B+W

[IVAN ZEITLIN]

My first trys at B+W photography using PS3. Maybe a little over done?

[c_soars]

The first image has some nice tonality, but it looks like it may have been pushed a little hard; the highlights on the boat are clipped, and there's odd white flecks in the sky at the very top.

The second shot has definitely been worked too much, the sky is breaking up and there's harsh outlining around the structure.... very early 2000's look 

Were these initially jpegs?

[luxborealis]

Second image looks posterized - definitely overdone unless, of course, that's the "look" you are working towards.

Remember, while B&W can be a simple as removing the colour from a colour image, more often then not, they are and require much more. Since B&W photographs do not have the initial attraction or impact of colours to draw viewers into the photo, they require stronger composition, tone, texture and local contrast. "Seeing" in B&W is an art in itself.

Early books on shooting B&W, like Ansel Adams' series or works by Fred Picker or Bruce Barnbaum and looking at the works of people like those mentioned plus John Sexton are a great way to learn the finer points of B&W irrespective of the digital manipulations that are now possible.

[Dewi Sant]

As already pointed out, the first is ok, second is overdone. To be honest, I'm the least qualified to criticise as I struggle with mono. I was fine with it in my film days but digitally I've never achieved the same degree of success, I know what I want it to look like but rarely achieve it. When I see people like Enda posting their black and whites it makes me so frutrated that I can't get to the same level - but I'm working on it. 

Keep at it, you've made a good start, but it's not easy by any means to produce a stunning mono

Dewi   

[Isaac]

Remember, while B&W can be a simple as removing the colour from a colour image, more often then not, they are and require much more. Since B&W photographs do not have the initial attraction or impact of colours to draw viewers into the photo, they require stronger composition, tone, texture and local contrast. "Seeing" in B&W is an art in itself.

I remember reading an interview with Paul Strand where I think he said something to the effect that colour was just an additional complication that he didn't want to deal with in his photography ;-)

Of course, these days, a camera like the D5000 has picture control settings for monochrome, so we literally can see B&W (before or) immediately after taking the photo.

[ckimmerle]

Of course, these days, a camera like the D5000 has picture control settings for monochrome, so we literally can see B&W (before or) immediately after taking the photo.

You're still better off shooting in color and then processing. It takes longer, but you have a helluva lot more control. But, whatever makes ya happy.

[Isaac]

You're still better off shooting in color and then processing.

I agree - my point was simply that now we literally can see B&W (before or) immediately after taking the photo - our difficulty is seeing composition, texture, tone.

Hmm does it matter with RAW? No, at least, not with my camera - the monochrome style shows B&W in the EVF and on the LCD but the RAW provides the usual processing opportunities.