Yahoo Groups archive

Digital BW, The Print

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 22:56 UTC

Thread

C86 mis-ez inks first prints - more questions

C86 mis-ez inks first prints - more questions

2004-12-31 by Steve

Very impressive. Actually some of the best results are from 35mm b&w 
negatives that i processed years ago.

My digital camera results for b&w prints are mixed - certainly no 
fault of the the printer or ink system.

I don't have photoshop cs, but I do have elements 2.0.

I have read that it is better to shoot in color, then convert to 
greyscale, as opposed to using the b&w camera setting.

Should I shoot in color, then convert to greyscale in elements?

Additionally, most of the conversions are very flat looking with very 
little contrast.

Any help would be greatly appreciated....thanks for being so patient 
with a novice.

Steve

Re: C86 mis-ez inks first prints - more questions

2004-12-31 by Michael Hung

I use channel-mixer in Photoshop. I don't know if elements has that
function. If you just use the greyscale feature, you might be able to
do some adjustment using Levels. (I always do some tweaking with level
after channel mixer anyway).

(If you search the net, there are plenty of ways to convert an image
to B/W. From GreyScale command to Channel-Mixer to Plugins..)

Michael
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> I have read that it is better to shoot in color, then convert to 
> greyscale, as opposed to using the b&w camera setting.
> 
> Should I shoot in color, then convert to greyscale in elements?
> 
> Additionally, most of the conversions are very flat looking with very 
> little contrast.

Re: C86 mis-ez inks first prints - more questions

2004-12-31 by rgb2bw

Steve,

I have Photoshop CS so I don't know how much of this applies to 
Elements, but I will share my observations on color vs B&W.  Take 
what I say with a grain of salt because I will be putting in a plug 
for the color-to-B&W method I devised.

A true grayscale image only has one channel of information whereas a 
color image in the RGB mode has three.  What is stored in these 
channels is not only color information, but also tone information.  
And tone is what B&W is all about.  Therefore, a RGB image has the 
capability of storing more tonal information than a single channel 
grayscale image.  In fact, I have read recommendations that B&W 
negatives should be scanned as color so the scanner can pick up all 
the information it can.  This may lead to a color cast in the scanned 
image, but the cast will be removed when converted to B&W.

I know many photographers who shoot in color and then convert to B&W 
in the computer.  When converting to B&W in the full version of 
Photoshop, there are a number of ways of doing so.  (Here comes the 
plug).  On my web site, www.zuberphotographics.com, I discuss several 
of the customary methods of converting from color to B&W and I also 
discuss a method I devised called the Tone Management System (there 
is no fee or charge to use it).

I do not know if you are trying to use a Hue/Saturation adjustment 
layer to remove the color by desaturating the image.  If so, and 
Elements supports it, change the blending mode to Color.  If left to 
Normal, the resulting B&W image will be flat indeed.

Whatever method you use, I suggest you not convert to grayscale and 
reduce your image to one channel.  (Unless you want to create true 
duo/tri/quad tones, then you have to.)  If you want to work in 
grayscale tonality, my web site shows you how to keep your image in 
color yet still work in true grayscale tones (it is the grayscale 
section under Tone Management System).

Hopefully, I did not waste your time because I do not know what you 
can and can not do in Elements.  But keep in mind that Light is 
Information and it is the channels where this information is stored.  
And in a lot of cases, three channels are better than one.

Thomas

> 
> I don't have photoshop cs, but I do have elements 2.0.
> 
> I have read that it is better to shoot in color, then convert to 
> greyscale, as opposed to using the b&w camera setting.
> 
> Should I shoot in color, then convert to greyscale in elements?
> 
> Additionally, most of the conversions are very flat looking with 
very 
> little contrast.
> 
> Any help would be greatly appreciated....thanks for being so 
patient 
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> with a novice.
> 
> Steve

QTR success!

2004-12-31 by Matt Haber

I'm posting this as a counter to all of my complaints and to thank 
Roy Harrington and Stephen Billard.

I've succeeded in running QTR (QTRGUI 2.1.10) with the following 
setup:

QTR/GUI loaded on a laptop running win2K
networked to a Win98 machine
driving a 1280

the output is nice--though not markedly different than using paul 
roark's curves. I like the ability to blend tones. Given that this 
installation was mostly proof of concept, I will probably wait til it all 
works on win98 before i make QTR part of my workflow. 

(FWIW, I tried installing 2.1.10 beta 3, since it does not require 
batch files, but it exits with the message "could not initialize 
installation (CRC). This function only valid in Win32 mode").

-matt
--
Matt Haber
dance, portrait and fashion photography
http://www.matthaber.com

Re: [Digital BW] QTR success!

2005-01-01 by Matt Haber

(ignore my msg about my installation attempt for beta 3--turns out 
the whole file had not downloaded)

-matt
--
Matt Haber
dance, portrait and fashion photography
http://www.matthaber.com

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.