger,

Steve

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Roger Howard 
<rogerhoward@m...> wrote:
> 
> On Nov 7, 2004, at 11:29 AM, Stephen Kobrin wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > If I am ultimately going to convert a digital image (saved in Raw
> > Mode) to B&W is there any point in worrying about getting the 
white
> > balance exactly right or does it suffice to leave it on automatic?
> 
> If you're asking about setting WB (color temp) in the RAW 
processing 
> software, yes it will affect the B&W result - the quickest was to 
see 
> this is to set your RAW image to the lowest saturation (-100 in 
Adobe 
> Camera RAW) and then tweak the WB setting - you'll see the B&W mix 
will 
> change.
> 
> If you're asking whether it matters to do a proper WB in your 
camera, 
> if you're shooting RAW for B&W results, then the answer is no, 
since 
> you can always tweak the WB/temperature during processing.

> From: Stephen Kobrin [mailto:kobrins@...]
>
> If I am ultimately going to convert a digital image (saved in Raw
> Mode) to B&W is there any point in worrying about getting the white
> balance exactly right or does it suffice to leave it on automatic?

Color to B&W conversion usually involves major transformations, not just
blindly converting to grayscale. For instance, the Channel Mixer lets you do
things like set the red to 150% and the blue to -50%, to make really dark
skies. If you're like me, you'll probably yank the curves all over the
place, too. By then, you'll have swamped any minor differences in the color
levels you get from using different white balances.

--

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@...

On Nov 7, 2004, at 8:50 PM, Paul D. DeRocco wrote:

>
>> From: Stephen Kobrin [mailto:kobrins@...]
>>
>> If I am ultimately going to convert a digital image (saved in Raw
>> Mode) to B&W is there any point in worrying about getting the white
>> balance exactly right or does it suffice to leave it on automatic?
>
> Color to B&W conversion usually involves major transformations, not 
> just
> blindly converting to grayscale. For instance, the Channel Mixer lets 
> you do
> things like set the red to 150% and the blue to -50%, to make really 
> dark
> skies. If you're like me, you'll probably yank the curves all over the
> place, too. By then, you'll have swamped any minor differences in the 
> color
> levels you get from using different white balances.

Agreed - but just to be literal, white balance settings *do* affect B&W 
conversion; whether they are a major factor just depends on how you're 
doing the conversion. Yeah, I usually use extreme moves in Channel 
Mixer, often with an additional Curves adjustment layer beneath it. But 
the right WB setting to preserve the right channel separation (before 
you mix them back down) is important, in my experience.

-R

> From: Roger Howard [mailto:rogerhoward@...]
>
> Agreed - but just to be literal, white balance settings *do* affect B&W
> conversion; whether they are a major factor just depends on how you're
> doing the conversion. Yeah, I usually use extreme moves in Channel
> Mixer, often with an additional Curves adjustment layer beneath it. But
> the right WB setting to preserve the right channel separation (before
> you mix them back down) is important, in my experience.

I don't think WB does anything at all to channel separation--it just applies
gains to the three channels. Correct me if I'm wrong.

--

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@...

On Nov 8, 2004, at 12:19 PM, Paul D. DeRocco wrote:

>
>> From: Roger Howard [mailto:rogerhoward@...]
>>
>> Agreed - but just to be literal, white balance settings *do* affect 
>> B&W
>> conversion; whether they are a major factor just depends on how you're
>> doing the conversion. Yeah, I usually use extreme moves in Channel
>> Mixer, often with an additional Curves adjustment layer beneath it. 
>> But
>> the right WB setting to preserve the right channel separation (before
>> you mix them back down) is important, in my experience.
>
> I don't think WB does anything at all to channel separation--it just 
> applies
> gains to the three channels. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Now I'm afraid we're going to confuse the poor OP :)

WB tweaks the three channels differently; this means that if you then 
do a channel mix, the results will be different depending on what WB 
you started with. Maybe we mean something different by separation - I 
was using it non-technically, to refer to the emphasis or de-emphasis 
of different ranges of color (and how those are represented in the 
three channels). WB definitely affects overall color, and if pushed too 
far in either extreme can easily start to loose color detail 
(separation).

