Views on colour vs black and white

I'm ignorant of using digital cameras in mono mode, but I've always assumed that if so used the mono output was a jpg file, which, being 8 bits, has a much, much smaller range of values than you'd get with a raw file. On the assumption that some processing of the image would be done, the result will have a less smooth range of tones than you'd get NOT starting from a jpg.

If you're not going to make a reasonable size print but just display on a monitor, it may not matter.

There's at least two relatively recent threads that I can recall on mono conversions and the best starting point/way to do it, although one is in F&C.
 
The reason for shooting colour with digital is so that the tonal range of each colour can be manipulated individually, rather than as a whole. If a photograph is shot in monochrome then the only tonal control available is global, through curves or highlights/shadows/exposure etc. If you convert from colour raw to mono then if the sky is too light you can reduce the luminosity of the blue channel, grass too dark then increase the luminosity of the green channel etc. Crudely similar effects are available using coloured filters when shooting monochrome, but again, they are global, rather than carefully controlled.

Shooting mono using film is different, because the limitations and benefits of the medium are different from using digital, therefore require the photographer to adapt to them. Mono film doesn't respond evenly to different colours, so some of the things one has to do in post to create a decent mono image are already done 'in camera' by the nature of the medium.
You explained it far better than i could, it was what i was trying to say. but didn't come across maybe clear enough, mono has its limits, colour has more tonal range so can be manipulated for better B&W.
 
Black and white, especially using film, should be consigned to the dustbin of history.

:D

So the Majority of the beginning and history of photography is only fit for the bin.
 
Back
Top