Nude Art Images in Digital Black & White

The first thing is that photography is a VISUAL art. This means there are no standards, which order you to do 'good' things (although we will use that word later on, meaning an image without clear exposure errors) and forget everything else. You are the master of the image and only your imagination and perception limit what you will produce.

Some of your images may not be acceptable to all-knowing critics, but if they meet your own personal criteria of value, that's exactly what photography is all about. Pour your individuality into your work, be creative, leave wide lanes others rush along and strand into uncharted lands.

If you can manage it, drop all photography courses and schools. Masters in any are not educated at formal institutions. Your individual taste has to be born out of your own personality, even if you lack technique.

Actually, this is no lack, but a hidden treasure. Technique can be mastered by anyone. Your vision cannot.

Whatever methods you may read about here, are thus only an indication of direction you may want to follow. When you do, explore all possibilities to find the results which are unique to you.



Introduction

The myth of post-processing

Image processing software allows deep image manipulation, including recovery of details lost in shadows and reducing overexposure. One may feel tempted to forget the basics of photography and rely on post-processing to obtain acceptable results.

This is not the best way, though, as you will lose a lot of time trying to make a good image out of faulty exposures and, more importantly, you will never learn tricks of the trade which make taking good images a snap.

By all means, try to take properly exposed images right on the spot, so that further use of programs is limited to creativity. Digital tools will help you greatly in this, histograms playing the major role. Experiment, use a variety of exposure settings and check the results. You have them immediate, so learning is easy and the only cost is your time.

There is a message in this introduction. Digital cameras take color images. Conversion to B&W may be difficult or at least time-consuming if you don't take a properly exposed, color-balanced and focused color photo first. On the other hand, when you take a well- balanced color image, you have infinite possibilities ahead for converting it or using as a point of departure for your creativity.


Color to B&W conversion methods

Having said that, we may now proceed to the practical part. The following methods are universally applied in almost all more popular software packages. For clarity reasons, we will use Photoshop commands. If you use a different program, find corresponding functions and options and re-create the procedures.

For comparison purposes, the images in the side column are processed with the described methods, with default settings used. The source was a typical 333x500px website-use full-color image (01).

There are a number of software conversion methods. Grayscale conversion (Image > Mode > Grayscale = 02) is the most straightforward. Use it for previewing images only, as in most cases the resulting grays are flat and images lack contrast and depth. The worst thing is that color channel data are lost irreversibly here, making further adjustments impossible.

Color desaturation is much better ( Image > Adjustments > Desaturate = 03). All color data are still there in the image file, and this is quite a good method to start with.

Hue-Saturation adjustment (Image > Adjustments > Hue/Saturation = 04) loses much of the original data. To make a B&W image, move the Saturation slider to 0.

Gradient application makes use of the standard software option and gives controllable results (Image > Adjustments > Gradient Map... = 05), far better than obtained with other 'simple' methods.

Lab color (Image > Mode > Lab Color = 06) conversion may produce amazing results when the Lightness channel image is taken as the source, with a and b channels discarded. Re-convert the Alpha 1 channel to Grayscale (= 07) and then to RGB and tweak channel or brightness/contrast values for best visual results.

Single channel selection (use Red = 08, Green, or Blue as source for further B&W image processing, depending on your perception) to find the image you expect.

Mixing channels (Image > Adjustments > Channel Mixer = 09) may surprise you with good resulting photographs when channels are tweaked. To avoid blowing whites, make sure the histogram preview is turned on (Window > Histogram).

Filters are plug-in add-ons. There are a number of solutions available in this form, to start with you may want to check freeware filters from Cybia Fotomatic BW-Plus (= 10), PhotoWiz B/W (= 11) or virtualPhotographer (= 12).

To give a hint of what can be done with seemingly simple color > BW conversion, we will follow the LAB conversion method in detail.


Color > BW through LAB color

The following is a bit lengthy procedure, yet it gives quite a lot of flexibility in producing the image you want. Follow it and you'll see it does not take much time to obtain impressive results.

Convert the image to LAB colors (Image > Mode > Lab Color). Discard the a and b channels in the Channels palette. You should have the Alpha 1 channel left only. Convert it to grayscale (Image > Mode > Grayscale. The Alpha 1 channel has turned now into the Gray channel.

Control+Click on it to load luminosity as a selection. Invert selection (Select > Inverse) and convert the image to RGB (Image > Mode > RGB Color). Create a new Solid Color... adjustment layer in the Layers palette (at the bottom). Select gray close to 50% and confirm your choice.