In other words, if I take the same RAW file and process it twice... 
once at 2400K and once at 9000K... then apply the SAME channel mixer 
settings to it... I'll get different B&W results.

Cheers,

Roger

>Agreed - but just to be literal, white balance settings *do* affect B&W
>conversion; whether they are a major factor just depends on how you're
>doing the conversion.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you but when in RAW mode with every digital
camera I've used the original data wasn't affected by the white balance
setting on the camera. When in RAW mode with those cameras (most recently
the Nikon D100) any white balance setting could be set,  which one didn't
matter, regardless of how the white balance camera setting the resulting raw
data would be the same. White balance was affected only by the adjustments
made in post-camera editing..

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Roger Howard" <rogerhoward@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 1:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] White balance and B&W




On Nov 7, 2004, at 8:50 PM, Paul D. DeRocco wrote:

>
>> From: Stephen Kobrin [mailto:kobrins@...]
>>
>> If I am ultimately going to convert a digital image (saved in Raw
>> Mode) to B&W is there any point in worrying about getting the white
>> balance exactly right or does it suffice to leave it on automatic?
>
> Color to B&W conversion usually involves major transformations, not
> just
> blindly converting to grayscale. For instance, the Channel Mixer lets
> you do
> things like set the red to 150% and the blue to -50%, to make really
> dark
> skies. If you're like me, you'll probably yank the curves all over the
> place, too. By then, you'll have swamped any minor differences in the
> color
> levels you get from using different white balances.

Agreed - but just to be literal, white balance settings *do* affect B&W
conversion; whether they are a major factor just depends on how you're
doing the conversion. Yeah, I usually use extreme moves in Channel
Mixer, often with an additional Curves adjustment layer beneath it. But
the right WB setting to preserve the right channel separation (before
you mix them back down) is important, in my experience.

-R




Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as
they are often being updated.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames.
Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W
printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from
the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and
Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY
DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS,
GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  "OWNER" AND
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY
TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR
ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY
THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER
MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.

Yahoo! Groups Links

I was experimenting with this a few days ago.

Absolutely white balance at the RAW stage is important. It can, in 
fact, become critical if you are concerned about highlight detail 
that is near clipping. In Photoshop's CS RAW import, adjusting color 
balance has the effect of repositioning the R, G, and B channels in 
the histogram. In an example here, highlights in my image clip at 
5500K but are smooth at 2500K.

What might be good is if the RAW importer would apply contrast FIRST, 
and then WB. That way you could decrease contrast (shrink the 
histogram) and then adjust WB (which can grow the histogram), without 
clipping. But it doesn't work like that, so you have to be very 
careful. The other pie in the sky solution would be a RAW to true 16-
bit-space converter. Photoshop CS does not do this; instead, 16-bit 
space is really 10-, 12-, or 14-bit space depending on camera.

The only solution I know of is to watch the histogram carefully as 
you drag your white balance slider around.

These are 100% crops taken from a Canon P&S digicam. All RAW sliders 
were set to zero (contrast, exposure, etc). I tried Bibble and 
BreezeBrowser as well on these files, but both of these retained 
highlights at the expense of clipping the shadows. I do not have 
capture one. The images are in color and clearly show that 
information is lost in the highlights which could not be regained.

