New to digital editing.

I shoot black and white film and had all my film scanned into jpeg's and want to start editing digitally. Would software would recommend? Any good online tutorials for editing black and white? I've only done darkroom work, so i'm completely new to photoshop.

Thanks!

Before we get started getting you down the road editing your scans, you need to realize that you should really be starting with tiffs, preferably 16-bit tiffs. Also, before you do any editing, you need to make sure you do not continue to save the same image as a jpeg over and over again. Each time you open jpeg, edit it, and then save it again (as a jpeg) you are continuously compressing the file and tossing out more information each time.

My recommended approach, if you are forced to start editing from a jpeg is to open it, immediately convert to 16-bit, and save as a psd or tiff. You are interpolating the 8-bit tones to get the increased bit depth, but at least the tonal transitions of your edits will be smoother than they would be otherwise. This approach will take more space on a hard drive, but hard drives are cheap nowadays, throwing out time and money you spent scanning and editing is not.

Did you scan these yourself or have a lab do them for you?

Besides Richard's advice, there are a variety of software programs available these days besides Photoshop that you can use.

Here are several books that may be of help "Mastering Digital black and white" Amadou Diallo, Michael Freeman's Mastering Black and white digital photography" I know same name, easy to remember.

You might also find a dvd, or the book by Vincent Versace that goes over every know conversion type for black and white work , "Return to Oz , Oz to Kansas 2.0, or John Paul Caponigro "Black and White Masery.

PhotoShop is bloatware. Besides that, it does what is needed, in the right way for excellent quality printing. The key is to learn only what you need to - to do a good print. Find someone very good at printing and take a lesson....

You need a Wacom tablet, and to learn curves and masking. That's about it...

You probably also need some better scans. I'm just guessing..

Lenny

Photoshop Elements is pretty cheap and gives you all you need. Most "economy" scanning services provide jpegs since TIFFS are so huge. I don't think it matters that much, particularly with B&W.

Have you tried the photo software that came with your computer? Also, if you have any digital camera, it probably came with that company's editing program on a DVD or you can download their program from their website. . A free on-line on you can download is Irfanview. good luck.

Hatchetman said:

Photoshop Elements is pretty cheap and gives you all you need. Most "economy" scanning services provide jpegs since TIFFS are so huge. I don't think it matters that much, particularly with B&W.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I don't mean to be rough, but this is simply not true. B&W is 10 times more delicate than color, both in the darkroom and in digital printing.

Of course, the OP needs to declare the level of quality he wants so the rest of us can make appropriate suggestions instead of just suggesting what we do...

Lenny

I'd be interested to learn your reasoning for the degree of difficulty in B&W printing using both digital and darkroom techniques. That's not my experience and I have 10 years plus with digital and 36 years in the darkroom, both at a professional but admittedly not fastidious level. I would also question your advice to a beginner to get a Wacom in order to learn masking and curves. I think tablets, which have their own learning issues, are better introduced when someone has already learned the basics of doing the things they need to do in Photoshop (or any other graphics program) without a tablet. OzJohn

I agree with another poster that JPEGs are not an ideal source but I'd only bother with TIFF if I was using a camera or scanner that actually recorded TIFF and even then only if the device did not offer a RAW format that I could ultimately convert to PSD or JPEG as needed.

OzJohn said:

I'd be interested to learn your reasoning for the degree of difficulty in B&W printing using both digital and darkroom techniques. That's not my experience and I have 10 years plus with digital and 36 years in the darkroom, both at a professional but admittedly not fastidious level.

Click to expand...

Printing has been a passion all my life. I took my first photographs in 1961, 53 years ago. My father was a photographer, who worked for Life and Vogue, among many others in the 50's. I was 10 when I worked for him in his darkroom, developing E6 in tanks and making color prints. I went to school for photography, at Pratt Institute, where I got a BA and an MFA. I taught at The Cooper Union and at Parsons in NYC, and a few others. I learned large format in college in the mid 70's and I started printing in platinum after trying a lot of other alt processes. I was one of half a dozen or so people who started the resurgence of platinum. I started a business called Platinum Editions, where I printed, usually in platinum, for a lot of top photographers, including Richard Avedon. After all this time I have some well-formed opinions. I do love a great print, especially in black and white. I am certainly fastidious about it.

These days I've been enjoying making prints with an inkjet printer that are indistinguishable from a platinum print. It takes a careful choice of paper, and mixing one's one b&w inks. I'm also updating my platinum setup with a new 26-1K I just acquired. I think I can say, unequivocally, that making a great, museum level, black and white print takes a lot more doing than the same in color. I'm not talking about just knocking something out, I'm talking about a print that Frederick Evans might be happy with. It takes a lot of iterations, sometimes a very long time, to understand what the image needs to make it come alive.