Select the Multiply blending mode in the drop down menu in the Layers palette to get the basic BW image. Now you can make some final touches in Brightness/Contrast or Levels adjustment layers (these would have to be created from the Layers palette) to arrive at what suits your visual taste best. Save the PSD image for archival purposes, and flatten it to save in the format needed. (= 13)

Tinting the image

You may use this step to tint the BW image. Double click the square icon in the Color Fill 1 adjustment layer in the Layers palette and choose the color you want. Set its Opacity and Color Fill parameters with sliders in the Layers palette. (= 14)

Adding simulated 3D depth

To add more depth to the image, duplicate the Background layer in the Layers palette and run the High Pass filter (Filters > Other > High Pass... = 15), adjusting its Radius by experiment. Change the Background copy blending mode to Hard Light and adjust its Opacity as required. Try and experiment with different blending modes and Opacity / Fill values for different effects.


Pure black?

Tweaking color in RGB black and white images may result in deliberate warming up the image or cooling it down a bit. The final image may turn out to be extremely appealing to the eye. To practice it, open the final BW image and call up the color balance palette (Image > Adjustments > Color Balance...).

Moving the Yellow / Blue slider to increase Yellow in the Midtones range by 5-10 warms the image up (= 16). Try to experiment with all shadows, midtones and highlights for best results. Similarly, moving the Cyan / Red slider to increase Cyan in the Midtones range by 5-10 cools down the image a bit (= 17).


Final notes

For best results, always use 16-bit images if you can, only converting them to 8-bit depth if needed. Saving images optimized for website display may be done directly from 16-bit images without reducing their bit depth.

If you primarily work with website presentations, remember that grayscale images saved as optimized JPEGs may become illegibly blackish (= 18). The same grayscale image converted to RGB and saved for web will have a different gray spectrum (= 19).

Image post-processing may involve a number of steps with different settings used for different parameters. If repeated procedures are needed, make sure to write down what you are doing. When you come across a special effect which you particularly like, you may want to make an automated task of it (Create new action... in the Actions palette).

Enjoy this process. Taking and making photos should make you fulfilled and happy. Try to understand what you are doing and you have an extra benefit of learning the tricks of the trade. After a time, you will be able to consciously apply various tools and options.

A good approach is to ask yourself a question when looking at the final image you have created: 'Would I like to have it exhibited in the Museum of Art?' Your image speaks about your subject, but also about you. Are you proud of it? Or would you rather have another try and adjust it? Become your own judge and improve your skills. Practice makes perfect.

Understanding Resolution - Do You Need More Pixels?

The limitation comes from the lens resolution. There's a point where more megapixels simply becomes a burden without bringing any perceivable benefit at all. I personally believe with 35mm, it is probably around 20 megapixels. Of course, there is not a clear cut off line, but a gradual approximation.

With 35mm full frame, the first critical point of megapixel arrives at 4M. I will show you why below. Before reaching that point, any increase of number of megapixel resulting a quite strict one-to-one increase of resolution. For example, 2M quite literally has twice as much much resolution as 1M. After that, this will start to degrade. For the matter of better communication, consider a coefficient called ratio between the perceivable resolution increase and the pixel number increase. This ratio is practically 1/1 before the number of pixels is 4M, but starts to fall off gradually after that. My estimate is that it would fall to less than 0.5 when the number of pixels reaches 10M, and probably less than 0.1 at 20M. I'm pretty certain that this ratio approaches 0 by 40M. What that means is that after 10M, the perceivable resolution increase one receives from every 1M increase of megapixels is less than .5M, and after 20M, the perceived resolution increase for every 1M is less than .1M. As a practical matter, after 20M, the more megapixels simply become "the Emperor's new cloth" which really is not there to be seen. It just makes some people happy. And I'm talking about full frame 35mm. For APS sensors, the number is even smaller.

All that is because the inherent limitation of the lens resolution. Take 35mm full frame. I'll use approximation to simplify the explanation. Suppose there are N columns (or rows) of photosites for every 1mm. The total number of pixels of a full frame 35mm sensor is then (Nx36)x(Nx24), which is roughly 1000N^2 (pixels). Now, good 35mm lenses usually have excellent MTF at 30 line pairs per millimeter. Especially at the center of the frame, a good 35mm lens can have 80% or above MTF at 30 line pairs per millimeter. So it is reasonable to take 30 line pairs per millimeter as a baseline. A sensor that matches this resolution would have N=2x30 (two photosites for each line pair), and correspondingly the total number of pixels of 1000xN^2 = 1000x60^2, which is approximately 4M (or slightly less). This tells you two sides of the story. First, on a 35mm full frame sensor, before the number of pixels reaches 4M, most lenses have enough resolving power to take full advantage of the more pixels. Second, when the number of pixels goes beyond 4M, most lenses will not be able to fully take advantage of the increase of the pixels.