http://www.pmb.net/a/psraw_2500.jpg
http://www.pmb.net/a/psraw_5500.jpg

-Pieris

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Roger Howard 
<rogerhoward@m...> wrote:
> 
> On Nov 7, 2004, at 8:50 PM, Paul D. DeRocco wrote:
> 
> >
> >> From: Stephen Kobrin [mailto:kobrins@w...]
> >>
> >> If I am ultimately going to convert a digital image (saved in Raw
> >> Mode) to B&W is there any point in worrying about getting the 
white
> >> balance exactly right or does it suffice to leave it on 
automatic?
> >
> > Color to B&W conversion usually involves major transformations, 
not 
> > just
> > blindly converting to grayscale. For instance, the Channel Mixer 
lets 
> > you do
> > things like set the red to 150% and the blue to -50%, to make 
really 
> > dark
> > skies. If you're like me, you'll probably yank the curves all 
over the
> > place, too. By then, you'll have swamped any minor differences in 
the 
> > color
> > levels you get from using different white balances.
> 
> Agreed - but just to be literal, white balance settings *do* affect 
B&W 
> conversion; whether they are a major factor just depends on how 
you're 
> doing the conversion. Yeah, I usually use extreme moves in Channel 
> Mixer, often with an additional Curves adjustment layer beneath it. 
But 
> the right WB setting to preserve the right channel separation 
(before 

> you mix them back down) is important, in my experience.
> 
> -R

I think if you only originally capture 10 bit then that's all you've got to
play with - even if it is presented in a 16 bit form.  The issue here is the
weakness of the original capture.  Try a MF digital back with true 16bit
capture.  An up-sampler ie interpolator might help but is no replacement for
a better original capture.

> From: Pieris Berreitter <pieris@...>


> The other pie in the sky solution would be a RAW to true 16-
> bit-space converter. Photoshop CS does not do this; instead, 16-bit
> space is really 10-, 12-, or 14-bit space depending on camera.

>Absolutely white balance at the RAW stage is important. . . . In
Photoshop's CS RAW import, adjusting >color balance has the effect of
repositioning the R, G, and B channels in
>the histogram. In an example here, highlights in my image clip at
>5500K but are smooth at 2500K. (large snip)

You're talking about white balance adjustments in Photoshop.  That wasn't
what the original poster asked about (at least I don't think it was).  He
asked whether he could leave the white balance setting on "auto"  so I think
he was asking whether the particular white balance setting in the camera
(i.e. auto, daylight, flash, fluorescent, etc.) mattered when shooting in
RAW mode.  It doesn't matter when in RAW mode with the digital cameras I've
owned because the raw data isn't affected by the white balance setting (i.e.
that setting as well as various other camera controls in effect become
inoperative when in RAW mode).

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Pieris Berreitter" <pieris@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 1:24 AM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] White balance and B&W




I was experimenting with this a few days ago.

Absolutely white balance at the RAW stage is important. It can, in
fact, become critical if you are concerned about highlight detail
that is near clipping. In Photoshop's CS RAW import, adjusting color
balance has the effect of repositioning the R, G, and B channels in
the histogram. In an example here, highlights in my image clip at
5500K but are smooth at 2500K.

What might be good is if the RAW importer would apply contrast FIRST,
and then WB. That way you could decrease contrast (shrink the
histogram) and then adjust WB (which can grow the histogram), without
clipping. But it doesn't work like that, so you have to be very
careful. The other pie in the sky solution would be a RAW to true 16-
bit-space converter. Photoshop CS does not do this; instead, 16-bit
space is really 10-, 12-, or 14-bit space depending on camera.

The only solution I know of is to watch the histogram carefully as
you drag your white balance slider around.

These are 100% crops taken from a Canon P&S digicam. All RAW sliders
were set to zero (contrast, exposure, etc). I tried Bibble and
BreezeBrowser as well on these files, but both of these retained
highlights at the expense of clipping the shadows. I do not have
capture one. The images are in color and clearly show that
information is lost in the highlights which could not be regained.

