Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: some B&W landscape conversions

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: some B&W landscape conversions

 
 
Mr.T
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-13-2010

"Doug McDonald" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:i951vm$tfk$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
> I seriously doubt that. With enough pixels ... and we are getting up there
> into 4x5 B&W pixel density just about now ... digital will be
> enormously superior. That is, of course, with Ansel Adam's esthetic
> skills, trained to use Photoshop, and printing on an art-grade silver

print paper.

And there's the problem, how many here use a printer with multiple grey inks
for printing their B&W on high quality paper?
If I had enough reason to invest in the right equipment, I might change my
mind. Or if a local lab did. The last time I tried one I was unimpressed
with the results however. That was a couple of years ago I admit.


> Of course, the problem with this idea is that one the AA clone person
> finished with the Photoshopping, an infinite number of perfect and
> identical prints could be reproduced. This is not conducive to
> the idea of "art prints".


Surely the photographer should have the same control over his original data
files as he does over his negatives?

MrT.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Mr.T
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-13-2010

"John McWilliams" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:i94lrb$am7$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
> And excellent results can be achieved with out firing up the enlarger
> and mixing chemicals


Possibly, but I have yet to see them. There just doesn't seem to be enough
demand to spend the necessary capital for most people. IF I was a
millionaire I might think differently of course Since my investment in
darkroom equipment would otherwise go to waste, I guess I'll stick with
that. Unfortunately that option is rapidly disappearing with the necessary
supplies


> but not on one's ordinary inkjet.
>(And no, monitors will never compare directly to a print, color or mono.)


Exactly.

MrT.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Mr.T
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-14-2010

"Troy Piggins" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> I didn't simply "remove the colour". I carefully selected colour
> ranges/hues/channels etc to get the contrast where I wanted it,
> where I thought it looked best. It was much more thought out
> than simply clicking "desaturate" or "grayscale".


Sure, but you can't tell that from the jpeg however. How did you print it?


> And I don't think my results are "artistic" and are far from
> perfect. That's why I made the original post. Asking for
> critique, to help me improve.


And I gave mine for what was presented. Since it was purposely converted to
monochrome, the other comments mostly about composition seem irrelevant to
me. I simply didn't see a photo that was transformed into a work of art by
making it monochrome, no matter how you did it.

(And for the record I was using at least the channel mixer, adjustment
layers, and layer masks to convert to monochrome 15 years ago. That is NOT
the big problem in producing quality B&W from digital IMO)

MrT.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-14-2010
"Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote:
>"Bruce" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
>> >I don't think he was comparing himself to Ansell Adams.

>>
>> No, he wasn't. But I don't think Mr.T was accusing him of doing that
>> either. I think Mr.T was saying that no-one should try to compare a
>> desaturated digital image with traditional black and white work of the
>> quality that Ansel Adams produced.
>>
>> If so, then I agree. Digital black and white has a very long way to
>> go before it can compete with traditional film and paper.

>
>
> Gee I'm glad someone got it. I thought it was clear enough when read in
>full. Obviously not for some.



Some people prefer to provide a knee-jerk reaction to something they
have only briefly scanned.

Welcome to Usenet!


 
Reply With Quote
 
Mr.T
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-14-2010

"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
news:201010131748271393-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...
> >> Agreed. Inkjets for B&W have not provided me B&W prints I, or anybody

else
> >> in this thread, would be satisfied with.

> >
> > Lots of people claim to be happy with the Epson 2400, while others claim
> > improvements by using dedicated inks.
> >
> > The experience here is that even the R800 produces very nice B&W

prints*.
>
> I have a Canon i9900 which does just fine for color, but is very hit
> and miss when it comes to B&W.
> I just could not justify the cost of replacing it right now, based on
> its poor B&W performance.



Yes that's my problem, and the local print places I tried a while back were
underwhelming.


> ...and from time to time I get what amounts to a magnificent accident.


> Agreed. Ultimately it is always the photographer.


Not so. Sure you can't make a good print from a bad photo, but you CAN make
a bad print from a good photo.

MrT.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Mr.T
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-14-2010

"Troy Piggins" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> I've seen guys trying HDR for macro, but they soon give up. I
> wouldn't have thought dynamic range is an issue either if you can
> use a flash.


