B+W overused here?

^^
I agree. But maybe because the B&W shots were done with a digital camera, and thus not having the tonality of a true black and white. Maybe.
 
we may see the world in colour but we don't necessarily think or feel in colour. B&W cuts to the chase in this regard by distilling scenes down into their elements. B&W is not always easier to do well. I think this is based on the notion that B&W adds 'mystique' but once images start getting good and the eye sharp, the instant 'B&W effect' has long since lost mileage.

I enjoy looking at both, but generally prefer mono and shoot 99% mono myself because it comes much closer to what I want to get out of looking at images, whether my own or other peoples. Colour can be too literally descriptive. I say 'can', because it is not always so.
 
hawkeye said:
"Color works when it is an element of the composition as you have excellently shown in these two photos. Otherwise color is just a distraction."

Rayt

Precisely right and following on this logic I would propose that it applies to BW as well. I feel that too many shooters use BW as a distraction. I see many photos that are BW and the only thing they have going for them is that they are in BW and therefore they are "serious" and perhaps "art."

BW and color are tools the photographer uses to create images and neither insures that the image will be any good.

It is the eye of the photographer (and the heart) that matters. Not whether you are shooting in BW or color or digitally or in film or with a 50mm Summicron or an Argus C3.

Hawkeye
Click to expand...
I totally agree!, and I think one of the things that prompted my OP was the fact that viewing a black and white, or - ( dare I say it! ) an often grey and white picture on these screens, is a very different thing to looking at a well made print. I was brought up on, and used untill their demise - the likes of 'Portriga', 'Brovira', 'Record Rapid', 'Gallery' etc. - hands up if you've even seen any, let alone used it! and I think this has spoiled me, because quick and convenient though it is - modern, ' plastic' multi-grade paper just does not compare!. Another thing that prompted my thoughts, was the recent aquisition of a book of 'Autochrome' pictures, from early in the last century - absolutely amazing!.....if only I could.......:(
Cheers Dave.
 
I will gladly admit that I overuse B+W. For me it boils down to the fact that I can easily process and print B+W at home for a reasonable price. I dabbled with color a bit but I found the developing/printing process to be too finicky (and expensive) for my taste. B+W will tolerate much more "slop" in the processing department and I'm pretty sloppy when I develop/print so it is a good fit for me. If I had a nice digital camera I am sure my use of color would go from nill to 50% or more.
 
Actually, B&W is much more difficult to do right, which is why you see so little of it that is really good. Getting a good color shot is a piece of cake. Even my wife's digital P&S does a fine job on most things. I shoot nearly everything B&W because I'm a B&W photographer, and 99% of it is w/ Tri-X. No better imagery in my opinion, but you have to know what subjects are suited for it. You can't just shoot any old thing in B&W. Keep in mind we're discussing what is being viewed on someone's computer monitor here. Believe me, a B&W print on fiber paper looks a lot better than that.

Actually, a lot of what I see on the forum, and on nearly every other internet photo site, is beyond description. It seems like someone just went out and randomly fired a shutter at walking people, the backs of people, someone who does not standout at all on a bus, etc. I would like to blame digital for this but a lot of the photos are from film. It's exactly the same in art galleries. Gads, they have some crap in there! Occasionally I see a good piece. Same w/ photography. Only occasionally. Which is just the way it's supposed to be.
 
I shoot B&W when I shoot film, color with digital. The main reason is there is no good high speed color film. As far as color goes, digital outperforms film by miles in my opinion.

Another reason for me to shoot b&w is that I can push the film as much as I need to, or use different developers depending on how I want the neg to look. Also, I've had bad luck locally with developing c41, and no options for e6.
 
Steve M. said:
Actually, B&W is much more difficult to do right, which is why you see so little of it that is really good. Getting a good color shot is a piece of cake. Even my wife's digital P&S does a fine job on most things. I shoot nearly everything B&W because I'm a B&W photographer, and 99% of it is w/ Tri-X. No better imagery in my opinion, but you have to know what subjects are suited for it. You can't just shoot any old thing in B&W. Keep in mind we're discussing what is being viewed on someone's computer monitor here. Believe me, a B&W print on fiber paper looks a lot better than that.

