B&W continues...

[Vesa]

Hi...

B&W pro 3.0 from The Image Factory or Power Retouche...?

Have been evaluating both and they seem to work nicely...
Both have 16bit/channel support and work with PS elements.

What do you people say, which one would be better...?
I find B&W pro somehow easier and more pleasant to use...
since it, for example gives the results in realtime...

Any opinnions...or maybe you have a third one to suggest.
I´m of thinking these two since I haven´t got the interest
in spending 500 eur in PS CS just to get the CHANNELS  

[Jack Flesher]

Well, I have CS2 and know how to get the channels right for B&W conversions and still bought Convert to B&W pro  

FWIW, I chose B&W Pro over PR simply because of the interface.  IMO the B&W Pro workflow was so similar to the traditional analog B&W workflow I used to follow, that it was a no-briner for me.  That said, I test drove both and they both deliver excellent and repeatable B&W results -- I don't think you can go wrong with either.  (PS: I am on a PC and I understand the UI's may be slightly different different on Mac.)

Cheers,

[Vesa]

Well, I have CS2 and know how to get the channels right for B&W conversions and still bought Convert to B&W pro  

FWIW, I chose B&W Pro over PR simply because of the interface.  IMO the B&W Pro workflow was so similar to the traditional analog B&W workflow I used to follow, that it was a no-briner for me.  That said, I test drove both and they both deliver excellent and repeatable B&W results -- I don't think you can go wrong with either.  (PS: I am on a PC and I understand the UI's may be slightly different different on Mac.)

Cheers,
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=60934\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks (on PC too)...Yea I´quess its just a matter of opinnion...

[DarkPenguin]

Well, I have CS2 and know how to get the channels right for B&W conversions and still bought Convert to B&W pro  

FWIW, I chose B&W Pro over PR simply because of the interface.  IMO the B&W Pro workflow was so similar to the traditional analog B&W workflow I used to follow, that it was a no-briner for me.  That said, I test drove both and they both deliver excellent and repeatable B&W results -- I don't think you can go wrong with either.  (PS: I am on a PC and I understand the UI's may be slightly different different on Mac.)

Cheers,
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=60934\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I really do not get the B&W Pro interface.  (After the initial filter selection.)  I suspect this is because I simply have never done darkroom work.

I like the conversions I get but I'm not sure I understand why I'm moving the sliders.  I dumb luck into things I like with it enough tho that I might just buy it anyways.

Anyone do a how to thing on this?

I usually just Russel Brown it.

[larkvi]

I really do not get the B&W Pro interface.  (After the initial filter selection.)  I suspect this is because I simply have never done darkroom work.

I like the conversions I get but I'm not sure I understand why I'm moving the sliders.  I dumb luck into things I like with it enough tho that I might just buy it anyways.

Anyone do a how to thing on this?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=60979\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well, any basic primer on darkroom printing would work. Check your local library. If you have a choice, I like the Lee Frost book as it is very readable and well-illustrated. Other volumes I have read were more technical but, using the computer, you will not need to know as much about the chemical composition and whatnot.

[Vesa]

Well, any basic primer on darkroom printing would work. Check your local library. If you have a choice, I like the Lee Frost book as it is very readable and well-illustrated. Other volumes I have read were more technical but, using the computer, you will not need to know as much about the chemical composition and whatnot.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=60980\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I´m kind of new with these things and don´t know much
about darkroom workflow either...well, if anything...  

Have gone with a gutfeeling, if it looks nice then it must be so...
anything wrong with that...? I suspect there are ´rules´ and right
ways how the get the image done but still learning...
Isn´t the main thing to get images that look good in one´s own eyes and
in others too...? Or maybe I take it too simple    

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

The main slider is for the color of the filter you might put over the lens if shooting BW film, but instead of being limited to a few specific filters, you can choose any color in the visible spectrum. But you don't even need to know this.

In a typical landscape scene with some blue sky, you will notice that yellow darkens the sky a little, and red darkens it a lot. But you don't need to know that either. Basically, just move the sliders until you like what you see. The nice thing is, there is no "right" answer. So just play with it and see what happens!

Eric

[Jonathan Wienke]

I generally start by playing with the filter settings, then fine-tune with the color response sliders, then play with the tonal response to tweak contrast. And except when converting images that are being stitched together, I don't think I've ever used the exact same settings twice. The image is what's most important, not some magic set of numbers.

[Vesa]

I generally start by playing with the filter settings, then fine-tune with the color response sliders, then play with the tonal response to tweak contrast. And except when converting images that are being stitched together, I don't think I've ever used the exact same settings twice. The image is what's most important, not some magic set of numbers.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=61017\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Right...thanks, and to Eric too.

Well, must say that eased my mind and made life much more easier
since I´m type of person who prefers to go by THE RULES and nothing more  
Yes, I´ve figured out those tips you guys gave me and got some pretty nice
results from images we took yesterday by the icy seashore  
Darkened the sky with red filter and played with contrast so that the snow
did not burnout...

As I´m still kind of new here...I really must say that it´s nice to have
this kind of forums...
One can throw in any question, simple or more pro kind and
can rely that there´s allways someone to read it and provide
with an answer  

[DarkPenguin]

Anyone use Fred Miranda's BW Workflow Pro?  For the amount of B+W work I do it seems like a better price for me.

[KeithR]

Anyone use Fred Miranda's BW Workflow Pro?  For the amount of B+W work I do it seems like a better price for me.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have used R. Browns technique, and found it quite good. Then I found a tutorial and PS action that works great. And free!

[a href=\"http://www.adobe.com/digitalimag/ps_pro_primers.html]http://www.adobe.com/digitalimag/ps_pro_primers.html[/url]

This will put you on the page, and in the right hand column, is the tutorial by John Paul Capenigro. Also, the action that you can load into PS. Read the tutorial, down load the action, and chances are you won't buy a program. What can you lose? It's free!  

[DarkPenguin]

I was playing with the outback photo contest picture in convert to b+w pro and I have to say that plugin does wonders.

But I put together an action that combines Russell Brown with the channel mixer and photo filter (for tinting) to do something quite similar.  FAR FAR FAR more work but it seems pretty straight forward.  I think I'll run with that for a while.  Then just get convert if it doesnt work for me.

Thanks!

[woodrowcampbell]

At one point in my pursuit of B&W (which I do exclusively) I shot a Macbeth target with Tr-X and scanned.  I then used the R Brown technique on a digital shot of the same target to duplicate (as well as I could) the tonal values as Tri-X.  It was an iterative process, and took a while, but it worked pretty well.  

Then I got B&W Pro, which does a better job of capturing the Tri-X (or whichever) look, and lets me add filtration.  I rarely use the exposure correction since the more sophisticated controls in PS are much better.  It works very well for me.

Woody

www.woodycampbell.com