Black and white jpeg or raw or both?
Oct 22, 2017 20:52:05 #
Planning a shoot. Available light only, band performance. I want the final prints in b/w. Should I shoot b/w jpegs or raw+jpegs? If I shoot jpegs (w A7r2) I can see the image thru the view finder, on the flip if I shoot raw I’ve got a Little more range to work with in post. Is it worth the extra work to wait until post to convert the image?
Oct 22, 2017 21:00:23 #
Is it worth the extra work to wait until post to convert the image? - If only JPEG, yes wait til post. If shooting RAW, you have a color image from the sensor (same as what was converted to B&W by the camera). Never (if you can) let the camera make the final decision.
If you plan to deliver the best work, start with the best ingredients and provide the necessary effort.
If you plan to deliver the best work, start with the best ingredients and provide the necessary effort.
Oct 22, 2017 21:01:58 #
My suggestion NEVER shoot black & white. Shoot in RAW. Very likely Photoshop or Camera Raw will give a better conversion than the camera and you have so many choices. If you shoot mono you are stuck with what the camera has done and no other choice.
Oct 22, 2017 21:03:19 #
I can't speak for that camera, but if your schedule permits, always shoot RAW and do the conversions later. If you have Lightroom or similar, you'll have much more control over the conversion, including the ability to emphasize/de-emphasize different colors' final contribution to the b&w, modulate your highlights and shadows, and fine-tune contrast. Your camera will likely give you its best guess, but you're limiting yourself--and not showing your work to its best advantage--if you let it make the decisions.
Oct 22, 2017 21:04:10 #
Raw will give you the flexibility to convert using different filter effects. In low light you will have better ability to recover shadows. You can slightly underexposed to avoid blown highlights, etc. from spotlights, etc. You might shot b&w jpgs but as an add on to the raw file which will have full color information.
Oct 22, 2017 21:20:52 #
Oct 22, 2017 21:21:19 #
You get much more leeway on how the B&W tones are rendered by shooting RAW and converting. And if you shoot B&W JPEGs, and the band decides at some point they would like color versions, you're out of luck.
Oct 22, 2017 21:30:41 #
Thanks EVERYONE! You’ve confirmed what I was thinking. Guess I was looking for an easy way. In an art form where there is no easy way.
Oct 22, 2017 21:36:58 #
dfharper1961 wrote:
Planning a shoot. Available light only, band performance. I want the final prints in b/w. Should I shoot b/w jpegs or raw+jpegs? If I shoot jpegs (w A7r2) I can see the image thru the view finder, on the flip if I shoot raw I’ve got a Little more range to work with in post. Is it worth the extra work to wait until post to convert the image?
Aside from the good advice here, my concern is more about shooting in available light! Is this at night? How far can you get to the stage? What settings on the camera are you contemplating? How fast of a lens will you be using?
Oct 22, 2017 21:39:15 #
canon Lee wrote:
shoot Manual, RAW, and get the best shots as possible then decide in PP what you want to do with it.Aside from the good advice here, my concern is more about shooting in available light! Is this at night? How far can you get to the stage? What settings on the camera are you contemplating? How fast of a lens will you be using?
Oct 22, 2017 21:45:14 #
dfharper1961 wrote:
Planning a shoot. Available light only, band performance. I want the final prints in b/w. Should I shoot b/w jpegs or raw+jpegs? If I shoot jpegs (w A7r2) I can see the image thru the view finder, on the flip if I shoot raw I’ve got a Little more range to work with in post. Is it worth the extra work to wait until post to convert the image?
NO....
Oct 22, 2017 21:49:22 #
Clapperboard wrote:
My suggestion NEVER shoot black & white. Shoot in RAW. Very likely Photoshop or Camera Raw will give a better conversion than the camera and you have so many choices. If you shoot mono you are stuck with what the camera has done and no other choice.
Agree with Clapperboard 100 percent.
Oct 22, 2017 22:35:53 #
imagemeister wrote:
NO....
Again, what if some time in the future a need for color versions of the photos come up?
Oct 23, 2017 00:23:21 #
There is a trick I read about when planning to convert to B&W in post.
Shoot RAW as recommended by most of us here but set the camera to B&W.
This will display the image on the LCD(or EVF) in B&W but will have no effect on the RAW file.
This will give you a better idea of what the final image will look like than if you view it in color.
Shoot RAW as recommended by most of us here but set the camera to B&W.
This will display the image on the LCD(or EVF) in B&W but will have no effect on the RAW file.
This will give you a better idea of what the final image will look like than if you view it in color.
Oct 23, 2017 04:01:54 #
rwilson1942 wrote:
There is a trick I read about when planning to convert to B&W in post.
Shoot RAW as recommended by most of us here but set the camera to B&W.
This will display the image on the LCD(or EVF) in B&W but will have no effect on the RAW file.
This will give you a better idea of what the final image will look like than if you view it in color.
Shoot RAW as recommended by most of us here but set the camera to B&W.
This will display the image on the LCD(or EVF) in B&W but will have no effect on the RAW file.
This will give you a better idea of what the final image will look like than if you view it in color.
This is how I do it. Primarily when shooting IR so I have immediate feedback on what the final result may look like. And I say "may" because the processed result will likely be much better.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.