The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Ricoh GRDII B&W Query

D

Dawson

Guest
Hi there, just joined the forum after seeing how good this small sensor section is... I just hope I'm not going to embarrass myself by asking a question that might seem a little dumb, a little overly complex, or a bit of both! :)

I used to own a GRD but - very foolishly on both counts - never played with RAW on it and then sold it for a Fuji F20 (A silly move which I quickly regretted once I realised the extra control and thinking time afforded to me by the GRD was a huge plus!), so I have nothing to go on really...

I've read in a couple of places that some people feel the GRD has nicer B&W straight out of the camera and so I was wondering: on the GRDII can I set the camera to RAW+JPG in B&W mode and if so does this mean the LCD shows the scene in B&W, produces a B&W JPG for review and leaves the RAW ready for me to convert to B&W properly later? It might seem a dumb question I know, but I just wanted to check before I part with my hard earned on either the GRD or the II! Thanks! :)
 

Terry

New member
Actually, I haven't shot my GRD II for a while and just grabbed it. I have it set to RAW but then you can show it on screen in B&W and it does not shoot a jpeg with it. Saves space but you then saw it in B&W and it uploads in color.
 
D

Dawson

Guest
Thanks for checking that out for me! So basically there's no RAW+JPG but the embedded thumb in the RAW which you can view on the screen is B&W, and the RAW is in colour as usual.
Just to check also, while you're shooting this way is the LCD's live view in B&W?
 

johnastovall

Deceased, but remembered fondly here...
I shot my GR-DII in Raw only and then do B&W conversions in Alien Skin's Exposure plugin for CS3. I just never bother with in-camera JPEG of any sort as I want to get the look I want not what the camera firmware wants.
 

Terry

New member
Thanks for checking that out for me! So basically there's no RAW+JPG but the embedded thumb in the RAW which you can view on the screen is B&W, and the RAW is in colour as usual.
Just to check also, while you're shooting this way is the LCD's live view in B&W?
Yes, the live view is B&W. I actually prefer the way Ricoh handles it over my Panny/Leica small cameras because I don't have to deal with the jpeg.
 
D

Dawson

Guest
Great, thanks again for checking it all out for me... Looks like there's no excuse to not buy the GRDII now then!

John, I have AS Exposure and was thinking about doing the exact same as you; I've seen on their forums mention of this and of dialling down contrast slightly in ACR to make Exposure work even better. It's good to know that kind of workflow... works - I can't wait to try the look of HP5 with the "grain" of the Ricoh!
 
V

VladimirV

Guest
I have it set to RAW but then you can show it on screen in B&W and it does not shoot a jpeg with it. Saves space but you then saw it in B&W and it uploads in color.
This is wrong, the Ricoh cameras all shoot JPG+RAW since they need the JPG for review on screen. If you set the camera to b&w, the screen display is in b&w and the JPG but the RAW contains all the information. You can not disable the JPG when shooting RAW but can set the size so could create only a 640 pixel JPG so this will be a very low resolution image for review on screen but take less space.

I am one of the people who believe the GRD I b&w JPGs are superior to the GRD II JPGs or even RAW files. I've made some comparisons between both GRDs in b&w here:

http://ricohgrdiary.wordpress.com/comparisons/
 

Lili

New member
My GRD firtst gen does both at once, no choice when set to do RAW to disable jpeg.
I REALLY like the in-camera B&W jpeg, one major reason I've not upgraded to the GRDII
 
D

Dawson

Guest
I had had a quick look at some of your shots before Vladimir but I just took a proper look at your blog and it does strike me that both the GRDII jpegs and especially the RAW files look a lot more noisy, even though I guess some of that might be attributed to the RAW file especially being a bit more sharp?

It's certainly a contentious point this B&W! The more I look at the images the more I seem to agree though, the GRD files do look a lot cleaner out of the camera, perhaps the result of them upping the MP in the GRDII?

Now I'm flipflopping! The GRD is now looking like the more attractive - and less expensive - option, plus with the extra money I save I could buy the GT-1 as well...

At the risk of sounding cheeky, does anyone have/know where I could download a full size GRD jpeg, GRDII jpeg and GRDII RAW file so I could have a closer - but not pixel peeping! - look at them? I remember GRD RAW times to be really slow, has this changed with firmware updates at all?

Thanks for all your help so far!
 
V

VladimirV

Guest
I had had a quick look at some of your shots before Vladimir but I just took a proper look at your blog and it does strike me that both the GRDII jpegs and especially the RAW files look a lot more noisy, even though I guess some of that might be attributed to the RAW file especially being a bit more sharp?

It's certainly a contentious point this B&W! The more I look at the images the more I seem to agree though, the GRD files do look a lot cleaner out of the camera, perhaps the result of them upping the MP in the GRDII?

Now I'm flipflopping! The GRD is now looking like the more attractive - and less expensive - option, plus with the extra money I save I could buy the GT-1 as well...

