B&W Conversion with a Pair of Hue/Saturation Layers

[Glenn_Mitchell@adobeforums.com]

Another favorite technique for converting from color to B&W uses a pair of hue/saturation adjustment layers.

The first adjustment layer, I rename to "Contrast Adjustment Layer" and it is a Hue/Saturation Adjustment Layer with a "Color" blend mode.

The second adjustment layer is placed on top of the first, which I rename to "Desaturation Layer," and the Saturation setting for the Master channel is set to -100.

You can then adjust the contrast in the image by making adjustments to the Hue and Saturation settings in the first adjustment layer (the "Contrast Adjustment Layer").

Comments on the tutorial are welcome!

Here's the URL to "Making a Fine Art B&W Image":

<http://www.thelightsright.com/DigitalDarkroom/Tutorials.htm>

Cheers,

Mitch

--------------------
<http://thelightsright.com>
<http://thelightsrightstudio.com>

[CygnusX1@adobeforums.com]

I believe Russell Brown introduced this technique.

<http://www.russellbrown.com/body.html>

"Seeing in black & white"

[Glenn_Mitchell@adobeforums.com]

This is really wearisome.

Why is it that every time I try to help people with this one technique, up crops this message from someone (Russell?) using a moniker?

I did not learn this technique from Russell Bropwn. I was happily ignorant of his name until I posted my tutorial a couple of months ago. I find his presentations to be so hammy -- reminiscent of Roberto Benini's Academy Award acceptance -- that I do not bother with them. I don't need cornball humor, a la a Mathew Lesko commercial, along with instruction about PS.

This is the only technique I am aware of that someone tries to assert they originated and then label with their own name. It's a BS claim, too!

(1) Russell Brown is not the only smart person around in PS. There are a number of people who spend a lot of time working with PS. Maybe, just maybe, they can discover similar techniques *INDEPENDENTLY*.

(2) Where is the evidence that Russell Brown originated the technique. First tutorial on the Web *OF WHICH YOU ARE AWARE* does naot make one the originator. How do you know that Russell Brown did not read about the technique elsewhere, have someone suggest it at a training session, etc.? You do not!

(3) Does Russell Brown credit others for techniques he describes which predate his tutorials? Not that I have seen. Why not?

I have no problem lauding Russell Brown for his efforts to help people. Although I loathe his schtick, I find him to be well-informed. Certainly, he spends a lot of time, energy, and resources trying to help people. That is worthy of praise. But, guess what!!! He's not the only one who does that.

This reply about Russell Brown is too systematic. Always worded the same. Etc.

Behavior is motivated. People do things for a reason -- like always implying that one particular technique described by Russell Brown was stolen from him *AND* providing no evidence whatsoever for that silly and insulting claim.

Let Russell Brown worry about whether he gets due recognition. In the meantime, suggest to him that he give credit for techniques he describes that predate his tutorials.

Cheers,

Mitch

[JasonSmith@adobeforums.com]

Glenn, maybe read the 'Who Is' section of Russell's site before going on a rant about him.

[John_Vitollo@adobeforums.com]

Russell Brown's technique has been around for at least two years, and he doesn't ask for donations!

[Jeff_Schewe@adobeforums.com]

Russell first demo'ed his technique 2 1/2 years ago at SeyBold SF. Pretty sure HE got it from working with one of the Photoshop engineers who helped him develop it. Perhaps _YOU_ should be more aware of previous art out there before announcing _YOUR_ technique and promoting _YOUR_ web site.

[Glenn_Mitchell@adobeforums.com]

Jason:

I know exactly who he is. Your point? One should not feel free to suggest that he did not originate a technique because this is an Adobe site? I disagree.

I believe I have good reason to be peeved. The gist of the comment is to claim I stole an idea from Russell Brown. This is flatly false!

John:

I have no idea how long the technique has been around. Two years does not make him the originator.

Try to follow this logic . . . Is it possible that Russell Brown learned about the technique by reading a Web log, seeing a message in a discussion forum somewhere, or having an attendee at a conference suggest it? Yes! Hence, you do not know that he was the first person in human history to have the idea of using a pair of Hue/Saturation layers for B&W conversion.

The question of who the originator is for a computer technique is so silly! As I said, I have seen no one except friends of Russell Brown (?!) make such a claim. And they do not hold their icon to the same standard. ;)

At least my description of the technique is not a$$ backwards (too much time on the comedy schtick, not enough on valid analogies), a line of argument you did not address. It also acknowledges that the lower layer (the Contrast Adjustment Layer) could be a Curves or Levels layer rather than a Hue/Saturation layer.

Yes. I ask for *DONATIONS*. So, what? No donation is expected nor required.

I do not get paid by Adobe as a technical evangelist a la Russell Brown. That's his job, as the "Who IS" section of his site makes clear.

I do not charge for my PS actions, tutorials, and other resources like Fred Miranda. Would that make you feel better?

I do not use banner ads like DPReview.com. Maybe you like those? Heck, DPReview uses banner ads and asks for donations.

I provide a Web site that offers a lot of resources and receives more than a half million hits a month and generates a couple GB of traffic. If people choose to donate in order to help pay for the site, how does that diminish my efforts?