http://www.pmb.net/a/psraw_2500.jpg
http://www.pmb.net/a/psraw_5500.jpg

-Pieris

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Roger Howard
<rogerhoward@m...> wrote:
>
> On Nov 7, 2004, at 8:50 PM, Paul D. DeRocco wrote:
>
> >
> >> From: Stephen Kobrin [mailto:kobrins@w...]
> >>
> >> If I am ultimately going to convert a digital image (saved in Raw
> >> Mode) to B&W is there any point in worrying about getting the
white
> >> balance exactly right or does it suffice to leave it on
automatic?
> >
> > Color to B&W conversion usually involves major transformations,
not
> > just
> > blindly converting to grayscale. For instance, the Channel Mixer
lets
> > you do
> > things like set the red to 150% and the blue to -50%, to make
really
> > dark
> > skies. If you're like me, you'll probably yank the curves all
over the
> > place, too. By then, you'll have swamped any minor differences in
the
> > color
> > levels you get from using different white balances.
>
> Agreed - but just to be literal, white balance settings *do* affect
B&W
> conversion; whether they are a major factor just depends on how
you're
> doing the conversion. Yeah, I usually use extreme moves in Channel
> Mixer, often with an additional Curves adjustment layer beneath it.
But
> the right WB setting to preserve the right channel separation
(before
> you mix them back down) is important, in my experience.
>
> -R






Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as
they are often being updated.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames.
Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W
printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from
the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and
Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY
DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS,
GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  "OWNER" AND
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY
TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR
ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY
THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER
MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.

Yahoo! Groups Links

I have two 16oz bottles of MIS;

FS-QUAD-PT-K and FS-HEX-PT-M

I don't need them and I don't want to through them away, if you can use them
drop me a line off-list. One is labeled Jan 06, the other has no date but it
is not very old. I'm not asking for money, so please only take them if you
will use them. 

Wendel

My concern was whether the white balance adjustment in the camera 
mattered if one was shooting in raw mode and planned to convert to 
B&W.  From the thread to date I gather that there is agreement that 
the camera white balance settings are irrelevant, but that there is 
some disagreement about the importance of getting the white balance 
right when you do the raw conversion in PS.

Thanks for all of the help.

Steve


> You're talking about white balance adjustments in Photoshop.  That 
wasn't
> what the original poster asked about (at least I don't think it 
was).  He
> asked whether he could leave the white balance setting on "auto"  
so I think
> he was asking whether the particular white balance setting in the 
camera
> (i.e. auto, daylight, flash, fluorescent, etc.) mattered when 
shooting in
> RAW mode.  It doesn't matter when in RAW mode with the digital 
cameras I've
> owned because the raw data isn't affected by the white balance 
setting (i.e.
> that setting as well as various other camera controls in effect 
become
> inoperative when in RAW mode).
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Pieris Berreitter" <pieris@y...>
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 1:24 AM
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] White balance and B&W
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was experimenting with this a few days ago.
> 
> Absolutely white balance at the RAW stage is important. It can, in
> fact, become critical if you are concerned about highlight detail
> that is near clipping. In Photoshop's CS RAW import, adjusting color
> balance has the effect of repositioning the R, G, and B channels in
> the histogram. In an example here, highlights in my image clip at
> 5500K but are smooth at 2500K.
> 
> What might be good is if the RAW importer would apply contrast 
FIRST,
> and then WB. That way you could decrease contrast (shrink the
> histogram) and then adjust WB (which can grow the histogram), 
without
> clipping. But it doesn't work like that, so you have to be very
> careful. The other pie in the sky solution would be a RAW to true 
16-
> bit-space converter. Photoshop CS does not do this; instead, 16-bit
> space is really 10-, 12-, or 14-bit space depending on camera.
> 
> The only solution I know of is to watch the histogram carefully as
> you drag your white balance slider around.
> 
> These are 100% crops taken from a Canon P&S digicam. All RAW sliders
> were set to zero (contrast, exposure, etc). I tried Bibble and
> BreezeBrowser as well on these files, but both of these retained
> highlights at the expense of clipping the shadows. I do not have
> capture one. The images are in color and clearly show that
> information is lost in the highlights which could not be regained.
> 
> http://www.pmb.net/a/psraw_2500.jpg
> http://www.pmb.net/a/psraw_5500.jpg
> 
> -Pieris
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Roger Howard
> <rogerhoward@m...> wrote:
> >
> > On Nov 7, 2004, at 8:50 PM, Paul D. DeRocco wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >> From: Stephen Kobrin [mailto:kobrins@w...]
> > >>
> > >> If I am ultimately going to convert a digital image (saved in 
Raw
> > >> Mode) to B&W is there any point in worrying about getting the
> white
> > >> balance exactly right or does it suffice to leave it on
> automatic?
> > >
> > > Color to B&W conversion usually involves major transformations,
> not
> > > just
> > > blindly converting to grayscale. For instance, the Channel Mixer
> lets
> > > you do
> > > things like set the red to 150% and the blue to -50%, to make
> really
> > > dark
> > > skies. If you're like me, you'll probably yank the curves all
> over the
> > > place, too. By then, you'll have swamped any minor differences 
in
> the
> > > color
> > > levels you get from using different white balances.
> >
> > Agreed - but just to be literal, white balance settings *do* 
affect
> B&W
> > conversion; whether they are a major factor just depends on how
> you're
> > doing the conversion. Yeah, I usually use extreme moves in Channel
> > Mixer, often with an additional Curves adjustment layer beneath 
it.
> But
> > the right WB setting to preserve the right channel separation
> (before
> > you mix them back down) is important, in my experience.
> >
> > -R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other 
resources as
> they are often being updated.
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you 
wish to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
this same
> page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages 
to keep
> them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
flames.
> Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
> membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital 
B&W
> printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be 
removed from
> the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group 
Owner and
> Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files 
section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
> 
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
PRINT
> YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND
> "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE 
LIABLE TO YOU
> FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR 
EXEMPLARY
> DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS,
> GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF 
THE  "OWNER" AND
> "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED 
OF THE
> POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE 
INABILITY
> TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED 
ACCESS TO OR
> ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR 
CONDUCT OF ANY
> THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY 
OTHER

> MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links

> From: Stephen Kobrin [mailto:kobrins@...]
>
> My concern was whether the white balance adjustment in the camera
> mattered if one was shooting in raw mode and planned to convert to
> B&W.  From the thread to date I gather that there is agreement that
> the camera white balance settings are irrelevant, but that there is
> some disagreement about the importance of getting the white balance
> right when you do the raw conversion in PS.

To clarify: WB variations will affect the B&W image, but not by a huge
amount, and then only if you do a "blind" B&W conversion. If you use the
Channel Mixer to make drastic adjustments to the mix (such as leaving out
one channel entirely, or even applying a negative gain to one channel), and
you do so by eye, tweaking the sliders until you like the result, then you
will have completely overridden and swamped out the smaller gain variations
that the WB controls make to the three channels.

--

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@...

On Nov 8, 2004, at 3:33 PM, B. Campbell wrote:

>
>> Agreed - but just to be literal, white balance settings *do* affect 
>> B&W
>> conversion; whether they are a major factor just depends on how you're
>> doing the conversion.
>
> Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you but when in RAW mode with every 
> digital
> camera I've used the original data wasn't affected by the white balance
> setting on the camera. When in RAW mode with those cameras (most 
> recently
> the Nikon D100) any white balance setting could be set,  which one 
> didn't
> matter, regardless of how the white balance camera setting the 
> resulting raw
> data would be the same. White balance was affected only by the 
> adjustments
> made in post-camera editing..

You're misunderstanding, but that's, um, understandable!

We're not talking about the effect of WB on the RAW data at the capture 
stage; we all can agree that's just metadata and does not impact the 
sensor data at all during capture.

We're talking about converting RAW files to B&W images; in this 
process, your white balance settings - whether keeping the settings 
your camera chose, or using custom settings after the fact - do affect 
the resulting B&W file. Just as applying a curve to RGB color data 
before converting to B&W would affect the B&W.

Best,

Roger

Roger Howard said:

"You're misunderstanding, but that's, um, understandable! We're not talking
about the effect of WB on the RAW data at the capture stage."

That actually  is what he was talking about. Note the reference in his
question to setting on "auto" in RAW mode. Auto is of course a white balance
setting on a digital camera. He clarified in a later message as follows:

 "My concern was whether the white balance adjustment in the camera
> mattered if one was shooting in raw mode and planned to convert to
> B&W".