Those who know me know that I am the Eiger at EigerStudios. I know a lot about scanning, I do scans for a living, on my Aztek Premier. I am all about quality.

OzJohn said:

I would also question your advice to a beginner to get a Wacom in order to learn masking and curves. I think tablets, which have their own learning issues, are better introduced when someone has already learned the basics of doing the things they need to do in Photoshop (or any other graphics program) without a tablet.

Click to expand...

You are certainly free to disagree, but I stand by this. I have been taught by my tools. I was informed by the extended tonal range of platinum, to see differently. I don't suggest people print on copy paper for a while until they get the hang of it. They won't, because the medium doesn't have the capability yo train. Masking and curves are the most important part of Photoshop for a photographer. I don't bother printing most images until there is a mask or two. I had someone very experienced show me the ropes when I first started. He refused to give me a second lesson until I got a tablet. It worked very well for me. I think he was right.

The question about quality is a key one. If all this person wants to do is make a print, hardly any of this is required. If he is taking snapshots of his family, then a few sliders in some program and he's fine. However, if he is interested in good printing, and a course of continual improvement that's another story...

Lenny

Lenny: How does a tablet work that provides additional and better editing? Since I have a NEC calibratable monitor, how do I integrate the value of using this monitor with a tablet when printing? Which tablet would you recommend? (I shoot both BW and color). What are masks used for when printing? Thanks. Alan.

lenny said:

Of course, the OP needs to declare the level of quality he wants so the rest of us can make appropriate suggestions instead of just suggesting what we do...

Lenny

Click to expand...

On that we can agree!

Alan Klein said:

Lenny: How does a tablet work that provides additional and better editing? Since I have a NEC calibratable monitor, how do I integrate the value of using this monitor with a tablet when printing? Which tablet would you recommend? (I shoot both BW and color). What are masks used for when printing? Thanks. Alan.

Click to expand...

The Wacom pen tablet allows you to intact with layer masks in a much more natural, comfortable, and precise manner. The pressure sensitivity also gives the ability to adjust the brush size needed without resorting to constantly manually change the pixel size of the brush with an option/right+click.

I would say the largest benefit is working with the image much more intuitivelythN any other input device.

Masks: adjustment layer masks take the place of local burning and dodging in the darkroom. Some of these types of adjustments are possible in Lightroom or capture one, but through testing other image editing software, nothing is as easy and intuitive as working with curves adjustment layers and layer masks.. You can visually in the amount of contrast change, invert the layer adjustment mask (fill with 100 black) and then paint with white with a low opacity and fill to gradually paint in the adjustment. The reason to do it gradually is that you can see how it is affecting the tonal balance of the entire image and it prevents you from going too far too fast.

I am with Lenny on how the tools you choose will inform how you work. If you are only used to seeing what a low resolution JPEG, or printing on terrible paper looks like your technique or vision will never be able to progress further than those tools will allow.






Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Richard's already provided some good input on this, let me add a thing or two from my perspective. The first concept here is that curves are the key tool for lightness/darkness and contrast adjustment. Hue/Sat is also good for precise color control. Those are the two main tools in one's arsenal. In my opinion, one should forget that Levels exist, at least until all else fails. Curves take a certain amount of time to understand (or to convert one's mind from the way one approaches things in the darkroom). It's more like calculating exposure, the grid going across represents something akin to the zone system, with 10 zones going from left to right across. If you want zone 5 to be lighter, you put a point on that area and pull up. The cool thing is that its a curve, not a single point, and everything remains in relationship to everything else.

That said, let's imagine we have a scan, or digital image, and it's too light, or too soft, etc. To darken it we pull out a curve adjustment layer, grab a piece of the curve and pull down. Done a few times, its quite simple.

At this point its darkening the whole image. Sometimes that might be just perfect. However, what if the sky is just perfect the way that it was, and the landscape below needed the darkening? We've fixed one area and ruined the other. This is where a mask comes in. We can mask the sky area (blocking it) so that the only part of the image that's getting the darkening adjustment is the part we want and the image is balanced correctly (for our eyes, which is all that matters).

A mask is simply a selection. One selects an area to modify with a curve or other adjustment. All you have to do is make a selection, and then add an adjustment layer. The mask will automatically be created. There are many ways of making a selection, one can just select something with a lasso or marquee, one can use Select by Color Range, or copy any one of the channels into a selection (just Command-Click on it on Mac, or Alt-Click if on a PC).

One can modify the selection using the marching ants, painting in quick mask mode or by painting directly on the mask. You can also add and subtract masks from each other (this is the real trick, and when it gets a lot easier). It is best NOT to make something darker in one layer and lighter in another. (Especially if you are doing color adjustments.)

