Luminous Landscape Forum

Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Black & White => Topic started by: William Walker on June 30, 2021, 07:11:56 am

Title: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: William Walker on June 30, 2021, 07:11:56 am
I came across this video yesterday and have tried this method of B&W conversion.

The difference is quite noticeable!

https://youtu.be/z4HYksU_7Tg
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: Bob_B on July 04, 2021, 06:56:43 am
Thanks for the tip, William.
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: Alan Klein on July 04, 2021, 02:52:13 pm
What's the tip?  I don't have time to watch the whole thing.
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: marvpelkey on July 04, 2021, 07:29:47 pm
Coincidently, I watched a few minutes of two of his recent videos.

I had to stop each after only a short while as I found it frustrating to listen to him. He may know his stuff but, boy his "public" speaking skills are lacking. It's like he didn't have any prior plan or thought on how he was going to present the material and just jumped right in and started talking.

By the way, William, if you would be willing to elaborate a bit - "The difference is quite noticeable", - from what?

Marv
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: rabanito on July 05, 2021, 03:51:46 am
Hmmm....
I think that it was a nice thing to share the link with us.
I've learned lots of things from this kind of "tutorials" and am grateful for it.
Some speakers are not perfect communicators, others put horrible background music, others  use (at least to me) ununderstandable English, depending on the region of the world they come from...
But most are for free and it's up to you to do the most of it. Or not-
Just MHO
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: Bob_B on July 05, 2021, 10:01:22 am
For those impatient with the presentation (and for good reasons), start the video around 19:00: that's his tip in a nutshell.
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: mdijb on July 05, 2021, 08:39:45 pm
After watching the video I did my own testing and can confirm what he is saying.   I compared the 16 bit and 32 bit processing and saw that the 32 bit had noticeably better details and contrast, especially in the shadows.  On some images the differences were small but present, on others it was more dramatic.  I also compared his method to the method built into Lightroom and saw the same results.  I think that Lr is using a 16 bit method to make its results.  I also compared the Lightroom "merge to HDR Pano" feature that automates a lot of the work and found the results compared to merging the image sets individually was not as good.  It was more work but I think the results were worth it.  I just completed a Pano of some beautiful Monsoon clouds we get here in AZ, using his method and am very pleased with the results.  I suggest you try  his stuff for yourself.

MDIJB
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: rabanito on July 06, 2021, 04:27:59 am
For those impatient with the presentation (and for good reasons), start the video around 19:00: that's his tip in a nutshell.

Thanks for the tip, Bob
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: William Walker on July 06, 2021, 08:05:35 am
After watching the video I did my own testing and can confirm what he is saying.   I compared the 16 bit and 32 bit processing and saw that the 32 bit had noticeably better details and contrast, especially in the shadows.  On some images the differences were small but present, on others it was more dramatic.  I also compared his method to the method built into Lightroom and saw the same results.  I think that Lr is using a 16 bit method to make its results.  I also compared the Lightroom "merge to HDR Pano" feature that automates a lot of the work and found the results compared to merging the image sets individually was not as good.  It was more work but I think the results were worth it.  I just completed a Pano of some beautiful Monsoon clouds we get here in AZ, using his method and am very pleased with the results.  I suggest you try  his stuff for yourself.

MDIJB

Those were my findings too.

I have altered my workflow from his based on another similar video: I take the three images into "Merge to HDR Pro in Photoshop", set it to 32-bit, but uncheck the Camera Raw box. It ends up as a 32-bit Tiff in PS. Save that back to Lightroom and in the Library Module go to "Library" at the top and take the option to "Convert to DNG". The Tiff file is converted into a 32-bit DNG. Carry on with your usual workflow.
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: William Walker on July 06, 2021, 08:11:27 am
Coincidently, I watched a few minutes of two of his recent videos.

I had to stop each after only a short while as I found it frustrating to listen to him. He may know his stuff but, boy his "public" speaking skills are lacking. It's like he didn't have any prior plan or thought on how he was going to present the material and just jumped right in and started talking.

By the way, William, if you would be willing to elaborate a bit - "The difference is quite noticeable", - from what?

Marv

Hi Marv - there is little doubt that different tone backgrounds are noticeably smoother than any other method I know of. See "MDIJB's" comment... Try the different methods and see for yourself .
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: David Eckels on July 06, 2021, 08:59:27 am
Those were my findings too.
Yup
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on July 06, 2021, 12:28:51 pm
I have altered my workflow from his based on another similar video: I take the three images into "Merge to HDR Pro in Photoshop", set it to 32-bit, but uncheck the Camera Raw box. It ends up as a 32-bit Tiff in PS. Save that back to Lightroom and in the Library Module go to "Library" at the top and take the option to "Convert to DNG". The Tiff file is converted into a 32-bit DNG. Carry on with your usual workflow.
I tried Bob_B's suggestion to start the video at 19 minutes, but the explanations were so vague and the illustrations too small to see any of the desired effect.

