hamradio
Well-known
When I have darkroom access, I primarily shoot b&w. When I don't, I shoot color.
I did not take it as a "criticism, judgment or condemnation," and if I had, I can assure you that my response would have been far more acidic, which it wasn't at all. However, when people, not just you, point out that I might be limiting myself ("missing out") in some regard (not just in terms of monochrome, but in focal length choice, subject matter, and such), I feel it's fair to answer no, I am simply doing what I enjoy, nothing too provocative about this.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.
and that's all there is to it?? 🙄Tonsl scale = b&w = photography.
Done.
I completely agree! Yet I have only ever marry blondes! Go fig.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.
could be one of the reasons!.....but be carefull! - or you'll end up in the same dungeons as me ! 😱"The world looks worse in BW"
--Paul Simon, Kodachrome.
And from an anonymous photographer.
"If the photo doesn't work print it bigger, if it still doesn't work print it in BW."
Color is harder than BW because it demands that you see and understand the emotional impact of color. I mean there are whole theories of the emotional value of color. Go read Goethe.
Is its difficulty why so many RFF-ers try to make it bad, wrong and stupid?
Hawkeye
Those are paintings. Photography is a different medium than painting. Why not ask why are there so many B&W charcoal drawings?...
But it is interesting that no one has mentioned that there are no great BW paintings? In the history of art 99.9%l of the world"s great art is in color.
What is up with that, huh?
What would the Mona Lisa look like in BW or a BW Sistine Chapel ceiling?
come off it Fred! - that is a list of your local football squad!.....is'nt it?😀
another one that will be joining me in the dungeon! 😱I'm one of those horrible people who actually like to shoot color, even *gasph* mostly digital too. That do not mean I do not like B&W photography, in fact I enjoy it very much. Personally do however see, feel and think in color. It even sort of feels wrong, to attempt to "save" a color shot gone wrong by a quick and dirty conversion. I still do it from time to time tho.
Another reason for dealing primarly with color is the fact that I don't consider myself an artist and I've seen way to many pretentious people claiming to produce "art" just because their images are B&W. The last thing I want to appear as is an arrogant brat. I just want to make pretty pictures that I like 😉
Now, what I'm saying is not ment as critic or an attack at anyone here, just a general observation from art galleries and in particular internet picture sites. I am delighted that some still are diehard B&W film shooters, wielding cameras older than me and I respect their choice and admire their patience and occasionally, skill. Yet, I've still got the feeling that color will never be as accepted as "fine art" as B&W, something that is frankly just friggin' ridicilous.
/Mac
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.
another one that will be joining me in the dungeon! 😱
Firstly, I apologise - my referal to my opening line was not really directed at you, but at those who seem to have the impression that I am anti-mono, and derisive of those who strictly adhere to it. I love black and white, and have shot and processed more than my share in the last fifty years, but try to maintain a 'horses for courses' outlook. I have no set ratio for anything, next week I may buy a few rolls of HP5+ and replenish my chemicals, then after that use colour (digital or film ) for a few weeks. What started as reasonable and inocent personal opinion on the colour or mono merits of a lot of the pictures that I see, and my asking for the views of others, seems - as so often happens here, to have escalated somewhat!.Sorry to come back to the discussion so late... but I don't need to be refered to the first sentence again... I understood that. More specifically, what is your metric of use/overused? I'm curious about how you formulated your personal opinion. Personally, I can generally abide by 75% b+w and the remainder in color.
I don't agree. For me the best colour photography is where colour is an important element of the photograph but at the same time not the subject of the photograph. I would cite William Eggleston's work as an example.I
Since I love the process, I shoot mainly b&w film. But I do all my illustration work in color. It's been said in this thread already, and is probably a truism, but color works best when the subject of the photo is the color itself.
I don't agree. For me the best colour photography is where colour is an important element of the photograph but at the same time not the subject of the photograph. I would cite William Eggleston's work as an example.