Stan Fayer

I shoot with a Nikon D300 and was wondering if I was better of shooting in monochrome or converting to monochrome after shooting in color, or, shooting in monochrome and then playing around with it later on my computer?
Stan

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Shoot in RAW and then you can do anything you want with the files.
If you shoot in monochrome than that is what you are stuck with no matter how much you may decide "I wonder if it would have looked better in color?".

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

The raw data from the sensor has one choice: color. Setting your camera to shoot monochrome only affects the jpg that the camera will produce. The raw file is color because of the way the camera is physically constructed.

Converting from color to monochrome after the fact offers you choices in just how to do the conversion. The conversion is probably analogous to using a color filter on a camera shooting monochrome film, or using different films with different chromatic sensitivities.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

The raw data from the sensor has one choice: color. Setting your camera to shoot monochrome only affects the jpg that the camera will produce. The raw file is color because of the way the camera is physically constructed.

Converting from color to monochrome after the fact offers you choices in just how to do the conversion. The conversion is probably analogous to using a color filter on a camera shooting monochrome film, or using different films with different chromatic sensitivities.

Using the raw file instead of the jpg from the camera probably offers more choices in the conversion.

Stan Fayer

Thanks, sometimes I miss using my old 4X5 with real film.
Stan

patman1 Loc: Pataskala, Ohio

I usually shoot to give me both a Raw and a jpeg, in color then if I want to create monochrome can use my Raw file. On my Kodak I could save as a jpeg and reduce color and get a grey scale and still retain color.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

G Brown Loc: Sunny Bognor Regis West Sussex UK

Check to see of your camera allows you to see in monochrome in live view and still shoot in raw. That way you can gauge the contrasts and grain and still have an image that can be post processed 'even better'.

have fun

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Converting to grayscale in post provides a lot more creative options than shooting in camera.

epd1947

What I often do is set the camera to shoot in black and white - so I get a pretty good representation of the scene in black and white. I also have the camera set to raw + jpeg. That way I can work with the raw file after the fact if I feel the need to do so - doing it that way you already have a black and white image as in the old days of shooting with Tri-X etc. but have given up nothing in terms of flexibility.

rond-photography Loc: Connecticut

I like shooting in mono sometimes just to allow me to see the scene in mono as I shoot. It is helpful to learn, but back in the film days we did not see the scene in color. You had to previsualize the scene, knowing that there would be no color after you left the dark room! So, I look at the mono option as just a help in getting better at purposely shooting for mono.

If you are shooting JPEG only, shooting in mono would probably not be a good idea. Once the camera renders the jpeg in mono, you are stuck with mono (please correct me if I am wrong on that assumption).

If you shoot mono in RAW only, Lightroom (at least with my Olympus OMD) will lose the mono setting and will display the photo in color, so you won't really know how the camera rendered it. No big deal, you toggle Color/Mono with the "V" key and see which you like, then enhance it. However, you shot all those photos thinking you would be seeing what the camera showed you when you were shooting in mono and now they appear in color - frustrating.

So if you want to use the mono setting to get the hang of previsualizing in mono, but you want the raw file, shoot RAW + JPEG and just delete the JPEGS once you find the RAW ones you would render in mono. You might even like the JPEG.

And by the way, back in the day, you could shoot color negative film and print on special paper to get a black & white print (I never tried it tho), so the concept of having a
"raw file" that could be processed multiple ways is not new, just digitized.

And don't fret that you only have the jpeg if that is the case - while the ability to get "more" from a RAW file is very real, I have shot both ways and only the real problem photos (extreme dynamic range, bad WB, etc.) benefit greatly from raw. You can get outstanding results from well exposed jpegs.

Rab-Eye Loc: Indiana

👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

The raw will get you both so why also the jpg?

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

I shoot color but my conversions are done with Topaz B&W Effects 2.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

As many stated, RAW and convert. I've found that renders much better control. As for shooting with a 4x5, I don't miss it at all. I still use my 4x5. In fact, we're planning an outing this weekend.
--Bob