But William Walker's description gives a clear outline of the essential steps (once you know what "the three images" are,) so Thank You William!
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: William Walker on July 07, 2021, 06:16:16 am
Crop of 16-bit and 32-bit - identical Lightroom adjustments.

32-bit above. 16-bit below.

Edit: I forgot to add that this is about a 200% crop.
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on July 07, 2021, 07:33:20 am
Crop of 16-bit and 32-bit - identical Lightroom adjustments.

32-bit above. 16-bit below.

It reduces noise!?

Can you describe how you got to the final pics, please? Is the process the one from the post #8?
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: Alan Klein on July 07, 2021, 07:52:36 am
Would adjusting noise or masking sliders with one picture reduce noise similarly? 
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: William Walker on July 07, 2021, 09:03:51 am
It reduces noise!?

Can you describe how you got to the final pics, please? Is the process the one from the post #8?

Yes Slo: I take 3 photos -2EV, 0.0EV, +2EV. From Lightroom I go to "Merge to HDR Pro in PS". In HDR Pro I set it to 32-bit and uncheck "Tone In ACR". It ends up in PS as a 32-bit TIFF. Save. It appears in Lightroom as a TIFF.
In Library Mode, I go to "Library" in the menu bar and select Convert to DNG. It converts it to a DNG. Check 32-bit as per Screenshot.

You now go ahead and process the image as you normally would. (In Lightroom! The moment you send it back to PS it becomes 16-bit.)

All I did in the above pics of the church was as described in the process above then I selected the 0.0EV photograph and synced the adjustments (with the 32-bit DNG) and ended up with the two examples I posted.

Simple!
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: Alan Klein on July 07, 2021, 09:34:47 am
Yes Slo: I take 3 photos -2EV, 0.0EV, +2EV. From Lightroom I go to "Merge to HDR Pro in PS". In HDR Pro I set it to 32-bit and uncheck "Tone In ACR". It ends up in PS as a 32-bit TIFF. Save. It appears in Lightroom as a TIFF.
In Library Mode, I go to "Library" in the menu bar and select Convert to DNG. It converts it to a DNG. Check 32-bit as per Screenshot.

You now go ahead and process the image as you normally would. (In Lightroom! The moment you send it back to PS it becomes 16-bit.)

All I did in the above pics of the church was as described in the process above then I selected the 0.0EV photograph and synced the adjustments (with the 32-bit DNG) and ended up with the two examples I posted.

Simple!
William: Have you compared the three picture process to adjusting noise or masking sliders with one picture?  It would be interesting to know the difference if any.   

It reminds me of scanning the same film image twice.  The process winds up combining or smearing grain from the two scans so it looks cleaner.  But you can accomplish the same thing by using adjustments on one picture in half the scan time and three times simpler.
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: James Clark on July 07, 2021, 09:55:39 am
What I see is a reduction in noise (or maybe reduction in granularity is a better description), but without the usual accompanying loss of sharpness or increased smearing you get with simple NR.

Looking at this (and at the OP's recent image in User Critiques), I'm sort of ambivalent about this process, I guess.  Any poor soul that's been paying attention to my sort-of-infrequent posts lately knows that I've been on a pretty heavy BW kick, and I've been playing mainly with X-Trans Fuji equipment.  Maybe it's just my own personal perspective, but what I'm finding is that, for what I'm shooting right now, I'm enjoying the "filmic" quality of the Xtrans BW files and prints, and I'm not certain that this method isn't resulting in "digitizing" what I am tryong so hard to "de-digitize"

Do I see the smoother tones and transitions, and the resultantincreased sharpening and clarity?  Yep - sure do.  Do I think it improves the picture?  Not quite as certain.  Could that opinion just be me putting too much emphasis on imitating the "feel" of something traditional isntead of embracing the advantages of a technique like this?  100% it could be. 

I'd be interested in looking at the ultimate difference in my "typical" end result - a 20x30 print on a rough matte paper.  Iwonder if the smothenss and the clarity would add to or detract from the fine art look I strive for.

Interesting discussion - thanks for sharing!

Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: William Walker on July 07, 2021, 10:20:03 am
William: Have you compared the three picture process to adjusting noise or masking sliders with one picture?  It would be interesting to know the difference if any.   

It reminds me of scanning the same film image twice.  The process winds up combining or smearing grain from the two scans so it looks cleaner.  But you can accomplish the same thing by using adjustments on one picture in half the scan time and three times simpler.

