nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
Both...
Color for most of the events I shoot...church, kid's high school stuff, family and anything else where people expect color...
B&W for the stuff I want to do...
I started in B&W and had to learn to shoot color (that is shoot color better)
The first time I did color back in high school the results were boring and dull...
The reason was...I wasn't used to looking for color, I was so used to shooting in B&W that my first rolls of color would have been better in B&W...after that I started looking for colors...
After years of just shooting color I decided I needed to get back to basics and head on back to B&W...
For now I shoot both and have no problem switching back and forth...
Color for most of the events I shoot...church, kid's high school stuff, family and anything else where people expect color...
B&W for the stuff I want to do...
I started in B&W and had to learn to shoot color (that is shoot color better)
The first time I did color back in high school the results were boring and dull...
The reason was...I wasn't used to looking for color, I was so used to shooting in B&W that my first rolls of color would have been better in B&W...after that I started looking for colors...
After years of just shooting color I decided I needed to get back to basics and head on back to B&W...
For now I shoot both and have no problem switching back and forth...
Bnack
Established
it's funny... I think most "friends" who see my photography much prefer my color photos. They tend to be bright, and a little more light hearted. Somehow... when I shoot black and while I conjure up a more reserved, somber... darker side. I often prefer the latter.
craygc
Well-known
This sort of question always elicits comments about, I see in colour, therefore I shoot in it. I guess nothing wrong in the view but there are many other dimensions you see in that you cant shoot - dynamic range, tonal response, 3D, actual vs recorded colours, etc - so as a statement it really becomes a through away line, similar to the type, if you're not with us you're against us!. Colour or B&W photography, both offer a degree of abstraction from reality.
Nothing scientific, but from casual observation, I notice that those who regularly mix colour and B&W, or only occasionally do B&W tend to often miss what makes a good B&W image. Consistent B&W takes practice as it initially presents a level of abstraction (absence of colour) that isn't always easy to see through. The practice makes perfect approach... This doesn't mean that colour images are all good but for many, its easier to get an initial sense of whether or not it can work.
I dont even really buy the argument, because its cheaper than colour when it comes to hobbyists. B&W vs colour is like oils vs water colours. They are fundamentally different media with vastly different characteristics ...why would you photograph in B&W if your real love was colour? Seems to be compromising yourself! You can always not photograph at all or even get a digicam
.
Personally, I shoot 99% exclusively in B&W film. I enjoy the results and often simple equipment involved. Whenever I shoot colour film its usually because Im lazy and I always have this compelling urge - which I inevitably succumb to - to convert it to B&W. If you asked me why I have such a strong attraction to the media, I don't think I can really give good definitive answer as to why beyond that I just enjoy it and feel attracted to tonality over colour :bang:
Nothing scientific, but from casual observation, I notice that those who regularly mix colour and B&W, or only occasionally do B&W tend to often miss what makes a good B&W image. Consistent B&W takes practice as it initially presents a level of abstraction (absence of colour) that isn't always easy to see through. The practice makes perfect approach... This doesn't mean that colour images are all good but for many, its easier to get an initial sense of whether or not it can work.
I dont even really buy the argument, because its cheaper than colour when it comes to hobbyists. B&W vs colour is like oils vs water colours. They are fundamentally different media with vastly different characteristics ...why would you photograph in B&W if your real love was colour? Seems to be compromising yourself! You can always not photograph at all or even get a digicam
. Personally, I shoot 99% exclusively in B&W film. I enjoy the results and often simple equipment involved. Whenever I shoot colour film its usually because Im lazy and I always have this compelling urge - which I inevitably succumb to - to convert it to B&W. If you asked me why I have such a strong attraction to the media, I don't think I can really give good definitive answer as to why beyond that I just enjoy it and feel attracted to tonality over colour :bang:
craygc
Well-known
Should try this in Asia. Most (Chinese especially) view B&W as the past and associated with death. Far more than colour, B&W requires a developed appreciation for the media and this often discounts the average person's ability to have a preference for B&W over a colour image
Melvin
Flim Forever!
I like black and white, because it records light. I'm not interested in color, just light.
And it's out of fashion and I like that.
But sometimes I shoot color.
And it's out of fashion and I like that.
But sometimes I shoot color.
Bnack
Established
interesting.... didn't realize there was this particular aversion in Asia. In the states... as long as you take a picture of antique cars, or trains people see B&W in a nostalgic light.
mh2000
Well-known
for the color sighted (like me) b&w is a basic abstraction from the reality as I see it... a way to work in an otherworldly realm that is still rooted in reality... that is why I shoot b&w. Color is what I see... in a boring sense... so I avoid it at nearly all costs (though going to Hawaii or something I have to load up my Stylus Epic for some lush green snapshots).
lawrence
Veteran
Like so many here I keep going back to b&w. The problem with colour is that it's usually too literal to be interesting although there are some masters of colour, such as William Eggleston, who manage to pull it off.
I'm planning to go to India for the first time in January and it's hard to decide between colour and b&w (I find it too complicated to shoot both, as I'm either mentally in one mode or the other). So I took a few rolls of colour the other day just to remind myself what it looks like and somehow they just don't work for me -- too busy, too much information, too much emphasis on the colour itself and not enough on the content. I think if I did shoot colour I'd want to go for a very de-saturated look but I'm not too sure how to achieve it -- maybe spending a few weeks with Photoshop would clarify this.
Converting colour to b&w doesn't work for me either -- it has to be 'real' b&w film. The digital b&w look is far too smooth and the transitions from one tone to another and the sharpness are different from film. And, of course, there's no grain, which to my mind is the 'soul' of the b&w experience. So it looks like the DSLR / colour film will not be on the plane to Delhi in January, this experience to be reseved for my rangefinders and HP5+ / Acros .
I'm planning to go to India for the first time in January and it's hard to decide between colour and b&w (I find it too complicated to shoot both, as I'm either mentally in one mode or the other). So I took a few rolls of colour the other day just to remind myself what it looks like and somehow they just don't work for me -- too busy, too much information, too much emphasis on the colour itself and not enough on the content. I think if I did shoot colour I'd want to go for a very de-saturated look but I'm not too sure how to achieve it -- maybe spending a few weeks with Photoshop would clarify this.
Converting colour to b&w doesn't work for me either -- it has to be 'real' b&w film. The digital b&w look is far too smooth and the transitions from one tone to another and the sharpness are different from film. And, of course, there's no grain, which to my mind is the 'soul' of the b&w experience. So it looks like the DSLR / colour film will not be on the plane to Delhi in January, this experience to be reseved for my rangefinders and HP5+ / Acros .
Last edited:
Roger S
Established
Couldn't agree more, Lawrence. I'll be doing the same on a trip to Australia in January, though I'm sure my wife won't understand why I'm doing it (family is supposed to be photographed in colour, surely??).
myM8yogi
Well-known
Both simultaneously!!!
Seriously. Sometimes I am attracted to a complimentary colour combination and stick exclusively in colour, but my "default" settings for street and portrait photography with my M8 is to have a B&W conversion as the jpg image, and to keep the raw DNG data (a colour file). This way I retain all of the colour information for a very flexible B&W conversion in photoshop later if I need it. Often though, the M8s B&W conversion is pretty much perfect right out of the camera, and I do like having immediate feedback on my B&W images. It makes for a very efficient workflow on location, with great flexibility at the desk afterwards.
I love B&W for portraits (because red marks on the skin, tired bloodshot eys, etc are not noticed by friends reviewing the photos), and for street photography (the extensive use of colour in marketing frequently makes for distracting backgrounds in colour street photography).
On the other hand, I do use colour almost 100% of the time for landscapes. Sometimes I also manipulate images to have slightly "warm" subjects advancing out of a "cold" background to give a three dimensional character to the image. This is a trick that obviously isn't possible with B&W, and it works great on happy child portraits.
