Tag Archives: grayscale

Feet on the Beach

Feet on the Beach

Brian Auer | 01/19/2008 | San Diego, CA | 300mm * f/6.7 * 1/250s * ISO100
[Print Pricing] [Contact for Signed Prints] [See it at Flickr]

This one was taken on the Torrey Pines State Beach near my home in San Diego. The feet actually belong to my Mother-in-Law. I spotted her walking along the water near sunset and I couldn’t resist trying to get some “walking on the beach” photos. I shot about 7 or 8 in rapid-fire mode and this one turned out the best from all of them. The reflection turned out better than I had hoped, and the moment in mid-stride made for an interesting photo.

Feet on the Beach Post-Processing

All of the following post-processing steps were done with Adobe Camera Raw — no Photoshop was used on this photo.

  1. Untouched RAW Image
    This is what the image looked like straight out of the camera. Not a lot of color to begin with, so black & white was a natural choice for me.
  2. Black & White Conversion
    Before doing anything, I switched to grayscale. I pushed the red, orange, yellow, green, and aqua to negative compensation while the blues, purples and magentas were pushed in the positive direction.
  3. Basic Adjustments
    I left the white balance set at a temperature of 5100 and a tint of -1. I left the exposure near zero, while I boosted the recovery to 33, fill light to 41, bumped the blacks up to 34, increased the brightness to 76, pushed up the contrast to 19, and I ramped the clarity all the way up to 100.
  4. Tone Curve Adjustment
    Using the parametric tone curve, I set the highlights to +22, lights to +49, darks to -33, and shadows to -47. This gave me the strong contrast I was after, and I actually pushed a few (very few) of the shadows off the histogram. Overall, the image is heavy on the darker tones.
  5. Vignette and Sharpen
    In the lens correction menu, I set the vignette to an amount of -70 with a midpoint of 20 — and this gave me the strong frame around the subject. As a last step, I set the sharpening under the detail menu to an amount of 50 with a radius of 1.5 pixels.

Enjoy!

The Place To Be

The Place To Be

Brian Auer | 02/09/2008 | La Jolla, CA | 19mm * f/4.5 * 1/400s * ISO100
[Print Pricing] [Contact for Signed Prints] [See it at Flickr]

This shot was taken during the La Jolla photowalk in early February. At the time, I found the scene to be very interesting — the hut, the birds, the people, and the ocean in the background really seemed to work together in this candid shot. I kept things fairly well centered because of the strong symmetry already present in the hut. The Birds and the people served to break up that symmetry in isolated areas, so I didn’t feel I needed to break it up even more. Lucky for me, I also left some extra room at the top of the frame, which served as a nice backdrop for some heavy vignette.

The Place To Be Post-Processing

All of the following post-processing steps were done with Adobe Camera Raw — no Photoshop was used on this photo.

  1. Untouched RAW Image
    This is what the image looked like straight out of the camera. It could probably work as a color image too, but I wanted to go colorless.
  2. Black & White Conversion
    Before doing anything, I switched to grayscale. I pushed the red, orange, yellow, green, and aqua to negative compensation while the blues, purples and magentas were pushed in the positive direction.
  3. Basic Adjustments
    I left the white balance set at a temperature of 5800 and a tint of +3. I left the exposure, recovery, and clarity set to zero, while I boosted the fill light to 46, bumped the blacks up to 36, dropped the brightness to 16, and pushed up the contrast to 52.
  4. Tone Curve Adjustment
    Using the parametric tone curve, I set the highlights to +41, lights to +39, darks to -44, and shadows to -76. This gave me the strong contrast I was after, and I actually pushed a bunch of the highlights and shadows off the histogram.
  5. Vignette and Sharpen
    In the lens correction menu, I set the vignette to an amount of -76 with a midpoint of 19 — and this gave me the strong frame around the hut while filling in some of that sky. As a last step, I set the sharpening under the detail menu to an amount of 50 with a radius of 1.5 pixels.

Enjoy!

February Challenge: Day 2 – Liquid Ice

Liquid Ice

WEEK 1 = CLEAR

Ice cube on a glossy black plate as it melts into a small puddle of water.

I’m kind of bending the rules on the project… this is actually a grayscale image. The photo was pretty much black and white anyways, and it had some extra impact by going grayscale. I’m going to justify it being ok because my color of the week is clear — so this trick probably won’t work when I choose a "real" color.

My buddy “the_wolf_brigade” justified it well: Clear is like the chameleon of colours, so I wouldn’t say it’s cheating to increase the saturation of the clear tones… :D

To see the rest of my February Challenge photos, check the “Challenge” category here on the blog or visit my Flickr Set.

Which Color Space Do You Use for Black and White Photos?

As I fall deeper into the rabbit hole of fine art prints with ImageKind, something has come up that’s really bothering me. Up to this point, I’ve been using Adobe RGB as my main working space for color management. Well, ImageKind has the ability to print true black and white photos if the image is managed under a grayscale color space.

Unfortunately, I can’t find any good resources that speak to grayscale spaces because everything seems to be centered around the battles between sRGB, Adobe RGB, and proPhoto RGB. Now surely there must be advantages and tradeoffs between the grayscale color spaces, but I’m somewhat unaware of them. So I’m curious what you folks use for your black and white photos. I’d also greatly appreciate any further information or links to information on this subject. And if you do use them, do you work in that space or do you just save the output files down into grayscale.

Which Color Space Do You Use for Black and White Photos?

And on a different topic within the subject of art, check out the results from the poll last week asking “What Would You Pay For Fine Art?” Clearly we couldn’t come to a clear answer, but I do see a few points worth noting. It looks like you guys would fall into three categories as art buyers: the low-end ($50), the mid-range ($100), and the high-end ($300+). I’m sure we had some yahoos vote for the $300 option just to mess with the poll, but several people mentioned in the comments that they’d pay much higher than that if it was a worthy print. On average, the majority lies at about $100 — so keep this in mind if you ever think about selling your prints as art.