Actually, a lot of what I see on the forum, and on nearly every other internet photo site, is beyond description. It seems like someone just went out and randomly fired a shutter at walking people, the backs of people, someone who does not standout at all on a bus, etc. I would like to blame digital for this but a lot of the photos are from film. It's exactly the same in art galleries. Gads, they have some crap in there! Occasionally I see a good piece. Same w/ photography. Only occasionally. Which is just the way it's supposed to be.
Click to expand...
At last!....a man after my own heart! - join me for a beer, Steve!:D
 
I like both color and B+W pretty much equally. I go through stages where I use color film, then ones where I use B+W, like I believe one of the posters from above has said. I guess it's more what I'm in the mood for at the time.

I think that B+W may be more prevalent because it's a film that's not easily duplicated in the digital realm ( not yet, anyhow ).

At least for me, color is more challenging, because of the added dimension of color thrown into the mix that I'm forced to deal with.

JP
 
[FONT=&quot]For me , developing your own film is part of the fun in practicing the hobby of photography. A fascination with the nature of the medium keeps me hooked. De-saturating color film or digital files after the fact, not so fascinating.[/FONT]
 
Dave Wilkinson said:
At last!....a man after my own heart! - join me for a beer, Steve!:D
Click to expand...

Hmmm, although I tend to think debates which posit some sort of intrinsic nature to a medium of communication are pointless, I gotta say I disagree with the "taking a good pic in color is easier than b/w" premise.

B&W is inherently an abstraction and even carries a fine-art connotation in our culture. You could easily take a color shot...a technically perfect one...of, say, peeling paint, and it'd just be a picture of peeling paint. Do a technically perfect B&W 8x10 of the same scene, and suddenly it's been transformed...even if it's not terribly interesting to many/most people, it'll still garner comments based on the sheer aesthetic experience conveyed by the b/w rendering.

IMHO, of course.
 
I'm partially colorblind and still shoot color depending on my mood or the subject matter. However, I gave up color correcting in college years ago (I warned my painting profs as well). Shooting digital makes it easier for color, but when shooting film I'll either revert to B/W or pay for the scans - esp if shooting portraits.
 
It's an interesting thread. When you look at the work of, say, Eliot Porter, I believe that you see photographs where image and color live together happily. A rare thing. Today I went to the exhibit of photographs at the Sonoma County Fair, and I remarked to my wife that in almost all the color shots the color was the star of the show. And so, very little seemed compelling to me. Of course, that was a totally subjective call on my part. But quite apart from all that, there is, clearly (to me at least), an apples and oranges part to the whole question, and not just because of the obvious. Ansel worked a bit in color, created some interesting color images, and actually tested color film for Kodak. Yet he claimed to have disliked color, and the evidence as to where his power really resided is unquestionable.

Cheers...

Rem
 
when I was taking Gary Winogrand's art photography classes at the Univrsity of Texas, one day he told our photo class , "You see a photograph in color. You see the soul of a photograph in black and white."
 
I prefer b&w but I use to shoot a far amount of colour when I did E-6 and Cibachrome. It was wonderful stuff and though I will be doing some colour negative work, someone just gave me several boxes of Fuji colour print paper, b&w will always be my first love.

Frankly, I think a good b&w takes more skill than most colour photographs I see and it may be that because colour is so ubiquitous in our everyday lives, we want and need a different way of seeing the common and not so common images that b&w photography brings.
 
I shot exclusively color for many, many years, but am pushing myself to learn to use b&w, including developing film myself. To develop some skills in that department is my current challenge, and that means b&w. And lurking on the film developing threads (where I've learned a lot from mfogiel, charjohncarter, and many other members here). But I'll never leave color completely behind. Sometimes ya just gotta show peaches and pears in their true colors...

3787203915_636e3291df.jpg
 
As I wrote earlier, colour just isn't my thing but something I have done a few times with colour to capitalise on my B&W abilities is represented here L*a*b processed

In these examples, I first did some generic black and white point adjustments then converted to L*a*b mode, swithced off the 'a' and 'b' channels and proceeded to work the image in the 'L' channel as if it were a B&W image. Once Im satisfied, I turn the 'a' and 'b' channels back on and return to RGB. These examples were all Fuji NPC 160

423026714_8bfec14e31.jpg
 
Good photography is good photography. Use the tool you personally prefer, that's all!

I prefer brunettes over blondes, I prefer my Grado headphones over Sennheiser, I prefer working three 12 hour days a week, and I prefer b&w film in my camera instead of color. I like those things for my personal satisfaction, not the satisfaction of anyone else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom