Getting professional looking black and white photos (Page 2): Yes. And if you are printing on your own, then printing an image well means having: a good printer; good paper; profiles...

ygelman Loc: new -- North of Poughkeepsie!

GoofyNewfie wrote:

You still have to print the images, which is at least half the battle. Hopefully someone will chime in about getting good prints. I'd certainly like to know.

Yes. And if you are printing on your own, then printing an image well means having:
a good printer;
good paper;
profiles that match the paper to the printer.

And even then it will be some trial and error unless the screen and printer are color calibrated (even with B/W).

SuzyCK

The only 'real' black and white HAS to be done with film. Digital or Photoshop will never be able to duplicate what film is able to do. The darkroom is much more of an art and can create beautiful images unlike any digital image. The beauty of Ansel Adams photos were created in his darkroom. Sadly, not many are willing to turn out the lights and go there anymore...... ;(

Julieb Loc: LaSalle, Colorado

Wow, wow, wow! You make this look easy Cliff. Beautiful work.

CaptainC wrote:

quote=morriscowley Have studied the past masters... (show quote)

ISO100 Loc: Richland City Indiana

Your work is excellent in my opinion. That is the kind of digital black and white I want to achieve. Would like to discuss printer and paper choices with you as well. Great images!

dundeelad Loc: Originally UK. Current West Dundee, Illinois

Check out fellow UHH member Ian Barber and his website. He is an acknowledged master of black and white and has even written a small program plug-in for b/w conversion. (MONOBOX)
I don't think you will be disappointed.

ygelman Loc: new -- North of Poughkeepsie!

SuzyCK wrote:

The only 'real' black and white HAS to be done with film. Digital or Photoshop will never be able to duplicate what film is able to do. The darkroom is much more of an art and can create beautiful images unlike any digital image. The beauty of Ansel Adams photos were created in his darkroom. Sadly, not many are willing to turn out the lights and go there anymore...... ;(

With all due respect, this is SuzyCK's opinion. In fact, before he died, my mentor from ages ago made a comment to me after looking at my B/W digital prints -- about how I was able to get "black blacks" that he tried to get. Since I had never worked in a wet darkroom, I didn't realize the quality of my digital work -- and I'm still learning.

FYI I use an Epson 3800, using Nik software and Eric Chan's profiles for advanced black and white.

Hendrickus

try alienskin.com

DougW Loc: SoCal

Pablo8 wrote:

It's not really something you can get from reading/looking at books. I spent years as a Press and Public Relations Photographer, and getting out there with the camera, and returning to the darkroom, is the best way to go. Choices of materials could be an ever growing problem now, and in the future. The old adage "Use it...or lose it" springs to mind.Joe Public went digital mad, and is the one to blame. I still shoot, and process film. Long may it last.

Lots of material out there, 35mm, 120, sheet film , papers, etc. etc.

bikinkawboy Loc: north central Missouri

Great work CaptainC! There are times where B&W is the only way to go. I think sometimes colors other than black and white pull attention away from the subject. Years ago before digital I tried shooting B&W but when having the film processed in town, the results were always too gray and lacked the contrast I wanted. Even the simple free digital processing programs can either convert an image to B&W or allow you to adjust the color or saturation to turn it into B&W, plus the ability to adjust contrast.

As for post processing images, I have to problem with the result not being a true representation of the actual subject. Painters seldom reproduce subjects accurately either. I guess what's improtant is whether you are using photography for documentation (like I do here at work) or use photography to create art.

jackm1943 Loc: Omaha, Nebraska

Are you saying you have the ability to enlarge and print the film, but are not willing to develop the film? If you are not willing to develop the b/w film yourself, which is critical but not difficult in terms of equipment and space, don't waste your time with b/w film.

It was not clear from your post, but if your intent is to scan negatives and then use PS or equivalent to process them, then shoot with color film and convert to b/w using NIK SilferEfex plug in.

morriscowley wrote:

Have studied the past masters of black and white photographers and without exception the blacks are blacker and the whites are whiter and tones great with film than I can never get with digital, even though everyone says digital is the way to . I'm about to buy a roll of black and white film, have it developed but do the printing and "improvements" myself. What say you experienced black photographers. morriscowley.

cheineck Loc: Hobe Sound, FL

NIK SilverEfex!!!!!!!

marcomarks Loc: Ft. Myers, FL

morriscowley wrote:

Have studied the past masters of black and white photographers and without exception the blacks are blacker and the whites are whiter and tones great with film than I can never get with digital, even though everyone says digital is the way to . I'm about to buy a roll of black and white film, have it developed but do the printing and "improvements" myself. What say you experienced black photographers. morriscowley.

I'd suggest using the HDR method in post-editing of combining 3 different bracketed exposures to achieve the higher dynamic range of film. You can read about HDR many places on the web.

All you're achieving by buying a roll of B&W film then doing improvements yourself during printing is the same thing as digital post editing to do improvements before printing.

If you don't have, or want to have, post editing software that is complex there is some fairly inexpensive HDR-specialized software out there.

I've seen some pretty awesome HDR B&W work so don't give up, just do some research concerning post-editing.

OldBobD Loc: Ohio

You can make the best b&w conversion possible in your post processing, but unless you have a printer that is capable of accurately reproducing the shades of gray, you are never going to duplicate the look of a silver print. Higher end printers use two or three different black inks to overcome some of the difficulties of producing a good b&w print.

DougW Loc: SoCal

Still won't have the range of tri x and silver paper

Guy Johnstone Loc: Ocean Shores WA

In my rarely humble opinion; if you plan to make black and white prints from 35mm negatives and print to digital devices you may as well forgo the film and just shoot digital. If you want the best black and white prints possible, I would suggest medium or large format film. Stay with the photographic process from start to finish. You can buy first-rate German-made professional film equipment, made to last a lifetime, for about the same price is a Nikon 7000 and 50mm 1.4. you'll probably have enough left over to buy a complete cold water darkroom. The learning curve for film is probably about the same as the learning curve for digital. In the end large-format film will produce the finest black-and-white prints possible, but once again that's just my opinion. Oh and by the way I have and do make black-and-white prints both ways. As a plus once washed properly your silver prints are truly archival quality. The first generation of Epson "archival" inkjet paper I used faded to a sick red in about two years. The stuff is better now. But I don't see how you can tell it's going to do in 20 years. yeah I know it's lab tested, but then so was the first batch.