An often asked question when discussing black and white photography is “How do I know which photograph will make a good black and white photo?” There is a somewhat definitive answer to this question, which I’ll discuss a bit later, but a quick answer is to simply try it in black and white and see if you like it or not. What makes an appealing black and white photo to you, or to me, or to someone else, can differ greatly. So, always give the image a try before you rule it out.
I’ve heard people advise someone, when that someone is admitting they are unsure about which image might work in BW, to take a JPG photo using the BW setting on their camera and then look at the view finder to see what they think about the image. This could be one way to answer the question if you have a lot of time while taking the image; so, perhaps if you are taking a portrait shot where someone is sitting for you, this could work out. But if you shoot in RAW and in JPG be sure to use the RAW file and render it in post processing as a BW image; the JPG file will not have the same amount of valuable color tone data in it and you will be cheating yourself out of the best possible outcome for the finished image. The camera captures the image in RGB tones, even when the camera setting is BW for the JPG, and then the camera processes the image, throwing away data, into an 8-bit BW finished JPG image. Use the RAW file and learn post processing techniques to get an image processed in the way you visualize it, not the way the camera visualizes it. This is not to say that a JPG will not make an impressive BW photograph as it very well may do that. Using a JPG when you have a RAW file is analogous to having only half of the candy bar when you can have the whole candy bar all to yourself!
There are several methods you can use to post process your RAW file into a finished format and all can produce a decent BW image; most of the limitations that we all have in post processing are inherent in us, in our own inability to see and produce what we want, and not because the software is not functional. Photoshop is fine for post processing for BW, Adobe Lightroom can work wonders, and any other program, such as Photoshop Elements, will work just fine, too. Many people extol the virtues of Nik software for BW conversion, the BW program is called Nik Silver Efex Pro (it is part of the free Google Nik Collection), and it uses presets that you can then alter. On1 (that actually reads as On One) is another good conversion program for BW effects and, again, it uses presets that can be altered. There are most likely various other programs around that work well, too, that will go un-named in this article. If you use Lightroom it is very easy to see your image in black and white, just hit "V" on your keyboard and it converts instantly to BW: it's a toggle so hit "V" again and it converts back to color.
So, back to the original question, what makes a “good” BW image? Hmmm…what is “good”? How is “good” defined? Shouldn’t the question be more specific; what makes a compelling BW image? What makes an emotional BW image? What makes a stunning BW image? And, we are back to the heart of photography since those questions can be asked about our images in general. Having said all of that, there are some guidelines that help us to discern which of our images might best be converted into BW. However, these are not rules and the guidelines should be broken as needed, based on your intent. One way to know if our BW image is successful is to listen to the viewer’s comments upon seeing the image; if there is a positive reaction then you’ve succeeded in creating a compelling image for that viewer. I’m always left wondering, “did I get this right?” and I will probably always be left in that state so I just keep learning and continuing to move ahead and become more informed about all of the facets of photography.
General considerations when deciding if your image is right for BW:
1. Does the image have texture or shape in it that will be enhanced when converted to BW?
2. Does the image have dark-darks and very light-lights, or a wide range of color tones from dark to light? (Ansel Adams always looked for this.)
3. Is the image primarily mid-tones, which may not convert as well as an image with many tones?
4. Does the image have emotional content that would be enhanced in BW?
5. Is the color working against the image instead of for the image?
6. Will high or low contrast (flat light) help tell the story in BW? (High contrast is often used in BW images and it usually looks great.)
7. Is there pattern or perspective in the image that will work well in BW?
After converting the image to BW sit back and study it and ask yourself, “Did this BW conversion enhance this photograph for the viewer?” But, as in all cases, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and if you are happy with it call it done and move on. Study your work, ask other people what they think, read about BW, look at images created by well known and popular photographers. And, above all, simply take the chance and convert images until you’ve figured out what it is that you need to know to create compelling black and white images.
I’ve heard people advise someone, when that someone is admitting they are unsure about which image might work in BW, to take a JPG photo using the BW setting on their camera and then look at the view finder to see what they think about the image. This could be one way to answer the question if you have a lot of time while taking the image; so, perhaps if you are taking a portrait shot where someone is sitting for you, this could work out. But if you shoot in RAW and in JPG be sure to use the RAW file and render it in post processing as a BW image; the JPG file will not have the same amount of valuable color tone data in it and you will be cheating yourself out of the best possible outcome for the finished image. The camera captures the image in RGB tones, even when the camera setting is BW for the JPG, and then the camera processes the image, throwing away data, into an 8-bit BW finished JPG image. Use the RAW file and learn post processing techniques to get an image processed in the way you visualize it, not the way the camera visualizes it. This is not to say that a JPG will not make an impressive BW photograph as it very well may do that. Using a JPG when you have a RAW file is analogous to having only half of the candy bar when you can have the whole candy bar all to yourself!
