Digital BW, The Print

So far I have managed to ignore HDR imaging, but curiosity has got the best of me.  I was 
wonder1ing if anyone has used HDR compositing techniques, then tone mapped back to grey 
scale.  More importantly, how did the image(s) look?  If you have such an animal, can you 
post a link to it?

Thanks

I've found this point of vue interesting:

http://www.apogeephoto.com/june2007/jaustin62007.shtml

Denis


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ilford100"
<robertrowe2@...> wrote:
>
> So far I have managed to ignore HDR imaging, but curiosity has got
the best of me.  I was 
> wonder1ing if anyone has used HDR compositing techniques, then tone
mapped back to grey 
> scale.  More importantly, how did the image(s) look?  If you have
such an animal, can you 

> post a link to it?
> 
> Thanks
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ilford100" <robertrowe2@...> 
wrote:
>
> So far I have managed to ignore HDR imaging, but curiosity has got the best of me.  I was 
> wonder1ing if anyone has used HDR compositing techniques, then tone mapped back to 
grey 
> scale.  More importantly, how did the image(s) look?  If you have such an animal, can you 
> post a link to it?
 
Hello Robert, I've played with it a bit both through color to b&w conversions and infrared to 
b&w conversions.  I've gotten some very, very, rich midtones using both PSCS3's HDR 
conversion and Photomatix's tone mapping.  It's probably lack of experience with both but I 
also get very posterized highlights and shadows with both.  I think there is a lot of potential 
there for very rich tones, sort of like pulling Tech Pan, but lots and lots of bugs to work out.  
It's not very high on my list right now but come this winter with some free time I think it's 
worth more exploration.

All you can do is give it a try;)

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ilford100" <robertrowe2@...> 
wrote:
>
> So far I have managed to ignore HDR imaging, but curiosity has got the best of me.  I was 
> wonder1ing if anyone has used HDR compositing techniques, then tone mapped back to 
grey 
> scale.  More importantly, how did the image(s) look?  If you have such an animal, can you 
> post a link to it?
 
Hello Robert, I've played with it a bit both through color to b&w conversions and infrared to 
b&w conversions.  I've gotten some very, very, rich midtones using both PSCS3's HDR 
conversion and Photomatix's tone mapping.  It's probably lack of experience with both but I 
also get very posterized highlights and shadows with both.  I think there is a lot of potential 
there for very rich tones, sort of like pulling Tech Pan, but lots and lots of bugs to work out.  
It's not very high on my list right now but come this winter with some free time I think it's 
worth more exploration.

All you can do is give it a try;)

A reference was given earlier in the thread to an article on the use
of HDR techniques for B&W images. It was full of remarks like "Subtle
changes from dark to light tones can act as metaphors for the passage
of time." Not sure what the author was smoking, but each to their own...

I haven't used the Photomatix product discussed in that article, but
it sounds interesting. Photoshop has the "Merge to HDR" utility (under
File>Automate menu), but I haven't managed to get that to work.

I have used Photoshop's "Load Files Into Stack" utility to merge
multiple, exposure-bracketed images to process HDR scenes, with some
success. If you're interested, the workflow follows. I certainly
didn't invent this -- it is lifted from some article I found somewhere
on the web and edited somewhat over time as I`ve used it



Step 1

Load the three images into Photoshop (applies to CS3), using 
File>Scripts>Load Files Into Stack menu item. 
In the Load Layers window, browse for and select the three images.
Check the "Attempt to Automatically Align Source Images" checkbox. 

Step 2

You will end up with a document with three layers, one with the
over-exposed image, one with the normal-exposed image and one with the
under-exposed image. Use the mouse to drag the layers so that the
normal-exposure is the bottom layer, the under-exposure is in the
middle and the over-exposure is at the top.

Step 3

Select the over-exposure layer and add a layer mask by selecting the
Layer> Add Layer Mask menu and selecting Reveal All.

Step 4

Select the Image >Apply Image menu item. In the Apply Image window,
check Invert and click OK.

Step 5

Select the under-exposure layer and add a layer mask by selecting the
Layer> Add Layer Mask menu and selecting Reveal All.

Step 6

Select the Image>Apply Image menu. In the Apply Image window,
*uncheck* Invert, then click OK.

Step 7

Adjust the opacity setting on the over-exposure and under-exposure
layers to taste. You typically adjust the over-exposure layer opacity
to dial in shadow detail, and adjust the under-exposure layer opacity
to dial in highlight detail.

If the captures are in color, converting to B&W is the same as for any
other color image. I use the Layer>New Adjustment Layer>Black&White
menu item.