I am grateful that some people choose to donate. It indicates they value my efforts and they express their gratitude in a way that makes resources freely available to others.

Cheers,

Mitch

[JasonSmith@adobeforums.com]

"The gist of the comment is to claim I stole an idea from Russell Brown. This is flatly false!"

NOOOOooo, the gist of the claim (as I interpreted it) was that there already was a similar technique out there, if someone was familiar with it - check it out.

Who knows, yours may be better.

Then the page long rants started flowing. Dont get offended so easily.

Sure fire way to get ahead in this industry is to start burning bridges....NOT.

[Glenn_Mitchell@adobeforums.com]

Perhaps you should be a little more fair and reasonable, Jeff.

I have not labeled any technique as "The Patented Glenn Mitchell" technique or claimed that my name should be associated with any technique whatsoever. I have not claimed to be the originator of any single technique! I think it's a silly claim! ;)

Why do I need to do a Web search and see who else might have come up with the same technique *INDEPENDENTLY*?

I believe my tutorial is superior to Russell Brown's. At least I know that film does not sit on top of filters. ;) But the fact that people have his tutorial and mine, his video, my learning gallery, and my action set from whnich to choose is a good thing. They can choose which resources help them the most. ;)

And why are you so preoccupied with this one technique and this one person?

Do you criticize Scott Kelby or Dave Cross or Jack Davis or Jim Divitale or any of several others when they publish a tutorial or article on a technique that others have also previously described? Why not?

Even your own logic indicates *RUSSELL BROWN* was not the originator. It indicates only that he had the idea 2 1/2 years ago. Him and a team of Adobe technical engineers. Do you know that no one else had it earlier? Your evidence, please?

Boy, I must be brilliant then! I discovered the technique independently without a team of engineers. ROFLMAO.

Why are you giving Russell Brown sole credit as originator, BTW? You just said he developed it together with a team of engineers. So, if you are so concerned that credit be fairly atttributed, should it not be Russell Brown et al. (or, in his corny way, Russell Brown and a team of extras). Why do you not credit the engineers you work with.

Did you credit the originators of using the LAB "L" channel for B&W conversion or the PS Channel Mixer for B&W conversion in the workshop tutorial on your site? Maybe you should take your own advice?! :)

As to MY Web site, that's a plain simple fact. It is my site. Your point?

Cheers,

Mitch

[John_Vitollo@adobeforums.com]

Mitch...You have way too much time on your hands!

[Glenn_Mitchell@adobeforums.com]

Jason:

IMHO, the people advancing that claim are hypocrits.

They only advance it for this technique and for Russell Brown.

Jeff Schewe, for example, does not hold himself to the same standard he imposes on me. Russell Brown himself does not hold himself to the same standard his fan club is so loudly demanding.

Why must I look around and see if someone else has ever discussed, published, or used a technique that I discovered with my own work with PS?

I have never seen this comment EXCEPT for Russell Brown and this one technique.

And the gist was that the technique was lifted from Russell Brown. This person has been posting this same message in other forums around the Web. Hence, it's a troll, IMHO.

Notice, it claims Russell Brown is the originator. That's very different from saying that Russell Brown also describes the same technique.

As to looking to advance oneself in the industry, that's something you may value. It's not my motivation. Not even remotely.

I noticed today that I posted this message in the PC discussion groups weeks ago and overlooked the Mac group. So I thought some people would gfind it helpful. instead, I ran into a bunch of uungrateful people.

I make my resources available freely, not to advantage myself, but instead as a form of charity. As Maya Angelou said during her Nobel Prize acceptance, "If you learn, teach. If you receive, give." I have learned a lot from others who have been free with their time and talents, so I was repaying "in kind".

Cheers,

Mitch

[JasonSmith@adobeforums.com]

Glenn, it wasnt that 'you stole the technique', it was 'yeah we already knew about that one'.

!REGARDLESS OF WHO THOUGHT OF IT FIRST!

"the people advancing that claim are hypocrits"

OK, you lost me now, what the hell are you talking about again?

[Glenn_Mitchell@adobeforums.com]

Jason:

No. You are the first to say, 'yeah we already knew about that one'.

If that *WAS* the gist, it was a silly thing to say. So what if *YOU* and others knew about it? Do you suppose, there might be some people who happen up this forum and who have not heard of this technique?

The hypocrisy is telling me that I need to do an exhaustive search of the Web in order to make certain no other human being in history had the same idea previously and discussed it and yet those people who post the comment do not behave that way. Nor does the beneficiary of the comment -- Russell Brown. So, they are doubly hypocritical, IMHO. They do not walk their own talk and they criticize me for a failing they fail to criticize in others.

If the comment had been something like "Russell Brown also has a free tutorial and Quicktime video on the same technique, I would have take no offence at all. ;) I have no problem with Russell Brown getting praise for his tutorials, etc. He is trying to help people, and that is praiseworthy.

A pity there's no much of a charitable attude in this forum.

Today was my first venture here. And my last. I don't own a Mac. No good deed goes unpunished -- at least when you try to help Mac ungracious users, it seems.