I should also say that just because I have a preference for B&W in some applications, that does not mean that I won't add colour later in Photoshop. I frequently play with duotones and tritones. I like to break up a selection of B&Ws from the same event with a few colour tones, and I appreciate that subtle overall immpressions of colour in shadows or highlights can convey a subconscious emotional charge to a print (e.g. blue, red, sepai, gold, green, purple etc.).
I only got my M8 three weeks ago, and before that I shot B&W film almost exclusively in an OM1, and digital in a dSLR. For me, the M8 is the best of both worlds!
Seriously. Sometimes I am attracted to a complimentary colour combination and stick exclusively in colour, but my "default" settings for street and portrait photography with my M8 is to have a B&W conversion as the jpg image, and to keep the raw DNG data (a colour file). This way I retain all of the colour information for a very flexible B&W conversion in photoshop later if I need it. Often though, the M8s B&W conversion is pretty much perfect right out of the camera, and I do like having immediate feedback on my B&W images. It makes for a very efficient workflow on location, with great flexibility at the desk afterwards.
I love B&W for portraits (because red marks on the skin, tired bloodshot eys, etc are not noticed by friends reviewing the photos), and for street photography (the extensive use of colour in marketing frequently makes for distracting backgrounds in colour street photography).
On the other hand, I do use colour almost 100% of the time for landscapes. Sometimes I also manipulate images to have slightly "warm" subjects advancing out of a "cold" background to give a three dimensional character to the image. This is a trick that obviously isn't possible with B&W, and it works great on happy child portraits.
I should also say that just because I have a preference for B&W in some applications, that does not mean that I won't add colour later in Photoshop. I frequently play with duotones and tritones. I like to break up a selection of B&Ws from the same event with a few colour tones, and I appreciate that subtle overall immpressions of colour in shadows or highlights can convey a subconscious emotional charge to a print (e.g. blue, red, sepai, gold, green, purple etc.).
I only got my M8 three weeks ago, and before that I shot B&W film almost exclusively in an OM1, and digital in a dSLR. For me, the M8 is the best of both worlds!
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
lawrence:
Personally if I were to go to India I'd take color film for all those saris, spices, markets, and trains.
But if you decide on the B&W, and I understand why, perhaps you could take a small camera with color film for the family photos. Or give one of the family a simple digital camera to use.
Personally if I were to go to India I'd take color film for all those saris, spices, markets, and trains.
But if you decide on the B&W, and I understand why, perhaps you could take a small camera with color film for the family photos. Or give one of the family a simple digital camera to use.
feenej
Well-known
Bokeh looks a lot better in color to me.
jky
Well-known
Although I enjoy both and agree that some images work better in one or the other, I personally prefer bw. I find working with color more difficult because it's another factor I have to consider when capturing images.... but whatever... they're both fun.
Nh3
Well-known
"Black and white are the colors of photography. To me they symbolize the alternatives of hope and despair to which mankind is forever subjected."
-Robert Frank
-Robert Frank
retnull
Well-known
B+W, because it has such a long tradition, and I think part of making interesting photographs is situating oneself in relation to that tradition.
edge-t
Member
It all depends. There's no real answer, but personal preferences plays a big part when a question like this pops up. For me, there's a time to shoot color--India--for the spices, Saris, Colorful temples...etc. How do you capture spices, red spicy food, beautiful Saris with B&W? It all boils down to the photograph, what works and what doesn't work.
To limit myself to just B&W just doesn't cut it for me--the camera's a tool, so is the film that you choose. Choose the right one for the job.
To limit myself to just B&W just doesn't cut it for me--the camera's a tool, so is the film that you choose. Choose the right one for the job.
ed1k
Well-known
I do B&W because I can afford it and because I like it. I love the media and capabilities it gives me. If I were about capturing reality I would probably shoot movies, or anything that is not as static as a photo. If I were about capturing colours I'd shoot colour film or rather digital; and would have yet another picture of the red pepper which I don't really need. I prefer to have a picture in B&W as good that anyone looking at it would say "hey, that pepper is really red".