That of course doesn't mean that after 4M, the increase of the pixel numbers will have no benefit at all. They still do, but will not have the full benefit due to the lens resolution limitation.

For example, suppose you have a lens that has an MTF value of 50% (or MTF50) at 50 line pairs/mm (meaning that at this resolution, the lens delivers a perceivable contrast of only 50% of the full contrast, i.e., losing 50% of contrast). A sensor that matches this resolution would have N=2x50=100, and correspondingly a total number of pixels of 1000xN^2 = 1000x100^2 = 10M. That means, with this lens, a 10M sensor is able to represent each line pair with two columns/rows of photosites, but with a loss of 50% of contrast at such resolution. It could be said that at this level, you are only getting 50% of the perceivable resolution out of the increased number of pixels.

Now, those who are familiar with lens tests will tell you that a 35mm lens with an MFT50 at 50 line pairs/mm is a very good lens. For 35mm full frame, this is about 1200 lp/picture height.

With a 20M sensor, you need a lens that has an MTF50 with 70 lp/mm or an equivalent of 1700 lp/picture height for full frame. This is already surpassing the optimal resolution (center of the frame with a stopped down aperture) of even the best prime lenses. And we are talking about MTF with a 50% loss of contrast here.

Overall, even with a full frame, going from 10M to 20M has less than 50% increase in perceivable resolved pixels even with the best lenses. You're certainly not doubling the resolved pixels there. Of course, even an increase of 50% can be important for some people who (1) actually need a greater resolution; and (2) actually have possession to the top lenses and use them. On the other hand, with the same technology, going from 10M to 20M will lose at least one full stop of the ISO performance. I have no problem with people's preferences. I just have a problem with people making choices without the necessary information and understanding.

Still, one could make a rational (albeit discounted) argument for 20M for a full frame sensor. But beyond that, it certainly looks like an Emperor's new clothes to me, unless they suddenly come up with drastically better optics, which is extremely unlikely.

Besides, unless you want to make prints larger than 30 inches, you really don't benefit from more than 20M anyway even if you had a lens that could resolve more. And you're not getting those large files as a freebie. They impose a heavy tax on your computer system.

Right ISO for Your Picture

Have you even considered changing the ISO sensitivity on your camera? If you don't know what ISO sensitivity refers to, you may want to consult your camera manual for a base point understanding about that and how it works. In short, changing the ISO setting on your camera changes the sensitivity to light, the lower number that you select the less sensitive to light (and conversely the higher the number the more sensitive it becomes).
Why change ISO?

You may wonder why it is necessary to make change of the ISO sensitivity; in fact, your camera just picked a suitable ISO sensitivity probably the best for your pictures when you are shooting in automatic mode. When you discover the limitation of the automatic mode, you will start to care about what ISO sensitivity should be used when shooting in other modes.

This is useful when you are shooting in different lighting situations - particularly when there is low light and you might not be able to use a flash (you'd bump up your ISO setting in this case), and this is just the beginning why you would want to shoot at higher ISO.


The Inside Story

The only cost of increasing ISO is that as you do it you'll notice that the "noise" or "grain" in your shots also begins to increase. Thus, the rule is simple - choose the lowest ISO possible for smooth and grain-free shots. The latest generation DSLR cameras today has very nice result at ISO 400 and lower sensitivity, you may consider the output are "noise-free" setup. You have start to concern about anything above ISO 400.

We have latest generation cameras today claim their capability for good higher ISO performance, is this just a matter of marketing game? or something to do? The higher ISO capability definitely gives an overall improvement on photography options. Firstly, at the same exposure amount, a smaller aperture can be used, this ensures subjects are in the DOF coverage for sharpness, it also means a higher shutter speed is possible to freeze actions. Most lenses go to their sweet aperture after stopped down 1-2 stops, the higher ISO sensitivity also makes the optimal setup easier. On the other hand, you may use lower speed lens, and thus less investment - Canon, Nikon and all other lenses manufacturers would probably disagree on that .... :P.