Using a lasso will make a very hard edge (unless you work carefully with the feathering) so its generally not the way to go. Select by Color Range is usually a great start. (Key word is usually.) However, this rarely gets everything exactly as you want it. When selecting a sky, as the values get closer to the land, for example, the selection may not be perfect. No matter, get out the brush and finish off that last 15% of it so that it matches the way you want it.

The great thing is that with a brush you have a very soft edge. You can easily adjust the "hardness" of you brush. If something is 50% selected, then 50% of the adjustment will be applied. With a soft brush, this means that the adjustment you are trying to make is tapered over the edge, making the adjustment undetectable.

With a brush, and a pressure sensitive tablet, it is easy to get exactly the kind of effect you want. I consider it an essential tool. When b&w printing I have anywhere from 1 to about 7 masks. I think nothing of adding another, removing the area from a prior correction, and making the adjustment I want. When I start I can see what areas are going to need adjustment by themselves (where what I want to do will affect the other parts of the image incorrectly) and I set up the main masks I need. Then I'll make a test print, lighten one mask, darken another, etc.

Hope this helps,

Lenny

you guys are taking a guy just getting his drivers license and asking him to drive in Formula One.

Lenny - thanks for the reply. I do understand where you are coming from and personally I use a tablet a lot and I also value the use of masks in particular. But, in my early days of digital editing I think I would have given up if I had tried to master tablet usage and masking simultaneously. Photoshop is a program that can give you almost instant gratification if you start with the basics like cropping, levels and retouching and it is important for a new user to have this early gratification from simple tasks because PS is actually a very complex program that new users need to learn slowly and methodically.

More importantly, there is a lot of functionality in Photoshop that is of little or no use to photographers as opposed to graphic designers and slow learning is the best way to work out what a particular user really needs to know. In terms of what the original poster asked, I'm inclined towards Hatchetman's view in post #14. OzJohn

you cannot beat Photishop in anything but price.prepare yourself for a long and steep learning curvebut, the sooner you start, the sooner you will harvest the fruit of your labor.I'm at it for 20 years and still feel like a novice.If yoy stick to B&W alone, you can start with a trial copy of Topaz and get good results quickly,but I always finish fine-tuning with PS. good luck and enjoy the ride.

OzJohn said:

I'm inclined towards Hatchetman's view in post #14. OzJohn

Click to expand...

As older people in the craft, we have all mentored the younger ones. This is a difference in teaching styles. I agree 100% that PhotoShop has way too many features, most of them of no use to photographers, budding or experienced.

My strategy is to limit the number of features that one learns, to only those specific to photography, and teach those. I am sure we would all agree that one has to start at the place where the learner is. Before I even begin, I bring them over to the library and we talk about what good photography is, and what good printing looks like, among the many different styles.

I never teach a thing they will have to unlearn, like levels, for example. I teach them a method they can use now, and that they can work at over time to continually improve. On their fist day they might just get a print out, but they usually come to me much later than that... so that could be part of the discrepancy here. If the OP was pretty good in the darkroom, and pretty good at exposing and developing, then they are ready for curves...

Of course, that's just how I do it. I am sure we could talk to people who were thrilled with your methods, and others who are thrilled with mine... In a short time we all get to the same place.

Lenny

Richard Boutwell said:

The Wacom pen tablet allows you to intact with layer masks in a much more natural, comfortable, and precise manner. The pressure sensitivity also gives the ability to adjust the brush size needed without resorting to constantly manually change the pixel size of the brush with an option/right+click.

I would say the largest benefit is working with the image much more intuitivelythN any other input device.

Masks: adjustment layer masks take the place of local burning and dodging in the darkroom. Some of these types of adjustments are possible in Lightroom or capture one, but through testing other image editing software, nothing is as easy and intuitive as working with curves adjustment layers and layer masks.. You can visually in the amount of contrast change, invert the layer adjustment mask (fill with 100 black) and then paint with white with a low opacity and fill to gradually paint in the adjustment. The reason to do it gradually is that you can see how it is affecting the tonal balance of the entire image and it prevents you from going too far too fast.

I am with Lenny on how the tools you choose will inform how you work. If you are only used to seeing what a low resolution JPEG, or printing on terrible paper looks like your technique or vision will never be able to progress further than those tools will allow.






Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Click to expand...

possibly just one voice, but the tablet did not work for me at all.I found it very cumbersome to select menu choices with a pen and ended up using tablet and mouse next to each other;in shortthe mouse is better in what the tabletwas designed forand the tablet is not very good at what the mouse was designed for.a mouse is hard to beat but I can see the tablet being useful for drawing-type functions;again just my experience. my tablet is largely unusedand it may come down to what one is used to

I bought an Intuos3 some years ago but found it difficult to use if you are left-handed.

pschwart said:

I bought an Intuos3 some years ago but found it difficult to use if you are left-handed.

Click to expand...

The newer models allow you to define right or left handed use.

In regards to the learning curve and getting used to working with a pen tablet: The first time I one back in 2007 I did find it hard to use for the first two hours. I pushed through it while spotting a couple of scans and was surprised how quick I got the hang of it.

I have watched a few different people try to use a pen tablet during one-on-one teaching sessions and I regularly had to point out to not be afraid to plant their arm and fatty part of their palm on the table and surface of the tablet. The motion comes from moving the stylus with fingers/wrist and not your entire hand/arm. That gives you a solid point of contact and reference for where you are moving the curser on the screen.

Here is a quick shot to illustrate what I mean.



Since you are looking at a the monitor and not looking at the stylus/tablet (like you would be when you are sketching with a pencil and paper) you need to be able to sense of how much motion translates to the movement on the screen. It really isn't that hard to develop the muscle memory for it and the long-term benefits greatly outweigh the short-term awkwardness.

So, a couple of people have some issues with Wacom's. Ok, no reason to say anything negative, everyone's entitled to their opinion. However, the vast majority of people who get one of these swear by it. The pressure sensitivity makes it much easier to do things like spotting, as in almost half the time. Brushing is way easier, the size of the brush is modified as one presses down, making it easy to spray and edge with an airbrush-like effect. This is essential for selecting areas in one's image and having the edge defined properly. If you have ever had to remove a background, especially when the background was dark, and now its light, you would see how valuable this is...

I can't imagine doing this without it...

Lenny

Richard Boutwell said:

Before we get started getting you down the road editing your scans, you need to realize that you should really be starting with tiffs, preferably 16-bit tiffs. Also, before you do any editing, you need to make sure you do not continue to save the same image as a jpeg over and over again. Each time you open jpeg, edit it, and then save it again (as a jpeg) you are continuously compressing the file and tossing out more information each time.

My recommended approach, if you are forced to start editing from a jpeg is to open it, immediately convert to 16-bit, and save as a psd or tiff. You are interpolating the 8-bit tones to get the increased bit depth, but at least the tonal transitions of your edits will be smoother than they would be otherwise. This approach will take more space on a hard drive, but hard drives are cheap nowadays, throwing out time and money you spent scanning and editing is not.

Did you scan these yourself or have a lab do them for you?

Click to expand...

I had to try this;opened and just saved the same file as a jpg 18x over againin 'high' quality;there is no visible difference between the first and last file:cool2:.that's good enough for me;save often losing your work is worse.

I had to try this;opened and just saved the same file as a jpg 18x over againin 'high' quality;there is no visible difference between the first and last file

Click to expand...

Did you ever print the first and the last version?

Anybody who still believes there is no difference between 8/24 and 16/48 bit color depth should read this:

Color / Farbe | Jens G.R. Benthien · Photography

Scroll down a bit, the English version is the second part.

ralphlambrecht said:

I had to try this;opened and just saved the same file as a jpg 18x over againin 'high' quality;there is no visible difference between the first and last file:cool2:.that's good enough for me;save often losing your work is worse.

Click to expand...

Losing your work to generational loss is just as bad.

I did the same thing as your little experiment: I opened a 16-bit tiff and saved it as a jpeg with a quality 10 (first, photoshop converts it to 8-bits. So there goes 65,280 possible tones). Then I opened and re-saved the file 10 times with the quality set to 10. I then did the same thing from the original tiff with the quality set to 5, this time I only re-saved it five times.

I then opened and stacked each jpeg as layers on top of the original tiff—the pixel dimensions didn't change so there were no registration issues.

By setting each layer to the Divide blend mode you can see the pixels that were actually altered (as black pixels) when compared to the underlaying original (represented as white pixels unaltered pixels). The Difference blend mode will do the same thing, but the changed pixels show as white, with the black pixels being unchanged—for this purpose the Divide blend mode made the changes more apparent in the screenshots.

Take a look at the following 10 screenshots (5 at 100% zoom and 5 at 300%) and you can see just how fast the image is changed, especially if the jpeg quality is set to anything other than the highest setting.

It might not look all that bad at a modest print size, but when the actual image pixels are rasterized by the print driver it can lead to a loss of contrast and sharpness. It actually might be fine for most people after just one or two re-saves, but think about how many times you might open, alter, and re-save an image over the course of a year, not to mention a working life.

Richard, thanks a lot for this fantastic demonstration!