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Roger Howard" <rogerhoward@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 3:20 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] White balance and B&W




On Nov 8, 2004, at 3:33 PM, B. Campbell wrote:

>
>> Agreed - but just to be literal, white balance settings *do* affect
>> B&W
>> conversion; whether they are a major factor just depends on how you're
>> doing the conversion.
>
> Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you but when in RAW mode with every
> digital
> camera I've used the original data wasn't affected by the white balance
> setting on the camera. When in RAW mode with those cameras (most
> recently
> the Nikon D100) any white balance setting could be set,  which one
> didn't
> matter, regardless of how the white balance camera setting the
> resulting raw
> data would be the same. White balance was affected only by the
> adjustments
> made in post-camera editing..

You're misunderstanding, but that's, um, understandable!

We're not talking about the effect of WB on the RAW data at the capture
stage; we all can agree that's just metadata and does not impact the
sensor data at all during capture.

We're talking about converting RAW files to B&W images; in this
process, your white balance settings - whether keeping the settings
your camera chose, or using custom settings after the fact - do affect
the resulting B&W file. Just as applying a curve to RGB color data
before converting to B&W would affect the B&W.

Best,

Roger




Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as
they are often being updated.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames.
Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W
printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from
the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and
Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY
DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS,
GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  "OWNER" AND
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY
TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR
ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY
THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER
MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.

Yahoo! Groups Links

On Nov 9, 2004, at 1:48 PM, B. Campbell wrote:

>
> Roger Howard said:
>
> "You're misunderstanding, but that's, um, understandable! We're not 
> talking
> about the effect of WB on the RAW data at the capture stage."
>
> That actually  is what he was talking about. Note the reference in his
> question to setting on "auto" in RAW mode. Auto is of course a white 
> balance
> setting on a digital camera. He clarified in a later message as 
> follows:

Yep, got that now. I was just trying to clarify what I was talking 
about.

Also, the reference to Auto could as easily be interpreted as leaving 
it set to Auto (or As Shot) in the RAW processor.

Anyway, at this point I think we've answered his question (and then 
some!).

Best,

Roger

I just purchased the set of MIS carbon inks for the Epson 2200. I 
started with a grayscale photo, working on Photoshop, added one of the 
curves downloaded from Paul Roark's site, made all settings according 
to directions and then got either a ghost or halo of an image or an 
image that looked solarized. I have no idea what on earth I did wrong. 
I took the MIS inks, went back and printed with Image Print and QTR 
and things went well. Anyone have a guess? 

Thanks. 

Steve Martin

Steve,

 
> I just purchased the set of MIS carbon inks for the Epson 2200. I
> started with a grayscale photo, working on Photoshop, added one of the
> curves downloaded from Paul Roark's site,

When you use curves, the grayscale file must first be converted to RGB.  If
you print with a grayscale file, use the "EZ" sliders method and settings.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Apologies if this question has been answered before - I did search the
posts but couldn't find anything relevant.

Simply, can anyone tell me where MIS ink sets can be purchased in the
UK. I'm thinking of using the EZ set for my C86 but I haven't been
able to find any UK suppliers.

Thanks.

Andrew

I don't think you will find one, Andrew. I live in Sweden and order
direct from MIS in the US painlessly ... delivery usually takes about
a week (usually less).

Daniel Ridings
http://www.dlridings.com/paw2005

On 8/16/05, ancwil <ancwil@...> wrote:
> Apologies if this question has been answered before - I did search the
> posts but couldn't find anything relevant.
> 
> Simply, can anyone tell me where MIS ink sets can be purchased in the
> UK. I'm thinking of using the EZ set for my C86 but I haven't been
> able to find any UK suppliers.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Andrew

I don't think the MIS inks are available anywhere except from MIS 
themselves (www.inksupply.com). I live in Canada and shipping is 
fairly fast. They are an easy company to deal with.

ancwil wrote:
> Apologies if this question has been answered before - I did search the
> posts but couldn't find anything relevant.
> 
> Simply, can anyone tell me where MIS ink sets can be purchased in the
> UK. I'm thinking of using the EZ set for my C86 but I haven't been
> able to find any UK suppliers.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Andrew
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated.
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See \ufffdGroup Topic, Rules and Guidelines\ufffd in the Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
> 
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE \ufffdOWNER\ufffd AND \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  \ufffdOWNER\ufffd AND \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 

-- 


Jordan Wosnick
jwosnick@...

