D40 B+W RAW Images are Colour in Aperture?

[Kardashian]

After getting my new D40 about 2 days ago - I rushed out snapping things for my art project.

First of all, Aperture failed to recognise any of my images in RAW format, until Aperture and 10.4.8 were updated.

Now, a bunch of pictures I shot in black and white are (for some reason) - In colour?

I know its pretty easy to make them black and white its just the fact that I shot them in black and white for a reason. If I wanted them in colour, I'd have shot them that way. 😕

 

[robbieduncan]

Your camera does not have a B+W sensor. It has a colour sensor. Anything it takes is always in colour. In RAW mode all you get is dump of the RAW sensor data before processing. So before the conversion to B+W or anything else done on camera. If you used the JPEGs then you would get B+W. but you'd be at a lower colour depth with less ability to correct in Aperture.

I'd keep the colour RAW images and do the B+W conversion in Aperture. You'll have more control over the conversion and will be more likely to get the end image you want.

 

[Kardashian]

Your camera does not have a B+W sensor. It has a colour sensor. Anything it takes is always in colour. In RAW mode all you get is dump of the RAW sensor data before processing. So before the conversion to B+W or anything else done on camera. If you used the JPEGs then you would get B+W. but you'd be at a lower colour depth with less ability to correct in Aperture.

I'd keep the colour RAW images and do the B+W conversion in Aperture. You'll have more control over the conversion and will be more likely to get the end image you want.

Thanks for the quick reply 🙂

So then, why does the camera have the option to shoot black and white, and the images show up on the camera's playback as black and white?

Just seems a bit pointless if the end transfered-result is colour 😕

 

[robbieduncan]

The display on screen is of a pre-processed JPEG (normally downsampled to enable quick display). The camera may even be saving an instruction in the RAW saying that the user asked for B+W and Nikon proprietary tools may be able to read that. But RAW has to be all the data from the sensor to enable the greatest fidelity in post processing. Once you have the B+W conversion exactly the way you want in Aperture you can lift and stamp that into each of the other images.

 

[gr8tfly]

Sounds like you probably don't need to shoot RAW - just set the format to JPEG.

That said, I have to agree with robbieduncan: whether you shoot RAW or JPEG, don't do any special camera effects. Do them in post-processing in Aperture or whatever editing program you like. If you do them in-camera, you are stuck with it. Always shoot in the best quality JPEG or RAW. That way, you always have the most data to work with (RAW preferable to JPEG, as it is loss-less and usually higher bit depth per pixel).

 

[Kardashian]

The display on screen is of a pre-processed JPEG (normally downsampled to enable quick display). The camera may even be saving an instruction in the RAW saying that the user asked for B+W and Nikon proprietary tools may be able to read that. But RAW has to be all the data from the sensor to enable the greatest fidelity in post processing. Once you have the B+W conversion exactly the way you want in Aperture you can lift and stamp that into each of the other images.

Thanks again, your a star! It makes sense now, as I just opened the images using some horrible software Nikon provided - and the images were indeed black and white.

🙂 Thanks

 

[Kardashian]

Sounds like you probably don't need to shoot RAW - just set the format to JPEG.

That said, I have to agree with robbieduncan: whether you shoot RAW or JPEG, don't do any special camera effects. Do them in post-processing in Aperture or whatever editing program you like. If you do them in-camera, you are stuck with it. Always shoot in the best quality JPEG or RAW. That way, you always have the most data to work with (RAW preferable to JPEG, as it is loss-less and usually higher bit depth per pixel).

I've been advised many times to shoot in RAW, as I do a lot of editing in Photoshop.

In that case, I'll shoot standard RAW in future, and do all the editing after transfer.

Thanks Guys!

 

[filmamigo]

The best part about doing your conversion to B&W in Photoshop is the amount of control you have.

The in-camera B&W effect means that your JPEGs are stuck with whatever rendition of tone the camera gave you.

By using Channel Mixer in Photoshop to convert an image to B&W, you can take your colour photo (JPEG or RAW) and play with it as though you were shooting in B&W with an infinite range of lens filters. You can get the darkened skies of a yellow filter, the phorescent skin of a red filter, etc, all by sliding some knobs. Very powerful -- I find digital black & white to offer the ultimate "virtual darkroom" experience.

 

[ChrisA]

Thanks for the quick reply 🙂

So then, why does the camera have the option to shoot black and white, and the images show up on the camera's playback as black and white?

Just seems a bit pointless if the end transfered-result is colour 😕

Think of it this way....

The camera sensor ALWAYS records in RAW format and the image must be converted before you can see it. There are TWO ways to convert RAW images (1) inside the camera and (2) using Aperture or something like Apterure

The controls on your camera ONLY control the RAW converter inside the camera. They have no effect on any other RAW converter you might want to use. The B&W setting on the camera dose NOT turn the sensor into a B&W sensor all it does is control the camera's internal RAW converter

So,.... what you say about B&W also applies to any other camera controls such as white balance and the type of color rendering (vivid or soft)

 

[ChrisA]

Thanks again, your a star! It makes sense now, as I just opened the images using some horrible software Nikon provided - and the images were indeed black and white.

🙂 Thanks

The camera setting are written into the RAW NEF file but the file is still RAW with the settings un-applied. The Nikon software is smart enough to read those setting from the file and apply them exactly as the camera would have applied them. Nikon lets you back the setting out or change them but they are applied by default so you see on-screen what you saw on the back of the camera. This is the strong point of using Nikon's software: Nikon knows how the camer's internal RAW converter works and can duplicate it exactly on the computer. The conversion is very good. But Nikon's user interface is horrible

The aperture designers made a different decision and decided to ignore the recored setting. We can argue with is the better design