Hi Gang
Apologies for 2 pictures in one week.
This is a B&W conversion of a shot taken Oct 10, 2005 of the abandoned Maynooth
Station.
Still needing more experience on
this stuff.
You can see the remains of the old bed to the right.
Converted using Channel Mixer in Monoc
Looks to me that it could use a bit more contrast.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Gang
Apologies for 2 pictures in one week.
This is a B&W conversion of a shot taken Oct 10, 2005 of the abandoned Maynooth
Station.
Still needing more experience on
this stuff.
You can see
Hi!
Looks to me that it could use a bit more contrast.
Ditto!
Boris
Hello Dave,
I like the shot but your tonal rendering is off the mark. I made an
adjustment as example. It might not be what you want to see in this
photo, but consider it as an example of how to get started.
http://homepage.mac.com/godders/DB/
Godfrey
On Oct 30, 2005, at 7:50 AM, [EMAIL
Thanks Godfrey
That looks better.I used the Channel Converter,set the %'s to 25-75-5 as per
your starting
points. Then i masked the sky
and darkened it.I then masked the building and grass and did a curves adj
layer(keep in
mind i usually dont use layers
and this is quite new to me)
I then mer
I agree. I'm just starting to work with layers and i'm in a coinfused state
right now.(as
if that needed an
expanation)
Help is appreciated
Dave
> Looks to me that it could use a bit more
contrast.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > H
Unless there's something horribly wrong with an image I don't "use"
layers. In photoshop I convert to b&w by first optimizing the color
image as much as I can. Then I use this method.
1. Create a new adjustment layer "Hue/Saturation"
2a. Set Hue to -180
2b. Set Saturation to +100
2c. Set Lig
You're missing out on a lot of capability.
1) You first have to define what "optimizing the color image" means
in the context of producing a grayscale rendering. An optimized
rendering for color presentation is not necessarily the best way to
prep for producing a grayscale rendering.
2) C
There seems to be something very wrong with the process as you've described
it.
Apart from anything else, when setting the lightness to minus 100, you'll
get a black screen - no info. Care to double check the steps and the
process?
BTW, I agree with everything that Godfrey said ...
Shel
"You m
Try it, it doesn't work the way you think it does.
I posted this a while ago:
http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/PESO_--_beast.html
I just did a conversion using the method I described...
http://www.mindspring.com/~webster26/PESO_--_beastb&w.html
Possibly not the best candidate, but I did n
1. Create a new adjustment layer "Hue/Saturation"
2a. Set Hue to -180
2b. Set Saturation to +100
2c. Set Lightness to -100
3. Change Mode to Lab Color, (if asked, yes do discard the layer).
4. In channels delete layer a.
5 Convert to gray scale.
Adjust curves or brightness/contrast for fine adjus
Hi, I tried it again. Looks to me that you get the same results
eliminating the Hue/Sat manipulation and just converting to Lab color and
working with the luminosity or lightness channel. It's an OK technique for
some conversions, but there are many other B&W conversions that offer far
greater c
On 30/10/05, P. J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed:
>2c. Set Lightness to -100
I thought the lightness was set to 000 ?
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
The easiest method is to simply use PhotoShop's Grayscale conversion,
then go to curves and adjust the various grayscale tones as necessary.
The grayscale curve gives you pretty much unlimited and very precise
control of the tonal range.
Paul
On Oct 30, 2005, at 10:45 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
I just tested this technique.
I took your Beast.jpg photo and used it as a test. If you do step 3
as stated, you're essentially eliminating what you did in Step
2a,b,c; there's no point to adding the HSV Adjustment Layer. I first
followed exactly what you have list
On 31 Oct 2005 at 7:39, Adam Maas wrote:
> and would rather like a quick into to a non-destructive method. My
> experience with layers is sadly lacking, so I'm not sure where to start
> when adapting this method to layers.
I just put up my two most used layer based mono actions, basically with
If you apply fixed values in the channel mixer, you're doing the same
thing photoshop's grayscale conversion does. You're just making it more
difficult. The channel mixer is only an advantage if one varies the mix
to obtain different results.
Paul
On Oct 31, 2005, at 7:39 AM, Adam Maas wrote:
On 10/30/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Gang
> Apologies for 2 pictures in one week.
>
> This is a B&W conversion of a shot taken Oct 10, 2005 of the abandoned
> Maynooth Station.
> Still needing more experience on
> this stuff.
> You can see the rema
Actually it should be, but I typed what was in the archive, with a small
error of my own, good thing too or the result would have been exactly
what Shel predicted. (I created an action and made the right choice
BTY, I should have looked at that).
http://www.mail-archive.com/pentax-discuss@pdm
I'm not using fixed values, but I use those as my starting point. I'm
also getting more than a greyscale conversion (As that's simply
luminance with all hue removed, Even the 60/40/0 preserves some of the
balance between channels).
-Adam
Paul Stenquist wrote:
If you apply fixed values in the
Rob Studdert wrote:
I just put up my two most used layer based mono actions, basically with the one
labelled mono just open the Hue/saturation layer (second from the top) and
alter the Hue control whilst watching the image. The effect is like a
continuously variable colour filter, you can't em
As does the photoshop grayscale conversion. It's just a preset channel's
adjustment followed by a conversion.
Paul
> I'm not using fixed values, but I use those as my starting point. I'm
> also getting more than a greyscale conversion (As that's simply
> luminance with all hue removed, Even th
Hi!
I like the shot but your tonal rendering is off the mark. I made an
adjustment as example. It might not be what you want to see in this
photo, but consider it as an example of how to get started.
http://homepage.mac.com/godders/DB/
Godfrey, you seem to be more attracted to high key im
On Nov 1, 2005, at 11:13 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:
Godfrey, you seem to be more attracted to high key images than to
low key... Neither of the two in question is not high or low key
per se, but I noticed in your work general tendency to brighter
tones... I find this remarkable!
Interesti
Hi!
Godfrey, you seem to be more attracted to high key images than to low
key... Neither of the two in question is not high or low key per se,
but I noticed in your work general tendency to brighter tones... I
find this remarkable!
Interesting statement. Can you give me an idea which of
25 matches
Mail list logo