Alan, I don't think it is noise... 32-bit allows you to make more aggressive adjustments on the colour sliders, especially the blue. If you have ever been too heavy on dragging the blue slider too far to the left you will know what happens to the sky.
What you are seeing - I think - is those artefacts which the 16-bit can't handle.

I will gladly bow to a superior theory!
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on July 07, 2021, 12:56:44 pm
"Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur."   :)
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: rabanito on July 07, 2021, 01:40:14 pm
"Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur."   :)

Hmmmm...
I would rather say
"Do what works for you"
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: Alan Klein on July 07, 2021, 02:15:06 pm
Alan, I don't think it is noise... 32-bit allows you to make more aggressive adjustments on the colour sliders, especially the blue. If you have ever been too heavy on dragging the blue slider too far to the left you will know what happens to the sky.
What you are seeing - I think - is those artefacts which the 16-bit can't handle.

I will gladly bow to a superior theory!
Just as uprezing 2K to 4K only gives you an illusion of 4K, doesn't overlying 16-bit images give you an illusion of 32 bits or 48 bits rather than 16 bits. All you're doing is blending three different exposure levels, each of which have only 16 bits.  You can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear.
 
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: NikoJorj on July 07, 2021, 04:21:42 pm
I would agree with Alan... 16 bits should be way more than enough to process an image destined to be displayed on a 8- or 10-bit device.
That's 6 bits of leeway, or roughly the ability to multiply the contrast by 64.
32bits is not that far from overkill.

What we may see here (if it's not a bug) is rather the effect of the merge to HDR routine : each image section benefits from the maximal S/N ratio in any of the 3 captures (I'd personally like to space them a bit more, -3/0/+3EV eg).
See http://www.guillermoluijk.com/article/virtualraw/index_en.htm written by Guillermo 13 years ago, many thanks to him!
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on July 08, 2021, 06:03:49 am
... All I did in the above pics of the church was as described in the process above then I selected the 0.0EV photograph and synced the adjustments (with the 32-bit DNG) and ended up with the two examples I posted...

Ok... correct me if wrong... but it seems to me that the noisier image is a result of just one image (0.0EV) adjusted in Lightroom. If so, you are losing the benefits of 1. the HDR process selecting the +1.0 image (more light, less noise) for a good part of the final image and 2. averaging noise when blending the three images.
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on July 08, 2021, 06:05:19 am
Hmmmm...
I would rather say
"Do what works for you"

Perhaps, but I was simply translating William's signature phrase to Latin (where it originated) :)
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: William Walker on July 08, 2021, 06:17:19 am
Ok... correct me if wrong... but it seems to me that the noisier image is a result of just one image (0.0EV) adjusted in Lightroom. If so, you are losing the benefits of 1. the HDR process selecting the +1.0 image (more light, less noise) for a good part of the final image and 2. averaging noise when blending the three images.

Try doing an HDR in Lightroom - which is 16-bit - and compare. You get the same "16-bit" result.
No question (in my mind - and apparently everyone else who has actually done the experiment) that the 32-bit is better.

As an aside: There is no noise in the 0.0EV image. I took it at midday in good light @ 100 ISO.
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: William Walker on July 08, 2021, 06:22:12 am
Perhaps, but I was simply translating William's signature phrase to Latin (where it originated) :)

So, you aren't just a pretty face, I see?  8)
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: rabanito on July 08, 2021, 06:44:38 am
Perhaps, but I was simply translating William's signature phrase to Latin (where it originated) :)
I knew Hitchens Razor but I didn't notice that that is William's signature (after the wording)
I know, it's all there... :-[
Chapeau, Slobodan
I'll put more attention next time
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: NikoJorj on July 08, 2021, 12:21:42 pm
Ok... correct me if wrong... but it seems to me that the noisier image is a result of just one image (0.0EV) adjusted in Lightroom. If so, you are losing the benefits of 1. the HDR process selecting the +1.0 image (more light, less noise) for a good part of the final image and 2. averaging noise when blending the three images.
Well spotted : the 32bit HDR should be compared with a 16bit HDR (made directly in LR, eg), a single frame will be noisier than both.
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: SrMi on July 08, 2021, 03:10:39 pm
I tried Joel's technique using his files and I got a really strange result.


Has anyone replicated his steps with the latest PS?
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: William Walker on July 09, 2021, 02:44:03 am
Well spotted : the 32bit HDR should be compared with a 16bit HDR (made directly in LR, eg), a single frame will be noisier than both.

Try doing an HDR in Lightroom - which is 16-bit - and compare. You get the same "16-bit" result.
No question (in my mind - and apparently everyone else who has actually done the experiment) that the 32-bit is better.

Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: William Walker on July 09, 2021, 02:44:57 am
I tried Joel's technique using his files and I got a really strange result.


