B+W overused here?

Dave Wilkinson

Dave Wilkinson

Veteran
Local time
3:57 PM
Joined
Feb 24, 2007
Messages
2,292
This is by no means criticism, judgement or condemnation! - but lately I have seen many pictures posted here (and elsewhere) in mono, that IMO just cry out for colour. I tend to have mono and colour 'phases', and at the moment have not processed a black and white film for about six months. Maybe next week I will get the urge - and buy a few rolls of HP5 and some ID11 or similar, and over the years I must have sampled nearly every combination.
Then there are those who fervently swear they will not use anything else but b+w - that's fine!, although personally I think they are missing out, and the old adage that "we see the world in colour...etc,etc" does hold some credence to me. Also there are those for whom mono is 'ART' and what proper photographers use! - regardless! - but as I said, many times I see these, and feel like asking the poster for a colour version. No doubt about it, a good mono print is a thing of beauty, but these days colour recording mediums, and facilities for display are so good, it seems a shame to ignore them. Finally - I know this subject, and variations, has been 'done to death', but just a few of my morning musings!, this retirement game gives plenty of time for reflection!......think I'll take a stroll with that old FT2 - I think it has a half used roll of Portra in!:)
Cheers, Dave.
 
Color is very difficult to do well. So I think a lot of folks avoid it for that reason. Beyond that, though, this is a forum that attracts people who want to walk in HCB's footsteps. That's not a criticism, just an observation.

I think that will change and you will see more color as more people here move to digital of one sort or another from film.
 
As Pickett says, colour adds something else to consider in the mix.

And apart from that, developing and enlarging B&W is much easier than colour.
 
I think there's something to this. Many people, especially in certain corners of the photographic world, tend to default to B&W almost entirely, if not completely. They often do so without ever having really thought about why they are doing it. This isn't true for everyone, of course, in fact maybe not even most people practicing photography seriously. However, I have met plenty of people who just choose B&W automatically. So many could really benefit from shooting color at least occasionally if not more.

I have tried at length to do color photography. At times it works and it works beautifully, but I seem to have to be in a particular state of mind that I do not find myself in particularly often. Recently I restricted myself to color for one month and it was rewarding, but ultimately it has not changed that b&w just works best for me.
 
Dave

You are a brave man in posting this, especially on RFF. Personally, I see the world in colour but like to keep my options open so I shoot colour in film or digital. That gives me the option of converting to B&W in post processing. It might not be the best solution but it simplifies the amount of gear I have to lug around especially while traveling. There are no B&W answers, pun intended, to which is the correct way to go because it varies so much on an individual basis.

Bob
 
Huh?

Huh?

What is the right amount of colour work? Is there a governing body, or an individual, a Colour Czar? What is the line between "should be colour" and "must be b&w"?

I "see" in greyscale. While I do some colour work and appreciate colour work that I find well done, etc., to frame the question in terms of a modality being "overdone" is close to the edge of absoluteism, IMO. YMMV.
 
When I started photography four years back with a DSLR, I assumed that I would shoot probably about 80 percent color and convert 20 percent to monochrome; a bit arbitrary, but the point being that I viewed color as the predominant medium. Within three months, however, I dropped color altogether. Bascially, I just didn't like working with it, while, unexpectedly, I found considerable enjoyment in manipulating tones for black & white shots. Being partially color blind to green and red likely contributed to my decision.


I do what I enjoy, and I don't worry about limiting myself; never was much of a generalist.
 
Geez ... ya like stickin' your neck out Dave! :p

I have to admit to over use of black and white at times but I'm just not good at colour ... I venture into it at times but seldom get what I'm hoping or striving for .

Except for this image ... but then it turned out nothing like I was expecting!


p333909143.jpg
 
sjones said:
I do what I enjoy, and I don't worry about limiting myself; never was much of a generalist.
Click to expand...
Of course you do - me too! and as I said in the OP no criticism, judgement, or condemnation! just a few personal opinions. No doubt there will be a few who think I'm trying to start another b+w -colour debate....lord forbid!, but if I was like these guys who say "I see in greyscale" - I would seek medical assistance! ;)
Dave.
 
There could be practical reasons for this too. I tend to prefer B&W for three reason, some of which are probably aplicable to a few other people:

1. B&W - easy to develop at home. Color - not.
2. I don't know about others, but I suck at scanning color film. The results are often untrue to a particularr film and I either can't seem to be able to correct them properly or simply can't be arsed.
3. I just like B&W and "walk in HSB's footsteps" :)
 
I prefer B+W for most things, but you are correct when you say that some subjects call out to be done in colour, and in fact, sometimes colour IS the subject.

Cost also plays a role in choosing B+W for me. B+W developing and printing I can do myself.
 
Hello:

I once had a colour period. I mastered Cibachrome after a fashion. Some of the prints still glow in the drawer. I reverted, or regressed, to BW as I realized that colour was easy, in that I made more "acceptable" images than BW images that "worked", but extremely difficult to push beyond pretty.

yours
FPJ
 
I produce images 99.9% in B&W. Its the way I think about and approach my photography. I agree, some shots would certainly work better in colour but I just cant bring myself to do it - Im completely drawn to the tonality of an image. Back to my opening line; I probably shoot about 10~15% of the time in colour (transparencies or negs) and I "always" find myself converting and then I delete the colour scan...

...and one of my favourite quotes "Colour is merely symbolic; the real truth is in luminosity!"
 
I've always preferred B&W for my personal work although for the past few years I've been off on a 15mm tangent, a lot of it tongue in cheek local political commentary featuring a toy monkey named Monkette on my blog http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com and that's been in color.

Lately though, I've revived a yard sale Minolta Autord and started shooting 120 again. I'm shooting 120 B&W. I've also been going back through my old 120 negatives and contact sheets from the 1960's and 1970's, scanning directly off the contacts and posting on my blog along with some text about who, why, where, etc.
 
I don't always have both types of film on me so what do I do? miss the shot if I don't have the right film? I’m a little adverse to converting colour film to B&W, I don't know why.
 
B+W is just so easy to process at home. It's just a great convenience. Also, I've never been greatly satisfied with my color 35mm results. I do like my medium format colors, though. But at $5 a roll for processing I don't do it so often.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom