Mistake shot turned okay?

[jrigdon112]

First night or two with my first DSLR and I grabbed this shot of my son. It ended up with the WORST coloring due to playing on auto. But I grabbed the raw file and changed it to b&w in PSE. How's my b&w conversion specifically? I think it ended up saving the picture. This morning I threw it into picnik (at work and didn't have access to PSE) to take out the double glare in his eyes due to a couple lights that were on behind me.
Any tips for adding dimension/etc to b&w conversions? And then of course, how's the shot in general? I know it crops the top of his head a bit (this has no cropping done) but I think it works?!?!

Thanks!



Exposure 0.3
Aperture f/5.6
Focal Length 55 mm
ISO Speed 800
Excuse the fact it was taken on auto

[zona5101]

Cute shot.
Your grays are all bunched up. You need a bit more contrast perhaps even try a different method of conversion. Look at the tone of the eye versus the adjacent skin, there's hardly any tonal difference. Similar issues with the white stripe on his shirt. It general it needs a more pop and separation.

[dinesh6481]

yeah some more contrast so that vitals stand out. its easy in color photos but quite a clever trick in B&W. or another option would have been to reduce the saturation to a great bit instead of completely taken off the colors.nice shot cute baby...

[tlake55]

Very cute! I actually like the crop; however, the background makes the photo seem crooked to me..it's a little distracting. I also agree with the posts above, needs more contrast/pop. And you don't have to apologize for using auto...nobody will look at your pics and say "that would be a great photo, if you hadn't taken it in auto mode"

[jrigdon112]

Originally Posted by tlake55

the background makes the photo seem crooked to me..it's a little distracting. I also agree with the posts above, needs more contrast/pop. And you don't have to apologize for using auto...nobody will look at your pics and say "that would be a great photo, if you hadn't taken it in auto mode"

I hadn't noticed the background until you said something... hmm I think he must have been standing a little wonky that it made the windows look sideways. I agree with more contrast/pop... maybe this edit looks better? And thanks for the auto mode thing, I feel like sometimes people are like, "well your first problem is that you took the shot in auto..."

Originally Posted by dinesh6481

yeah some more contrast so that vitals stand out. its easy in color photos but quite a clever trick in B&W. or another option would have been to reduce the saturation to a great bit instead of completely taken off the colors.nice shot cute baby...

So I tried reducing the saturation and adding some more contrast, does this help at all?

Originally Posted by zona5101

Cute shot.
Your grays are all bunched up. You need a bit more contrast perhaps even try a different method of conversion. Look at the tone of the eye versus the adjacent skin, there's hardly any tonal difference. Similar issues with the white stripe on his shirt. It general it needs a more pop and separation.

So I tried reducing the saturation rather than using an action. I think the action washed him out a bit much. What do you think of this. I think the eyes looks a bit more pronounced now.

And thanks everyone for the sweet comments of my little guy!

[zona5101]

the updated one is better...and I am sure with a bit more time learning cconversions you can improve it more. It's still a little gray. Imagine what this shot would look like it shot on B&W film and printed, it would have more blacks and more whites and greater scale of grays. That's what you're trying to get to...and I know I struggle getting it 'perfect' myself - so keep at it!

[EmyB]

I agree it looks crooked due to the ?window frame. The second edit is better but I think it would benefit from more contrast still - why did you "desaturate"? I thought it would be better to "saturate" to bring out the range? No? I'm learning myself.

But I am really wondering - why is the right side of his head seethrough?? Is that the lights behind him that can be seen??

[Naala]

I think the second one works so much better, the eyes on the first one were scary, they stood up too much.

[jrigdon112]

Originally Posted by zona5101

the updated one is better...and I am sure with a bit more time learning cconversions you can improve it more. It's still a little gray. Imagine what this shot would look like it shot on B&W film and printed, it would have more blacks and more whites and greater scale of grays. That's what you're trying to get to...and I know I struggle getting it 'perfect' myself - so keep at it!

Ya I'm still working on getting my whites and blacks more pronounced than my grays!

Originally Posted by EmyB

I agree it looks crooked due to the ?window frame. The second edit is better but I think it would benefit from more contrast still - why did you "desaturate"? I thought it would be better to "saturate" to bring out the range? No? I'm learning myself.

But I am really wondering - why is the right side of his head seethrough?? Is that the lights behind him that can be seen??

Not sure how I managed to get his head to look see through. It's from the lights that are behind him. I desaturated it because someone suggested I try that to get a bit more contrast in my blacks and whites. I was just trying. What method do you use to turn a photo b&w?

Originally Posted by Naala

I think the second one works so much better, the eyes on the first one were scary, they stood up too much.

Thanks!

[Elmo]

Try this: reload your raw image in DPP ( converts raw to jpeg, it came with your camera) As you said the colors were off, adjust the color balance in DPP. Then correct for any exposure errors using DPP. Then adjust the white and black points using DPP. You can now adjust contrast and saturation in DPP it works much better here when you have all the sensor data available. Save this corrected image as a jpeg and reload it into your image editing software and do the conversion and other adjustment as required. I do not save the corrected raw as I may later find something in the raw processing that works better.

The key is to correct as much as possible while you have all the raw data available.