At the risk of sounding cheeky, does anyone have/know where I could download a full size GRD jpeg, GRDII jpeg and GRDII RAW file so I could have a closer - but not pixel peeping! - look at them? I remember GRD RAW times to be really slow, has this changed with firmware updates at all?

Thanks for all your help so far!
The GRD I JPGs have a diferent noise pattern and look more pleasing. The GRD II RAW files contain slightly more details and the dynamic range is higher but you do have more noise and the noise is more difficult to remove. Overall you have to slightly overexpose the GRD II for best results but doing so with the GRD I will again give better results. The sharpness is almost identical and although Sean Reid in his review and other users like Mitch Alland prefer the GRD II I still think the GRD I has superior image quality and the JPGs are also better than the RAW files from the GRD II (or any other small sensor camera for that matter).

If you want to shoot mainly in b&w and can still find a GRD I just go for it and get the 40mm or 21mm adapter for the money you save. Callumet still have 2 new GRD I in store in London and you can oder them also online for 250 GBP.

I will have a look since the original link on the page does not work anymore and re-upload the comparison pictures I took.

If you want to shoot RAW, the GRD I is still as slow as it has been before but when the JPGs are as good and you can push them as much there really is no need for RAW. In my experience, you can at most get slightly more details and dynamic range from the RAWs compared to the JPGs of the GRD I so it's pointless to shoot RAW. If the GRD II JPGs would be as good as the GRD I it would save me from having to waste my time processing RAW file altogether.
 
D

Dawson

Guest
Thanks Vladimir, it's interesting to note that you think the GRDI jpegs are pretty much as good as the GRDI RAW files anyway... For all this hoohah over RAW I only ever shoot JPEG on my 20D and have never really worked with RAW save on the 5D I use at work. I always shoot 1/3rd of a stop under on the 20D so highlights don't blow out so much, so I could probably do a similar thing with the GRD and just work with jpegs.

It's great to have someone with experience and knowledge with both cameras instead of pixelpeeping and trying to work out which might be "better" from specs etc!

I hadn't noticed Calumet on eBay with their new GRDs, thanks for that. Looks like I'll be getting one of those or, if I can find one at a nice price, a good 2nd hand one then!
 
V

VladimirV

Guest
Sorry for my late reply, could not find the files but have uploaded them now under: https://dl.getdropbox.com/u/289725/GRDvsGRD2.rar

Thanks Vladimir, it's interesting to note that you think the GRDI jpegs are pretty much as good as the GRDI RAW files anyway... For all this hoohah over RAW I only ever shoot JPEG on my 20D and have never really worked with RAW save on the 5D I use at work. I always shoot 1/3rd of a stop under on the 20D so highlights don't blow out so much, so I could probably do a similar thing with the GRD and just work with jpegs.
The JPGs are prefect and you can push them a lot so for me there is no reason for RAW. You'll see this in the files I provided.
On the GRD I would always recommend to slightly overexpose when using high ISO (over 400) or in low light, this will give you nicer grainlike noise and also sharper pictures.

It's great to have someone with experience and knowledge with both cameras instead of pixelpeeping and trying to work out which might be "better" from specs etc!

I hadn't noticed Calumet on eBay with their new GRDs, thanks for that. Looks like I'll be getting one of those or, if I can find one at a nice price, a good 2nd hand one then!
Pixelpeeping is difficult and the GRD II would probably win but the GRD I has character and better grain/noise IMO.

Good luck, hope you can find a GRD I at a good price.
 

Lili

New member
The JPGs are prefect and you can push them a lot so for me there is no reason for RAW. You'll see this in the files I provided.
On the GRD I would always recommend to slightly overexpose when using high ISO (over 400) or in low light, this will give you nicer grainlike noise and also sharper pictures.
Slight overexposure will tend to reduce Sahadow noise but then do you not risk burning out your highlights?
 
W

wbrandsma

Guest
Yes, you do Lili. I think it comes down to making choices. It all depends on your subject. If you photograph people for instance and you underexpose, you need to brighten the skin tones. That will unfortunately result in more noise and the loss of details. So expose for your subject.
 
V

VladimirV

Guest
Slight overexposure will tend to reduce Sahadow noise but then do you not risk burning out your highlights?

You can compensate for this by using the Contrast setting at -2 for the JPGs.
 

Lili

New member
Yes, you do Lili. I think it comes down to making choices. It all depends on your subject. If you photograph people for instance and you underexpose, you need to brighten the skin tones. That will unfortunately result in more noise and the loss of details. So expose for your subject.
Ooops, Wouter, I missed this.
Agreed completely
 

Will

New member
Just read that very interesting piece and it seems to agree with what I thought Lilly was saying. One of us must me misunderstanding her.
 

Lili

New member
Simon, I was trying to interpret Vladimir's advice about High ISO work in the GRD.
He seems to be saying that it works best to overexpose a touch to keep the shadow noise down and pull the contrast down enough to save your highlights.
At its simplest, as I understand it, the Zone System is all about exposing for the shadows then pullling developement enough to save the highlights- in effect lowering contrast.

I will give it a try.

Will, as I read that article I *think* its saying the same thing...
 
Top