> Apologies if this question has been answered before - I did 
> search the posts but couldn't find anything relevant.
> 
> Simply, can anyone tell me where MIS ink sets can be 
> purchased in the UK. I'm thinking of using the EZ set for my 
> C86 but I haven't been able to find any UK suppliers.

I contacted MIS about this the other week. Their response? They ship to the
UK daily.

Chris


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

As a regular UK customer of MIS I have been repeatedly impressed by
their reliable service, the cheapest shipping always seems fast too.
A few months ago it seemed an incredible bargain, but now the exchange
rates are not quite so friendly it still seems low cost compared to
anything else in Europe.

Ken

o


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Aitken"
<chris@i...> wrote:
> > Apologies if this question has been answered before - I did 
> > search the posts but couldn't find anything relevant.
> > 
> > Simply, can anyone tell me where MIS ink sets can be 
> > purchased in the UK. I'm thinking of using the EZ set for my 
> > C86 but I haven't been able to find any UK suppliers.
> 
> I contacted MIS about this the other week. Their response? They ship
to the

> UK daily.
> 
> Chris
> 
> 
> -- 
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.

Hello Group,

I've been lurking for a while, and now that I've just got my first order of 
inks from MIS, my first post with a lot of questions!

1. When I placed the order, I had a PM-3700C, the Japanese equivalent 
of the 1280, and therefore ordered MISPRO color and UT2 B&W inks. The 
B&W inks say Ultra Tone UT-4-LC/LM etc. Are these UT2 inks, or the 
original UT inks? 

2. A couple of days ago, I found a bargain PM-4000PX, the Japanese 
equivalent of the 2200, and now I'm thinking of using color in the 2200 
and B&W in the 1280. Is this a good idea? 

3. I got a bottle of GLOP and cleaning fluid (one of which is the base, I 
believe) as well. 

4. Since I had not bought any LK earlier, is it possible to make it myself, 
using PK and either GLOP or the cleaning fluid? What is the dilution?

5. Since many in the group are also using QTR, a question specifically for 
them. QTR does not show either the PM-3700C (1280) or the 
PM-4000PX (2200). Would I be okay using the 1280 or 2200 as the 
printer of choice?

Thank you for your help.
Kumar

>1. ... ordered MISPRO color and UT2 B&W inks. The 
>B&W inks say Ultra Tone UT-4-LC/LM etc. Are these UT2 inks, 
>or the original UT inks?

I don't know MIS numbering.  The 4 could be the bottle size -- 4 oz. -- if
bulk.  Look at the Yellow position.  The UT2 sepia is very obvious.
 
>2. ... thinking of using color in the 2200 and B&W in the 1280.

The 2200 is much less susceptible to clogs and faster, for what it's worth.
Both at their best make excellent prints.  The LK substitution in the 2200
has value in color.

>3. I got a bottle of GLOP and cleaning fluid (one of which is the 
> base, I believe) as well.

Glop can be used as a base for glossy printing inks.  Cleaning fluid is
dilute (lower viscosity) UC-type base (no binder).  The cleaning fluid
cannot be used as a base.

>4. Since I had not bought any LK earlier, is it possible to make it 
> myself, using PK and either GLOP or the cleaning fluid? 
> What is the dilution?

Use PK and Glop.  The standard ratio for dilution is 30 PK to 70 base.
However, the PK loads have changed.  So, it's hard to say what the exact
ratio is for what you have.

>5. ... QTR does not show either the PM-3700C (1280) or the 
>PM-4000PX (2200). Would I be okay using the 1280 or 2200 
>as the printer of choice?