Advanced cameras may have state-of-the-art noise reduction program running in camera to reduce noise at higher ISO. And if you shoot RAW format, RAW processor tools may further optimize your image for smooth output. Lastly, there are third-party noise reduction tools in the market; they are effective enough to further tune up your higher ISO images and make them really usable.


Make Sure Yourself

First of first, make sure you know your camera well. If you don't have any idea what you would probably have at higher ISO settings from your camera, I will recommend you run through a series of test shots at various higher ISO setup under environments mostly you would work with. I trial run my Canon 5D, 40D and 400D and assess their higher ISO performance. I understand pretty well what I could expect from these cameras when shooting at various higher ISO configuration. See articles:


Canon EOS 5D - Dark Angel in Digital Photography
Canon EOS 40D for Serious & Everyday Work
Canon EOS 400D Combo for Everyday Snaps


Then, make sure you change ISO that you will need to get in the habit of checking what setting is selected at the start of every photo shoot. Many photographers have been disappointed at the end of a shoot to find that they forgot to check what ISO setting they left their camera on in their last shoot. There is nothing worse than thinking you are shooting at an ISO of 100 only to find you forgot to switch it back from 1600. To help with this always check your ISO setting before starting to shoot - but also try to always switch it back after a shoot.

Now, make sure you got a properly exposure picture! This is the most critical part and it directly impacts the final result even with the right ISO set. A badly exposure picture can just make everything going into a mess, and become unusable even after post-processing noise reduction. How could I make a properly exposure picture? Huh?! .... good question, but this should return to the basic, the best answer is to be given by yourself - learn more about your camera and shoot more!

Photography and the Great Outdoors

Combining photography with the passion of hiking, biking and mountain climbing can result in the most incredible photographs imaginable. Whether it's ice climbing in the Rockies, with your camera bag packed safely away, until you reach the summit where you have a breathtaking panoramic view of the frozen earth spread out as far as the eye can see. Or a leisurely springtime hike up a flower carpeted Pocono hillside with your camera close at hand to catch that pheasant or covey of quail. The outdoors and photography are a perfect match.

If you're a week-end photographer who can't wait to get out of the city and become one with nature, there are countless opportunities that will allow you to fulfill your desire to "get away" and get that "shot of a lifetime".

Consider those who are lucky enough to live in Seattle, Washington where you can leave work on a Friday afternoon and be standing on the majestic and rugged coastline, removing your camera and tripod from their bag in time to be setting up to focus on one of the most beautiful sunsets on earth. The next morning, while enjoying your first cup of coffee, you could be snapping pictures of the Grey whales which migrate north along the Washington coast between February and April every year.

Or maybe mountain scenery is your first love and you are fortunate enough to live in the Yellowstone area of Montana were the wildlife is phenomenal. Grizzly, coyote, elk.... big horned sheep playing on the mountainside. Buffalo grazing peacefully, as they must have a 100 years ago. This is truly Big Sky Country where you can catch a glimpse of a graceful eagle gliding silently through the trees. These are pictures most people can only see in a magazine, not through their camera lens on a brisk autumn morning.

Remember it's important to research not only where you're going to be photographing and what camera equipment you'll be using, but also the bags, backpacks and pouches to which you entrust your valuable cameras, lenses, tripods and accessories The touring bicyclist needs to invest in a dry sack in the event he encounters inclement weather, but the young photographer hiking through the Sierra Nevada, in search of the various species of blooming cactus, probably would be in need of the backpack with room for her water bottles. Look for quality, durability and functionality.

Whatever your passion, wherever you call home. There are beautiful pictures waiting to be taken. That horse pasture you are fortunate enough to pass on your way to work every day. Stop; take a good look. I bet you'll see a terrific photograph. One you'd probably be in awe of if you saw it in a magazine. So pack up those camera bags and keep your equipment handy. You never know when that one perfect picture will appear.

Photography Pioneers

Modern day photography dates back to the early 1800's. The word photography is derived from the Greeks; photos meaning light and graphein meaning to draw. The word was first used in 1839 by scientist Sir John FW Herschel to describe a method of recording images. That was 12 years after the first photograph was captured by Frenchman Louis Jacque Mande Daguerre, a professional opera scene painter. This first process took eight hours and he then worked 12 more years to reduce the expose time to under 30 minutes and keep the image from disappearing. These first photographs were exposed on metal that had been sensitized to accept the image and were called Daguerreotypes after their French inventor. Then came the tintype, invented in 1856 by Hamilton Smith. This was a thin sheet of iron used as a base for light sensitive material to produce a photograph.