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "the_des_bois"
<thedesbois@...> wrote:

>
> I've found this point of vue interesting:
> 
> http://www.apogeephoto.com/june2007/jaustin62007.shtml
> 
> Denis
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ilford100"
> <robertrowe2@> wrote:
> >
> > So far I have managed to ignore HDR imaging, but curiosity has got
> the best of me.  I was 
> > wonder1ing if anyone has used HDR compositing techniques, then tone
> mapped back to grey 
> > scale.  More importantly, how did the image(s) look?  If you have
> such an animal, can you 
> > post a link to it?
> > 
> > Thanks
> >
>

tynmansystems wrote:
> 
> 
> A reference was given earlier in the thread to an article on the use
> of HDR techniques for B&W images. It was full of remarks like "Subtle
> changes from dark to light tones can act as metaphors for the passage
> of time." Not sure what the author was smoking, but each to their own...
> 
> I haven't used the Photomatix product discussed in that article, but
> it sounds interesting. Photoshop has the "Merge to HDR" utility (under
> File>Automate menu), but I haven't managed to get that to work.

I've experimented with HDR using the freeware qtpfsgui utility
and multiple scans from my Nikon LS9000, adjusting the analog
gain for each scan.  The registration of the images is apparently
excellent; I'm not seeing a sharpness problem.

The result are interesting, particularly when I start with
real "problem" negs.  It certainly speaks to the latitude of
B&W negative film that we've been discussing already.

Dana

Dynamic Photo is an HDR package thats similar in capablity to 
Photomatix and is about half the cost. Its simple and very quick to 
use and has tonemapping capabilities (like photograpic and auto-
adaptive modes) that extends dynamic range w/o the exaggerated look.  
For some scenes it can work well.  
SteveB 

-- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "tynmansystems" 
<tynmansystems@...> wrote:
>
> A reference was given earlier in the thread to an article on the use
> of HDR techniques for B&W images. It was full of remarks 
like "Subtle
> changes from dark to light tones can act as metaphors for the 
passage
> of time." Not sure what the author was smoking, but each to their 
own...
> 
> I haven't used the Photomatix product discussed in that article, but
> it sounds interesting. Photoshop has the "Merge to HDR" utility 
(under
> File>Automate menu), but I haven't managed to get that to work.
> 
> I have used Photoshop's "Load Files Into Stack" utility to merge
> multiple, exposure-bracketed images to process HDR scenes, with some
> success. If you're interested, the workflow follows. I certainly
> didn't invent this -- it is lifted from some article I found 
somewhere
> on the web and edited somewhat over time as I`ve used it

> 
> 
> Step 1
> 
> Load the three images into Photoshop (applies to CS3), using 
> File>Scripts>Load Files Into Stack menu item. 
> In the Load Layers window, browse for and select the three images.
> Check the "Attempt to Automatically Align Source Images" checkbox. 
> 
> Step 2
> 
> You will end up with a document with three layers, one with the
> over-exposed image, one with the normal-exposed image and one with 
the
> under-exposed image. Use the mouse to drag the layers so that the
> normal-exposure is the bottom layer, the under-exposure is in the
> middle and the over-exposure is at the top.
> 
> Step 3
> 
> Select the over-exposure layer and add a layer mask by selecting the
> Layer> Add Layer Mask menu and selecting Reveal All.
> 
> Step 4
> 
> Select the Image >Apply Image menu item. In the Apply Image window,
> check Invert and click OK.
> 
> Step 5
> 
> Select the under-exposure layer and add a layer mask by selecting 
the
> Layer> Add Layer Mask menu and selecting Reveal All.
> 
> Step 6
> 
> Select the Image>Apply Image menu. In the Apply Image window,
> *uncheck* Invert, then click OK.
> 
> Step 7
> 
> Adjust the opacity setting on the over-exposure and under-exposure
> layers to taste. You typically adjust the over-exposure layer 
opacity
> to dial in shadow detail, and adjust the under-exposure layer 
opacity
> to dial in highlight detail.
> 
> If the captures are in color, converting to B&W is the same as for 
any
> other color image. I use the Layer>New Adjustment Layer>Black&White
> menu item.
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "the_des_bois"
> <thedesbois@> wrote:
> >
> > I've found this point of vue interesting:
> > 
> > http://www.apogeephoto.com/june2007/jaustin62007.shtml
> > 
> > Denis
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ilford100"
> > <robertrowe2@> wrote:
> > >
> > > So far I have managed to ignore HDR imaging, but curiosity has 
got
> > the best of me.  I was 
> > > wonder1ing if anyone has used HDR compositing techniques, then 
tone
> > mapped back to grey 
> > > scale.  More importantly, how did the image(s) look?  If you 
have

> > such an animal, can you 
> > > post a link to it?
> > > 
> > > Thanks
> > >
> >
>

HDR has been useful for difficult images from time to time, used in ways for which it was 
not intended. THis relates to the zone system/film/scanning compression thread as well. 
One thing film can do, even when a great deal of minus development is used to control 
excessive scene range, is remain (for the sake of this discussion) virtually continuous tone. 
In other words, despite the dramatic compression, there is still tonal distinction, no 
outright posterization. So with a hi bit scan, those locally compressed tones can be pulled 
apart nicely.
But it can be difficult. A recent image made down in a forest ravine looking out into sunlit 
areas was very compacted via developement, and the density range scanned easily. But 
despite a lot of messing around it was hard to get pleasing local contrast and retain the 
range, with such image complexity.
HDR does seem to deal with this successfully sometimes, so I fooled it. I've never been 
successful with PS HDR, so this was with Photomatix. I simply made different file versions 
from that scan, increasing contrast and changing brightness similar to what a bracket 
might have looked like letting extremes go, then combined them with Photomatix. If I 
recall I had to put in some fake exposure data. Obvioulsy registration is a non-issue.
It only got part way there, I wound up working it as a new scan with masked adjustment 
layers etc., and layered back in the original scan in areas, but it gave a good starting point 
I doubt I could achieved manually. One exposure, one scan.
The point is, when all else fails, break the rules... use tools for what they seem to be good 
at, often not what they were intended for...
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ilford100" <robertrowe2@...> 
wrote:
>
> So far I have managed to ignore HDR imaging, but curiosity has got the best of me.  I 
was 
> wonder1ing if anyone has used HDR compositing techniques, then tone mapped back to 
grey 
> scale.  More importantly, how did the image(s) look?  If you have such an animal, can 
you 

> post a link to it?
> 
> Thanks
>

Tyler,

> I've never been 
> successful with PS HDR, so this was with Photomatix. I simply made 
different file versions 
> from that scan, increasing contrast and changing brightness similar 
to what a bracket 
> might have looked like letting extremes go, then combined them with 
Photomatix. If I 
> recall I had to put in some fake exposure data. Obvioulsy 
registration is a non-issue.
> It only got part way there, I wound up working it as a new scan 
with masked adjustment 
> layers etc., and layered back in the original scan in areas, but it 
gave a good starting point 
> I doubt I could achieved manually. One exposure, one scan.
> The point is, when all else fails, break the rules... use tools for 
what they seem to be good 

I've used this same technique with 4x5 Velvia when the scale of the 
image couldn't be handled by my cheap Epson 2450. Making two scans 
with different gamma I was able to composite the two scans with 
Photomatix and get the full range of the tranparency.

So yeah the technique works.

Don Bryant

I can see that these digital tools can simplify some of what we've done 
manually, including dodging and burning.  (I anticipate initial 
overused -- which I've certainly been guilty of with new tools or 
toys.) 

The Potomatix website is at 

http://www.hdrsoft.com/

I still do even dslr dual-frame images manually.  (I was not happy with 
the PS CS2 version of HDR.)  

The following is typical of my manual versions of HDR: 
http://www.paulroark.com/Foxs_&_Cirque.html  It makes an interesting 
comparison to the Photomatix sample on its web page, above.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

I really dislike most of the examples on their webpage but swear by
photomatix.  I use it to combine slide scans and avoid noise and to do
the same with high contrast digital scenes.  I do bit use its HDR
feature but rather the combine images one which lets you extend the
dynamic range as with using layers and masks.

Roger

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

>
> I can see that these digital tools can simplify some of what we've done 
> manually, including dodging and burning.  (I anticipate initial 
> overused -- which I've certainly been guilty of with new tools or 
> toys.) 
> 
> The Potomatix website is at 
> 
> http://www.hdrsoft.com/
> 
> I still do even dslr dual-frame images manually.  (I was not happy with 
> the PS CS2 version of HDR.)  
> 
> The following is typical of my manual versions of HDR: 
> http://www.paulroark.com/Foxs_&_Cirque.html  It makes an interesting 
> comparison to the Photomatix sample on its web page, above.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

I read that article the other from the link on DPR. Looking at the first two images that 
they show I prefer the single exposure image any day. The HDR one might contain more 
shadow and highlight detail but it is as boring as hell and flat as a pancake.
Jules




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "the_des_bois" <thedesbois@...> 
wrote:

>
> I've found this point of vue interesting:
> 
> http://www.apogeephoto.com/june2007/jaustin62007.shtml
> 
> Denis
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ilford100"
> <robertrowe2@> wrote:
> >
> > So far I have managed to ignore HDR imaging, but curiosity has got
> the best of me.  I was 
> > wonder1ing if anyone has used HDR compositing techniques, then tone
> mapped back to grey 
> > scale.  More importantly, how did the image(s) look?  If you have
> such an animal, can you 
> > post a link to it?
> > 
> > Thanks
> >
>

Re your last paragraph, do you mean Hue/Saturation when you say Black and White menu (as 
this does not exist). This step is crutial to a great b&w image and not as simple as the one 
step that your refer to it as. 
Jules


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

> 
> If the captures are in color, converting to B&W is the same as for any
> other color image. I use the Layer>New Adjustment Layer>Black&White
> menu item.