Mitch

[Jeff_Schewe@adobeforums.com]

First off, you might wish to get off YOUR high horse and walk on ground. YOU come into an Adobe User to User forum, post a technique to promote YOUR OWN web site and have the unmitigated gaul to be offended when it's pointed out that Russell Brown, an Adobe employee for many years, has previously published a similar technique. Then you go on a rant and vent rampage-which does nothing for YOUR credibility-over the originality of the technique. As to how, when or what regarding Russell's technique, I know about it because after developing it, he sent it to me for comment and I was on stage with he and Greg Gorman when Russell presented it at SeyBold-over 2.5 years ago. And yes, I "think" the engineer may have been Chris Cox, but I'm not sure. I know Russell was trying to come up with something that would demo well and be easier than Channel Mixer-which Chris Cox developed.

As to my jumping on other people who have techniques that may or may not be "borrowed" or "inspired" by others, to my knowledge, none of the individuals have come into this forum claiming authorship and trying to promote their own web site. If they do, I suspect the results will be the same.

You really screwed the pooch bud. . .rather than doing yourself any good, you've pretty much exposed your attitude problems and given any of the readers of this thread a prime example of behavior unbecoming this community. Your best bet at this stage is to fade away and come back with some manners.

[JasonSmith@adobeforums.com]

"No. You are the first to say, 'yeah we already knew about that one'."

NO. I was saying that's what the initial response from Cygnus was.

You interpreted that as being accused of stealing, then went on a book long tirade against anybody trying to talk sense into you.

[Glenn_Mitchell@adobeforums.com]

Oh, please, Jeff.

What does it matter that this is an Adobe site or Russell Brown is an Adobe employee?

This is a site for helping Adobe PS users, not protecting the claim that Russell Brown is the originator or a technique.

Do you credit Russell Brown with originating the technique of using a Lighten layer and a Darken layer for sharpening? No you do not. Yet, there he was before you and your colleagues at Pixel Genius started selling PS automation objects for the technique and authoring tutorials on sharpening that use the technique. Hmm..... Sounds like Russell Brown is the originator of that technique, too, by your logic. Why do you deny him such credit.

You took a simple technique, encapsulated it into a set of automation objects, just to charge $95 for something I will gladly give away. (Just wait until you see the PS action set for sharpening that's coming out in a few days -- everything your automation can do and for free!)

None of what you say, BTW, proves Russell originated the technique whatsoever!

How do you know someone else in the world had the idea first? Maybe they even discussed it in a place that you do not read.

To be "the" originator, he had to be the very first person *AND* nothing you have said conclusively demonstrates he was the first. I accept that he discussed it with you two years ago. So what?! How do you know that someone else did not discuss it with him before, let alone had the idea itself before him?! You don't!

All I have heard from you is defense of a friend!

I have not claimed authorship of any technique. That is an absolutely unfair characterization. Let's get this clear. I leave claims of originator to you and Russell Brown. I claim authorship of tutorials, not origination of techniques.

As to mentioning my site, how else will readers of this forum get to the tutorials? I am not aware that visitors can post PDF files here.

You claim I rant . . . OK, at least I can still follow a simple line of logic. I invite you to try and respond with reason and think through the illogic of your statements. Again, you're being hypocritical, IMHO. I think it is fair to characterize both of your replies as ranting.

Speaking of gaul . . . At least I give away all of my Photoshop knowledge. I don't try to sell it for $95 a throw, like you (and your friends at Pixel Genius).

Cheers,

Mitch

[Ramón_G_Castañeda@adobeforums.com]

The first post was (is) spam that deserved (and deserves) to be deleted.

[JasonSmith@adobeforums.com]

"Comments on the tutorial are welcome!"

Apparently they're not.

where is RR or MO when you need them?

[Ramón_G_Castañeda@adobeforums.com]

[DELETED -- wrong thread]

[Bruce_Fraser@adobeforums.com]

In point of fact, PhotoKit SHARPENER does not use Lighten and Darken layers to do sharpening, in any of the modules.

In our seminars, workshops, and publications, we demonstrate all the techniques that are incorporated in SHARPENER — see, for example,

<http://www.creativepro.com:80/story/feature/20357-2.html>

The value proposition of SHARPENER is the huge amount of empirical research we did to determine what numbers to stick into the various dialog boxes at different parts of the process. If someone would rather build their own sharpening routines, I've told them how to do so. All they need to do is figure out which numbers to use in a given situation.

All the PhotoKit products are available as fully-functional 7-day demos. Anyone who doesn't find them worth the money is encouraged not to buy them—we have no desire to be in the shelfware business.

We've all had the experience of stumbling upon this, that, or the other technique, getting very excited, then finding someone who says, "hey, I've been doing that for the past two years." We generally have the good grace to give credit where it's due.

Everyone who uses Photoshop owes Russell Brown a significant debt of gratitude. He's had far more influence over the evolution of Photoshop than he would ever claim, and unlike you he isn't an ill-informed wannabe with a bad attitude who attempts to use this forum for self-promotion... I suggest you get used to the fact that when you promote techniques, you'll get people saying, "yeah, Russell Brown showed us that one in 1998," because it'll happen.