Along came an American from upstate New York, George Eastman, who was very fascinated by photography, but frustrated with what he considered cumbersome exposure methods. He developed a dry photographic plate, patented it in the United States and England and began his first photographic business in 1880. In 1884, he replaced the glass plates with paper rolls allowing multiple images to be taken much more quickly. Four years later, on September 4, 1888 he patented he "roll film camera". You could take your pictures, mail the camera to Kodak who would develop your 100 photos and send them back to you along with another roll of 100 exposures. Sound familiar? The big difference? You used to get your camera back, now you don't!

These pioneers would be amazed with the equipment available to us today. We have the digital camera, the SLR,35mm, the camcorder, automatic exposure and automatic focusing, zoom lens and video. We even take pictures with our cellphones, which we can then download onto our computers. We have the luxury of going just about anywhere to get that perfect shot. Indoors, outdoors, underwater, or on top of a mountain. We attach our camera to a tripod and set the self timer so we can be in that majestic mountain scene.

When the equipment was of a size to be transported from place to place, they certainly didn't have a camera case with a padded shoulder strap. We have a camera bag suited to fit every camera and the accessories. Backpacks for hiking up that trail and lens pouches.

We can take pictures as a hobby, while on vacation; supplement our income as a weekend photographer/writer for a local newspaper; or travel the world as a full-time photojournalist. Today, our photographic possibilities are limitless thanks, at least in part, to these photography trailblazers.

Black-and-white infrared film

Black-and-white infrared negative films are sensitive to wavelengths in the 700 to 900 nm near infrared spectrum, and most also have a sensitivity to blue light wavelengths. The notable halation effect or glow often seen in the highlights of infrared photographs is an artifact of Kodak High Speed Infrared (HIE) black-and-white negative film and not an artifact of infrared light. The glow or blooming is caused by the absence of an anti-halation layer on the back side of Kodak HIE film, this results in a scattering or blooming around the highlights that would usually be absorbed by the anti-halation layer in conventional films.

Frank Lloyd Wright's Rudin House: panchromatic film on the left, infrared on the right

The majority of black-and-white infrared art, landscape, and wedding photography is done using orange (15 or 21), red (23, 25, or 29) or visually opaque (72) filters over the lens to block the blue visible light from the exposure. The intent of filters in black-and-white infrared photography is to block blue wavelengths and allow infrared to pass through. Without filters, infrared negative films look much like conventional negative films because the blue sensitivity lowers the contrast and effectively counteracts the infrared look of the film. Some photographers use orange or red filters to allow slight amounts of blue wavelengths to reach the film, and thus lower the contrast. Very dark-red (29) filters block out almost all blue, and visually opaque (70, 89b, 87c, 72) filters block out all blue and also visible-red wavelengths, resulting in a more pure-infrared photo that usually looks more contrasty.

Certain infrared-sensitive films like Kodak HIE must only be loaded and unloaded in total darkness. Infrared black-and-white films require special development times but development is usually achieved with standard black-and-white film developers and chemicals (like D-76). Kodak HIE film has a polyester film base that is very stable but extremely easy to scratch, therefore special care must be used in the handling of Kodak HIE throughout the development and printing/scanning process to avoid damage to the film.

As of November 2, 2007, "KODAK is preannouncing the discontinuance" of HIE Infrared 35mm film stating the reasons that, "Demand for these products has been declining significantly in recent years, and it is no longer practical to continue to manufacture given the low volume, the age of the product formulations and the complexity of the processes involved." see notice: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/discontinuedNotice.jhtml?id=0.2.26.14.25&lc=en At the time of this notice, HIE Infrared 135-36 was available at a street price of around $12.00 a roll at US mail order outlets.

Arguably the greatest obstacle to infrared film photography has been the increasing difficulty of obtaining infrared-sensitive film. However despite the discontinuance of HIE, other newer infrared sensitive emulsions from EFKE, ROLLEI, and ILFORD are still available, but these formulations have differing sensitivity and specifications from the venerable KODAK HIE that has been around for at least two decades. Some of these infrared films are available in 120 and larger formats as well as 35mm, which adds flexibility to their application. With the discontinuance of Kodak HIE, Efke's IR820 film has become the only IR film on the market with good sensitivity beyond 750nm, the Rollei film does extend beyind 750nm but IR sensitivity falls of very rapidly.