(embiggenable) • iPhone
(embiggenable) • iPhone
IN A RECENT ENTRY ON T.O.P., MIKE JOHNSTON used the phrase "typical," very broadly, of fashionable digital B&W tonality. Virtually every commenter took him to task noting that there is no such thing as "typical" digital B&W tonality.
In particular, Johnston opined that "...the lack of grays, the overall balance between the predominant light tones and the predominant dark tones, the way the highlights tend to wash to sameness..." is typical digital tonality. Although, in Johnston's defense, he did use the caveats of "very broadly" and "fashionable" to somewhat temper his opinion. Nevertheless, iMo, he's most definitely off the mark...
...inasmuch as-unless one is using a Color>BW conversion app with a specific and repeatable "look" or a specific camera maker's in-camera idea of what bw should look like-a digitally-derived grayscale image can "look" just about any way a picture maker cares to make it "look" like. To wit...given a rich full tonal range color image file, there are a significant number of processing tools-in addition to simple conversion apps-which allow a picture maker an incredible range of control over how the final picture can "look".
In Photoshop, 2 such tools are the IMAGE > ADJUSTMENTS > BLACK & WHITE and THE IMAGE > ADJUSTMENTS > CHANNEL MIXER tools. And, after the use of either, the judicious use of the CURVES tool-globally or, locally with the use of selection tools-can take you almost anywhere a picture maker might want to go, "look" wise. Although...
...if one is an old-school antiquarian, maybe even a coot, who had a formulaic analog processing routine-a specific film / developer / paper-which produced a very specific "signature" look for one's printed pictures-one might not be overly thrilled with all the variables inherent in the digital world. Nevertheless, with enough trial and error time with the tools, one can most likely carve out a image processing path which yields a satisfactory "signature" look.
AN ASIDE A little known tip. When I convert a color image file to grayscale I most often convert the file to LAB color space and then discard the color channels which leaves only the LIGHTNESS (grayscale) channel. That channel is a very nice tonal-rich starting point for additional processing. In many cases, that channel needs only minor tweeking to get to where I want to go, "look" wise. END OF AN ASIDE
BONUS ASIDE When I use Photoshop CURVES to make tonal adjustments, I ALWAYS convert to LAB COLOR space and do my tonal adjustments on the LIGHTNESS channel. Doing so in LAB color space avoids the change in color saturation values that happens when doing so in RGB color space. The LAB LIGHTNESS channel contains only grayscale tonal values and is totally independent of the LAB color channels. So, working on the LIGHTNESS channel does not effect the color channels (A+B) in any way. EVEN MORE BONUS And the same goes for sharpening...a greater degree of sharpening (if needed) can be applied to the LIGHTNESS channel-with the result of much less edge artifacts-than can be applied in RGB color space. END OF BONUS ASIDE