Has anyone replicated his steps with the latest PS?

I agree, I gave up working on his files and used my own...
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on July 09, 2021, 04:13:25 am
Ok... will go out on a limb and say it: you can not possibly get so much cleaner and sharper results just by going 32 vs. 16. There must be an error in your comparison workflow.
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: mcbroomf on July 09, 2021, 05:06:27 am
Ok... will go out on a limb and say it: you can not possibly get so much cleaner and sharper results just by going 32 vs. 16. There must be an error in your comparison workflow.

The video shows and compares processing of files; 32 bit with HDR, 16 bit with HDR and 16 bit single shot.  So the discussion does need to be clear about what is being compared.
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: William Walker on July 09, 2021, 06:01:32 am
Ok... will go out on a limb and say it: you can not possibly get so much cleaner and sharper results just by going 32 vs. 16. There must be an error in your comparison workflow.

Well Slo, there's only one way to find out. Try it yourself, it will take you less than the time you've spent thinking and questioning all this!   8)

P.S. What is the Latin translation for "What can be asserted with evidence cannot be dismissed without evidence."
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: Alan Klein on July 09, 2021, 10:13:45 am
Are the results of shooting three shots for every picture worth the time and effort and processing?  Or is this just a case of pixel peeping?
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: rabanito on July 09, 2021, 10:39:30 am
Are the results of shooting three shots for every picture worth the time and effort and processing?  Or is this just a case of pixel peeping?
If you get the results you want in this way, then it is worth it.
If you are satisfied with less, probably not.
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: William Walker on July 09, 2021, 11:35:37 am
Are the results of shooting three shots for every picture worth the time and effort and processing?  Or is this just a case of pixel peeping?

If you make large prints - which I do - it is worth it.
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: Alan Klein on July 09, 2021, 09:12:52 pm
If you make large prints - which I do - it is worth it.
What size is where you can see the difference with three shots?
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: fdisilvestro on July 10, 2021, 03:47:51 am
Photoshop does behave differently with 32 bit images. Iím not sure if this is due more to the fact that 32bit uses floating point math vs 8/16 bitís integer math.

Anyway, a good demonstration of the differences between the editing capabilities of 32 bit images and 8/16 bit in photoshop can be seen in the following video:

Photoshop 32 vs 16 bits (https://youtu.be/Fnua6gM7bUk)
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: William Walker on July 10, 2021, 03:52:36 am
What size is where you can see the difference with three shots?

...from A2 upwards you notice the smoothness in the sky - remember, all this time I have always only spoke of this in terms of Black & White photography - I have not looked colour.
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: JRSmit on July 10, 2021, 04:10:36 am
Interesting thread, must say however that 32bit files are not handled  correctly in Lightroom. Colors are not shown correctly on screen and in print. This must have an effect on black and white as greyís are just part of the colorspace.
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: Garnick on July 12, 2021, 02:55:43 pm
To Alan,

Even though I've never checked this fellows videos it only took about a minute to download this one so I can view it at my own leisure.  Therefore I might check more than the one mentioned here and decide if they are worth the time.

Gary
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: mtakeda on September 16, 2021, 03:23:07 am
Yes Slo: I take 3 photos -2EV, 0.0EV, +2EV. From Lightroom I go to "Merge to HDR Pro in PS". In HDR Pro I set it to 32-bit and uncheck "Tone In ACR". It ends up in PS as a 32-bit TIFF. Save. It appears in Lightroom as a TIFF.
In Library Mode, I go to "Library" in the menu bar and select Convert to DNG. It converts it to a DNG. Check 32-bit as per Screenshot.

You now go ahead and process the image as you normally would. (In Lightroom! The moment you send it back to PS it becomes 16-bit.)

All I did in the above pics of the church was as described in the process above then I selected the 0.0EV photograph and synced the adjustments (with the 32-bit DNG) and ended up with the two examples I posted.

Simple!
[/quotei tried to go from LR to merge to HDR pro in Ps but under pull down of tools I do not find it. Am I looking at the wrong placeL
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: mcbroomf on September 16, 2021, 03:32:36 am
Quote
i tried to go from LR to merge to HDR pro in Ps but under pull down of tools I do not find it. Am I looking at the wrong placeL

It's not in the Tools tab/pulldown.

Go to the Photo tab, then Edit In in the pulldown
You'll see the Merge to HDR Pro in PS option there.
Note that if you only select 1 image you'll see it but it will be greyed out

You can also right click on any one of your selected images and find the Edit In option listed

Mike
Title: Re: The "Joel Grimes Method".
Post by: mtakeda on September 16, 2021, 10:15:39 pm
I was able to make headway thanks to your advice. I am facing another problem but I will first strive to overcome then I may come back to ask for your help.