The world is full of options. Personally, when I want B&W I prefer shooting B&W film - nothing matches the tonality of Tri-X, IMO (and that's not to say nothing is as good - just different)... anyone who scoffs at someone elses choice of film is a person of limited perception and understanding, lacks moral conviction, and is not to be trusted <LOL> I don't care for C-41 unless specifically wanting a C-41 look, or am just too lazy to develop a roll of film. I've made at times better conversions from color neg than I've gotten from chromogenic B&W. And I've concluded that the Ilford version is not one that I want to use.
That said, there's got to be at least a dozen or so different methods of converting color to B&W in Photoshop. They all have some value. Juan likes to use the channel mixer, I find it too limiting - but then, Juan gets good results from using channel mixer. I prefer the double Hue/Sat layer method, although, while familiar with numerous other methods, I've not tried them all. Just this morning I downloaded an interesting process wherein channels are converted to layers, and adjustments are made to the layers. I've not played with that one yet except to run it as an action just to see how it's put together. The bottom line is that the conversion method used is best not left to an arbitrary decision. Different images, different image sources, different film, different lighting, different subjects, all may help determine the process. One of the things that's often overlooked in discussions of this sort is lighting. When shooting "real" B&W, one is concentrating on tonality, and would often be using the light in a scene differently than when shooting color. So, converting color to B&W is often not the ideal way to get the best B&W result. The problem is compounded by the number of people who think they're making good B&W conversions who've never worked with B&W film. Some images just don't lend themselves well to conversion, regardless of the method used. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Mark Erickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Pentax-Discuss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 12/20/2004 6:04:33 PM > Subject: OT: tonality of different B&W workflows? > > This question is inspired by Juan, Rob, Shel, and others' recent black and > white PAWs, PESOs, and discussions of how they were made. I've seen a > couple of strongly-worded opinions scoffing at anyone who shoots in black > and white directly rather than converting to black and white in Photoshop, > specifically shooting C-41 process black and white rather than C-41 color. > > While I see the value in being able to play with the channel mixer and in > effect "try different filters" after the fact, my feeling is that the C-41 > process black and white films yield smoother tonal transitions than > converted color film. Anyone care to share an opinion? Also, I know that > Juan has discussed a(n) *ist-D workflow that yields results similar to black > and white film. I'd love to hear updated opinions and comparative results > for such workflows.... > > Thanks, > > Mark