There are several methods you can use to post process your RAW file into a finished format and all can produce a decent BW image; most of the limitations that we all have in post processing are inherent in us, in our own inability to see and produce what we want, and not because the software is not functional. Photoshop is fine for post processing for BW, Adobe Lightroom can work wonders, and any other program, such as Photoshop Elements, will work just fine, too. Many people extol the virtues of Nik software for BW conversion, the BW program is called Nik Silver Efex Pro (it is part of the free Google Nik Collection), and it uses presets that you can then alter. On1 (that actually reads as On One) is another good conversion program for BW effects and, again, it uses presets that can be altered. There are most likely various other programs around that work well, too, that will go un-named in this article. If you use Lightroom it is very easy to see your image in black and white, just hit "V" on your keyboard and it converts instantly to BW: it's a toggle so hit "V" again and it converts back to color.
So, back to the original question, what makes a “good” BW image? Hmmm…what is “good”? How is “good” defined? Shouldn’t the question be more specific; what makes a compelling BW image? What makes an emotional BW image? What makes a stunning BW image? And, we are back to the heart of photography since those questions can be asked about our images in general. Having said all of that, there are some guidelines that help us to discern which of our images might best be converted into BW. However, these are not rules and the guidelines should be broken as needed, based on your intent. One way to know if our BW image is successful is to listen to the viewer’s comments upon seeing the image; if there is a positive reaction then you’ve succeeded in creating a compelling image for that viewer. I’m always left wondering, “did I get this right?” and I will probably always be left in that state so I just keep learning and continuing to move ahead and become more informed about all of the facets of photography.
General considerations when deciding if your image is right for BW:
1. Does the image have texture or shape in it that will be enhanced when converted to BW?
2. Does the image have dark-darks and very light-lights, or a wide range of color tones from dark to light? (Ansel Adams always looked for this.)
3. Is the image primarily mid-tones, which may not convert as well as an image with many tones?
4. Does the image have emotional content that would be enhanced in BW?
5. Is the color working against the image instead of for the image?
6. Will high or low contrast (flat light) help tell the story in BW? (High contrast is often used in BW images and it usually looks great.)
7. Is there pattern or perspective in the image that will work well in BW?
After converting the image to BW sit back and study it and ask yourself, “Did this BW conversion enhance this photograph for the viewer?” But, as in all cases, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and if you are happy with it call it done and move on. Study your work, ask other people what they think, read about BW, look at images created by well known and popular photographers. And, above all, simply take the chance and convert images until you’ve figured out what it is that you need to know to create compelling black and white images.
The image (right) won a 2nd Place Award in a valley agricultural competition in 2016; a good way to know if the image conversion was successful is if it is deemed worthy of an award in a juried show. This image worked well in black and white and the conversion helped to focus the viewer on the trees and the perspective of the trees in the image. This is a more high-key image; high key means the image used more bright tones (note the histogram in this screen image and that most of the data is to the right, in the high tones). Where to place the image in reference to darker tones and lighter tones is a decision that will ultimately be made by the person processing the image, based on their vision of what they want the image to be.
The orchard shot (below, left) shows an image that has a lot of midtones, but almost no black or white tones, a sort of overall muddy look as it should have given that the histogram tones are all centered, not many dark or highlight tones, mostly midtowns (on a muddy day but that is not actually related to the muddy look). The reflections are, of course, what creates something unusual about this image. The second shot (below, right), in BW, using a quick Lightroom conversion (Command V), gave me hope for the image but it was still just a muddy and not very well-done conversion (a RAW file, no edits done yet). I turned to Nik Silver Efex to see what I could do to enhance it since I really liked the reflections. In Nik I was able to alter the histogram to create deeper tones and to get more highlights and blacks into the image. The final image was much more in line with my vision for this image.
|
|
Note the change in the histogram. Now there are many, many tones in the photograph, ranging from the left side to the right side of the histogram, or darks to lights. I pushed the tones in Nik to get out of the print what I wanted it to be and what I saw it could be. I also edited the image again in Lightroom after it was edited in Nik. As Ansel Adams said of one of his prints, “A normal “realistic” interpretation of this subject would be quite drab” and this is evidenced by the Lightroom conversion above.
The next image, another tree shot (right), shows a similar range of tones as in the shot above, good deep midtones and sufficient highlights and darks. This is a somewhat high key image in that the highlights were set as high as the mid-90% range and the darks left as low as the 5% range. If using Lightroom to edit you can check your range of tones by simply rolling your mouse over the different areas of the photo and watching the number readout just below the histogram. The numbers will show as a percent, meaning that the tone is XY percent of 100%. So, if the numbers show up in the range of 40% or 50% (a midtown range) that tone has that amount, in a percent, of the tone it could have at 100%; this is based on zero as having no tone and 100% (which would be 255) being completely white in tone. An 8-bit histogram uses numbers from 0 to 255.
The fish shot (below) in color did not appeal as much to me as the BW conversion. I thought the color detracted from the image. I used a more high key approach to the conversion.
The mushroom image (below, left) looked ok in color, but after the BW conversion I liked it a lot better; removing the color allows the viewer to focus on the patterns and textures in the mushroom, which is the heart of the image, the color got in the way of that.
