Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Yes, gradient is like using a graduated filter on the lens

 

My favourite method for converting Color photos to B&W, has to be Photoshop Gradient map. I watched a video which walked through about 8 different methods, but the gradient map seemed to retain the largest tonal range of colors when converted into B&W. I shoot 100% of my photos in color, but end up converting a lot to B&W in post. Usual method is to fully edit for color in Lightroom, transfer to Photoshop only to apply the "Gradient Map", then bring it back to lightroom and adjust levels to taste.

 

Here's an example of the look when finished:

 

32330412942_e74bea347b_c.jpg

 

I've tried just editing in Lightroom by switching to the B&W panel, but for some reason it often reduces the overall tonal range of colors. Gradient map is visibly better, every time (and it's a very simple conversion!)

Edited by lleo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, gradient is like using a graduated filter on the lens

There's the Gradient Filter / Radial filter from Lightroom and Photoshop that adds the Graduated Filter, like the ones attached to lenses.

 

Gradient Map is an adjustment layer in Photoshop which converts your image into a gradient based on the two colors you choose. This Gradient Map Tutorial is a great resource to teach how it is done!

Edited by Isaac Hilman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some landscapes from my last trip to Japan, Australia and USA:

 

32438926152_06e7e30995_h.jpgShadows in the Valley @Red Rock Canyon, Nevada, USA by Hendrik Osula, on Flickr

 

X-T1 + 50-140/2,8

 

31748085994_a582e9c75c_h.jpgCamping Under Stars @Buffalo Mountains, Australia by Hendrik Osula, on Flickr

 

X-T1 + 14/2,8

 

32468796511_fc39c1f025_h.jpgSheep @Victoria, Australia by Hendrik Osula, on Flickr

 

X-T2 + 50-140/2,8

 

32212544280_2be4dadde0_h.jpgGreen Valley @Victoria, Australia by Hendrik Osula, on Flickr

 

X-T2 + 50-140/2,8

 

32212541740_50b24730c7_h.jpgTwelve Apostels @Victoria, Australia by Hendrik Osula, on Flickr

 

X-T1 + 14/2,8

Link to post
Share on other sites

very nice, you Sir are a very fine photographer.

 

I like the good use of the compressed view of a tele for landscapes with trees and the meadows with the sheep, the one with trees I would have enhanced contrast a little ( or maybe go the other way around) to deal differently with the haze in the background.

 

Thank you for compliment, I'm really glad to hear that! 

 

On the picture with trees I tried to find best balance between shadows and highlights and you might be right, that I should have went for darker shadows and higher contrast. Will try it when all other photos are ready :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for compliment, I'm really glad to hear that! 

 

On the picture with trees I tried to find best balance between shadows and highlights and you might be right, that I should have went for darker shadows and higher contrast. Will try it when all other photos are ready :)

Actually, I like that shot the way it is, more natural and makes me feel like I'm there.

 

Oddly, I found the processing on the last one a little noticeable, but love the shot.

 

Loved those shots, though, and totally agree about using telephoto for landscapes, not done enough!

Link to post
Share on other sites

A small fishing village. Xpro2  23/2.8

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Takasphoto - I really enjoyed your photostream. Just so you're aware, though, the above post isn't showing the picture correctly on this thread, just a lot of code, might be worth correcting the link?

Thank you, I think I fixed it - excuse me, it was my first post ever on this forum.  And I appreciate your help! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

32711570992_a1c573a469_h.jpgCold Morning @Kollassaare, Estonia by Hendrik Osula, on Flickr

 

X-T2 + 90/2

 

32483936610_45799f5534_h.jpgSunset @Saare, Estonia by Hendrik Osula, on Flickr

 

X-T2 + 23/1,4

 

32711569362_2b54a1abc4_h.jpgCold Morning @Kollassaare, Estonia by Hendrik Osula, on Flickr

 

X-T2 + 18/2

 

32823836016_c7c65b1b66_h.jpgCold Morning @Kollassaare, Estonia by Hendrik Osula, on Flickr

 

X-T2 + 18/2

Link to post
Share on other sites

Going colour crazy at Railay Beach after sunset 9 days ago....

X-T1, Samyang 12mm f/2.0

 

Edit: BTW if someone knows the model let me know... I was shooting the sunset, didn't have my portrait lenses, and she arrived with another photographer and stood in front of my composition (had the tripod installed and all), so I continued shooting, she was sort of hidden behind the boat, but on one moment the waves made the left boat turn and I had the shot ;)... and as fast as they appeared, they were gone so couldn't ask for their email to send them the pic, and on the camera LCD she was mostly on silhouette so they wouldn't be so thrilled neither if I showed them the shot then.

 

1702181839_biuti_5004_biuti.cl_.jpg

Edited by Biuti Chile
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • I found the reddit topic i refere to :  https://www.reddit.com/r/davinciresolve/comments/1pc3f1e/cant_apply_new_fujifilm_gfx_55_lut/ "Update for y'all, It's just like what @ExpBalSat said, it's because of the backslashes in the names break them. I changed the file name and it works now. "   For me it was the solution. Realy annoying if it doesn’t work for you 😕  
    • Here is the solution to using the Eterna 55 file simulation LUTs in Davinci Resolve.   In general, do not use the FLog2C to film simulation LUTs as they are not supported by Davinci Resolve for two reasons: 1) Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut Color Space and 2) Davinci Resolve does not support FLog2C gamma.  Instead, use Flog2 which is supported by Davinci Resolve.  Here is an example.  Let's say that you want to use Classic Chrome simulation.  Do the following: Complete your color grade and use a CST to get to Rec 709. Add a node.  Use a CST to convert from Rec 709 to FLog2.  Output Color space is Rec 2020 and Outout Gamut is FLog2. Add a node.  Apply the FLog2 to Classic Chrome LUT Create a combination node from node in steps 2 and 3. Apply a Key to the combination node and adjust the Key Output Gain to get the amount of the combination node that you want applied. So that you do not have to do this over and over again, generate a LUT for the combination node.  Remember to turn off all other nodes before generating the LUT. Hope this helps others. Don  
    • Thanks for the insights. I think it's really hard to make a decision without having the two side by side! 
    • I don’t have the 23 f2 but I have read several times that it is considered a little soft at close distance, compared to the 23 f1.4 lenses. These will also focus at shorter distance from the subject, esp. the new one. So that might make a difference. The new 23 f1.4 LM WR  has better resolution, esp. in regard to the 40Mpix sensors, which you don’t have on the X-T2. What practical difference that makes for the value of the pictures one makes is disputable and subjective.  f1.4 will gather more light but with a smaller DOF, which may be desirable in some situations but not so in others, depends. If you like to shoot close ups, you will probably use higher f numbers to get a bigger DOF. Same for landscapes. If you are a bokeh fan, yes the f1.4 lens are better.  The older 23 f1.4 lens that you are considering is a very good and respected lens. The f1.4 vs f2 aperture per se is perhaps not so important. The 23 f2 is very small, light and practical and a great lens for travel and landscapes. So, go figure. I am afraid I just sent you further down the road to insanity !
    • First post here but long time fuji shorter. I use the XT2 with the 23mm f2 / 35mm 1.4 / 16-80mm f4 I'm considering the 23mm f1.4 r (Non-WR) About me: - I shoot black and white only. - I like macro details to wide open landscapes and everything in-between. - I shoot mostly for art, intrigue and creativity of the image. My question - is the 23mm f1.4 going to offer me any meaningful difference over the f2 for the above scenarios Thanks and sorry for bringing it up again...
×
×
  • Create New...