Cheers,
Ed
Cheers,
Ed
stefan_dinu
Established
I use 100% film and make both color and BW photographs. And I process all by myself from film to analog printing. BW for family memories and color for serious work. For color I use exclusively slide film. For small and medium format I use both, but for large format I use only BW.
It is really a matter of choice. It depends a great deal on WHY you are taking photographs. My mission with photography now, is to show others what they can see around them if they pay more attention. And for that reason, using BW is not an option, as aren't any photographic tricks that shows you the world different (macro, wide, tele, havy editing, and so on). For this reason I use only 35mm (on 35mm format) which I find closer to human vision, and I shoot 90% in landscape format rather than portrait.
With the risk of upsetting some people around here, I want to say that is far easier to make interesting, catchy photographs in BW. Just because is different for the viewer perspective of the real world. It is easier to follow the composition and to see the structure. It hides also the possible color messiness in the scene.
On the other hand, producing valuable color photographs it is more difficult, since you have another element that you have to take care of. There where numerous occasions when I could not use, or could not take a photograph just because the colors in the scene where a mess.
My gallery (link bellow) shows better what I am talking about. I do pay a lot of attention to color when I press the shutter, and I use the color information to compose the image.
I do prefer BW for familly memories. I have a 8 days son (very happy ) and didn't take any color photographs of him. I think it has something to do with the fact that all my childhood photographs where taken in BW. It is also closer with the ideea of the past, and the memories.
In terms of prints, I love BW prints, and I do a lot of practicing theese days. But the Ilfochrome prints from my slides....oh boy. As Mark Power said to me in a recent workshop: "they are such beatiful objects".
Oh, and another thing. I do tend to appreciate the today photoraphers which work in color.
It is really a matter of choice. It depends a great deal on WHY you are taking photographs. My mission with photography now, is to show others what they can see around them if they pay more attention. And for that reason, using BW is not an option, as aren't any photographic tricks that shows you the world different (macro, wide, tele, havy editing, and so on). For this reason I use only 35mm (on 35mm format) which I find closer to human vision, and I shoot 90% in landscape format rather than portrait.
With the risk of upsetting some people around here, I want to say that is far easier to make interesting, catchy photographs in BW. Just because is different for the viewer perspective of the real world. It is easier to follow the composition and to see the structure. It hides also the possible color messiness in the scene.
On the other hand, producing valuable color photographs it is more difficult, since you have another element that you have to take care of. There where numerous occasions when I could not use, or could not take a photograph just because the colors in the scene where a mess.
My gallery (link bellow) shows better what I am talking about. I do pay a lot of attention to color when I press the shutter, and I use the color information to compose the image.
I do prefer BW for familly memories. I have a 8 days son (very happy
) and didn't take any color photographs of him. I think it has something to do with the fact that all my childhood photographs where taken in BW. It is also closer with the ideea of the past, and the memories. In terms of prints, I love BW prints, and I do a lot of practicing theese days. But the Ilfochrome prints from my slides....oh boy. As Mark Power said to me in a recent workshop: "they are such beatiful objects".
Oh, and another thing. I do tend to appreciate the today photoraphers which work in color.
stefan_dinu
Established
Hey. I don't wanna be the last to post here. It is a rather interesting one. is there anyone else to share anything on this issue?
John Lawrence
Well-known
I shoot both black and white and colour, but find like craygc did in his post that in certain places and with certain people black and white is looked down on. By this I mean elderly relatives (and one in particular) who just can not understand why anyone would shoot black and white - now that colour film is (or should that be was???) readily available. Likewise when I lived in Africa if I ever shot any black and white film the question I was always asked was "could I not afford colour film?".
I do tend to shoot more black and white film though these days and there are many reasons for that, one of which is that I tend to use older lenses and (not surprisingly) find that they don't render colour that well.
There, now you're not the last post!!
I do tend to shoot more black and white film though these days and there are many reasons for that, one of which is that I tend to use older lenses and (not surprisingly) find that they don't render colour that well.
There, now you're not the last post!!