Are your sure they were actually doing HDR and not image stacking for
increased depth of field? That's what I do for macro.

MrT.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Mr.T
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-14-2010

"Troy Piggins" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Sure, but you can't tell that from the jpeg however. How did you print

it?
>
> What is this "printing" of which you speak? It's 2010 baby,
> get with the times. We only save for web these days.


OK, how many people are using a monochrome monitor on the web, hands up?
Try looking at Ansell Adams pictures on your computer if you want to see why
there is no competition with real prints.


> Sorry. Seriously, though, and in case it isn't obvious, I'm an
> amatuer who only photographs for my own pleasure. I have very
> little experience printing for high quality prints.



Sure, and I said right from the start I wasn't attacking you, just pointing
out my opinion.


> You're really hung up on this monochrome conversion thing, aren't
> you. You don't think composition, exposure, textures, leading
> lines, subject matter, appeal, movement, whatever are important
> for monochrome images?


Sure they are, but they apply exactly the same whether you remove the color
from the original image or not, (IMO of course)


> I never expected the shot to be transformed into a work of art
> because I converted it. I just thought it suited monochrome
> better. A final touch. That's all.



OK, that's your right. And mine to think it didn't really work surely?


> I'm probably more interested in comments about those items
> mentioned above moreso than telling me that digital photos will
> never turn out the same as monochrome film shots. Of course they
> won't. But I'm living in 2010, not last century.


In that case shouldn't you be making color 3D images rather than B&W? Surely
thats SOO last century, or the one before in fact!

MrT.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Mr.T
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-14-2010

"Bruce" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Welcome to Usenet!


Yeah if only, 20 years and counting!

MrT.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Mr.T
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-14-2010

"Doug McDonald" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:i97f0v$go8$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Surely the photographer should have the same control over his original

data
> > files as he does over his negatives?

>
> Yes, but in Art, the mere ability to make more reduces monetary value.
>
> Adam's own prints were of course unique productions.


No, he could always make more from his negatives, the same as you can from
data files. What makes them valuable is to number and sign each one with a
guarantee no more will be made. If you break that guarantee then your future
work becomes worth-less.
The only real difference is that few could reproduce the quality of Adams
work after he died, even given the negatives. Whereas anyone can reprint a
digital file after the photographer dies. Simply destroying all data files
relating to the image after the print run is done will solve that problem of
course. Something not even Adams did with his negatives.

Frankly the idea of simply making art only something for speculators doesn't
appeal to me however.

MrT.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Dr Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-15-2010
Bruce wrote:
> "Mr.T"<MrT@home> wrote:
>> "Bruce"<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Welcome to Usenet!

>>
>> Yeah if only, 20 years and counting!

>
> I'm something of a novice ... only 15 years.


27 years.

--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ipvdBnU8F8
- KRudd at his finest.

"The Labour Party is corrupt beyond redemption!"
- Labour hasbeen Mark Latham in a moment of honest clarity.

"This is the recession we had to have!"
- Paul Keating explaining why he gave Australia another Labour recession.

"Silly old bugger!"
- Well known ACTU ****pot and sometime Labour prime minister Bob Hawke
responding to a pensioner who dared ask for more.

"By 1990, no child will live in poverty"
- Bob Hawke again, desperate to win another election.

"A billion trees ..."
- Borke, ****ed as a newt again.

"Well may we say 'God save the Queen' because nothing will save the governor
general!"
- Egotistical shithead and pompous ****wit E.G. Whitlam whining about his
appointee for Governor General John Kerr.

"SHUT THE **** UP YOU DUMB ****!"
- FlangesBum on learning the truth about Labour's economic capabilities.

"I don't care what you ****ers think!"
- KRudd the KRude Rat at his finest again.

"We'll just change it all when we get in."
- Garrett the carrott
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Some Basics - strings and Conversions Mike Copeland C++ 7 04-18-2012 04:31 AM
Re: some B&W landscape conversions Noons Digital Photography 2 10-13-2010 04:07 PM
Pointer conversions and Data types conversions vb@gmail.com C Programming 10 08-05-2005 09:51 AM
ASP.net and Printing Landscape Eric ASP .Net 4 05-31-2005 04:24 PM
How to configure a page to print in the landscape format? Dexter ASP .Net 0 10-18-2004 07:47 PM



Advertisments