Download the program and see if it works.

Good luck with the project.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Paul,

Thanks for the quick response. I've had no response from MIS as yet, so 
I still don't know whether I have UT or UT2 inks. I've not had quick 
responses from MIS earlier as well. Perhaps some of the other members 
can chime in? 

I guess I'll have to get the LK for the 2200 from MIS, then.

I downloaded QTR a couple of days ago. Both my printers show up with 
their Japanese names. I'm a little confused about the Printing Models. Is 
there some place where I can figure out what all the acronyms mean?

Thanks,
Kumar

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul 
Roark" <paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
> 
> >1. ... ordered MISPRO color and UT2 B&W inks. The 
> >B&W inks say Ultra Tone UT-4-LC/LM etc. Are these UT2 inks, 
> >or the original UT inks?
> 
> I don't know MIS numbering.  The 4 could be the bottle size -- 4 oz. -
- if
> bulk.  Look at the Yellow position.  The UT2 sepia is very obvious.
>  
> >2. ... thinking of using color in the 2200 and B&W in the 1280.
> 
> The 2200 is much less susceptible to clogs and faster, for what it's 
worth.
> Both at their best make excellent prints.  The LK substitution in the 
2200
> has value in color.
> 
> >3. I got a bottle of GLOP and cleaning fluid (one of which is the 
> > base, I believe) as well.
> 
> Glop can be used as a base for glossy printing inks.  Cleaning fluid is
> dilute (lower viscosity) UC-type base (no binder).  The cleaning fluid
> cannot be used as a base.
> 
> >4. Since I had not bought any LK earlier, is it possible to make it 
> > myself, using PK and either GLOP or the cleaning fluid? 
> > What is the dilution?
> 
> Use PK and Glop.  The standard ratio for dilution is 30 PK to 70 base.
> However, the PK loads have changed.  So, it's hard to say what the 
exact

> ratio is for what you have.
> 
> >5. ... QTR does not show either the PM-3700C (1280) or the 
> >PM-4000PX (2200). Would I be okay using the 1280 or 2200 
> >as the printer of choice?
> 
> Download the program and see if it works.
> 
> Good luck with the project.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

Kumar
I also just recently received my first order for UT2 inks.  Mine say 
UT2-4-LC/LM, etc on the labels in 4 oz bottles.

Dan

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "bskumar_in" 
<bskumar_in@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Group,
> 
> I've been lurking for a while, and now that I've just got my first 
order of 
> inks from MIS, my first post with a lot of questions!
> 
> 1. When I placed the order, I had a PM-3700C, the Japanese 
equivalent 
> of the 1280, and therefore ordered MISPRO color and UT2 B&W inks. 
The 
> B&W inks say Ultra Tone UT-4-LC/LM etc. Are these UT2 inks, or the 
> original UT inks? 
> 
> 2. A couple of days ago, I found a bargain PM-4000PX, the Japanese 
> equivalent of the 2200, and now I'm thinking of using color in the 
2200 
> and B&W in the 1280. Is this a good idea? 
> 
> 3. I got a bottle of GLOP and cleaning fluid (one of which is the 
base, I 
> believe) as well. 
> 
> 4. Since I had not bought any LK earlier, is it possible to make 
it myself, 
> using PK and either GLOP or the cleaning fluid? What is the 
dilution?
> 
> 5. Since many in the group are also using QTR, a question 
specifically for 

> them. QTR does not show either the PM-3700C (1280) or the 
> PM-4000PX (2200). Would I be okay using the 1280 or 2200 as the 
> printer of choice?
> 
> Thank you for your help.
> Kumar
>

Dan,
I got a mail from Rob at MIS this morning, and he told me to peel back 
the labels to check the markings. They're all UT2, so I'm glad that 
confusion is over.

Which printer are you using?

Kumar

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, 
"dbhull97459" <d_hull@...> wrote:

>
> Kumar
> I also just recently received my first order for UT2 inks.  Mine say 
> UT2-4-LC/LM, etc on the labels in 4 oz bottles.