Modern Black and White Aesthetic

[Larry Cloetta]

I love a Photo that moves me, pulls me in
Gets me thinking, stirs my emotions

Does not matter whether it’s ‘punchy’ , a full tonal spectrum of greys, or lots of rich inky blacks
😉

Helen,
I’d personally agree that this is the bottom line with regard to “styles”.
Digital does seem to have moved the needle towards normalizing photos that are generally overly contrasty, and overly saturated, if compared to reality, and I don’t know if younger people have or have not adopted that style when they moved to film work. It’s certainly possible, and probably not just younger people. Dunno.

But...... the larger point to keep in mind is the reality behind your comment. Different subjects cry out for different processing, a different “style”, a different esthetic, in order to be fully realized. We have Yousef Karsh’s style as used to photograph Churchill and, on the other hand, we have Daido Moriyama’s dog. Both are, I would hope most would agree, undeniably good photographs. The subject is served by the style. In a perfect world the subject should dictate the style, instead of trying to shoehorn every subject into a single style, or tonal esthetic. Karsh’s style used on Moriyama’s dog would be instantly forgettable, and Moriyama’s style used on Churchill would be less than optimal at realizing the effect that Karsh was able to create.

If young film photographers are indeed doing nothing but over sharpening photos which are over saturated and overly contrasty, that would be a shame, since not every subject is best served by that esthetic, just as every subject is not best served by the Zone system and long tonal range.

In the final analysis, it’s the “does it move you” bit that matters, as Helen says, not whether it has, or doesn’t have, shadow detail. For some subjects, crushing the blacks is the best way to emotionally represent, or better, to “present” a scene. A single way of processing all one’s images is going to mean that subjects are optimally realized and depicted only part of the time. (With the caveat that if one limits one’s subject matter to a single basic type of subject, as Karsh or Salgado do, then a single style is in fact, the best way forward. Plus, it’s the easiest way to do photography, once one settles on a technique, as long as one realizes that once that hammer is acquired, not everything is a nail, and limits their subject matter accordingly.)

But, in the final analysis, wonderful photos come in all kinds of kinds.

 

[Godfrey]

I feel no need to criticize whatever aesthetic someone else likes or enjoys.

I can only know what satisfies me, at some given point, for some given intent, and that's what I try to produce. And when viewing other people's work, I look for what I like at that point, and what I might divine out of it.

A punchy, grainy, contrasty look ... works well for some things, some moments, some photographs. A smooth, "perfect" tonal scale with high detail and grainless acutance works well for others. I can easily point to examples of both in my own work ... and regardless whether the capture medium was film or digital.

It seems wrong to me to say "the kids today don't understand, they're missing what I loved." The photographs they are making are their photographs, not mine, and they should make them as their heart and eye intend. They might not always be what I like, but then neither were the photographs that others of my contemporaries (or even my own!) always what I liked, looking at them now.

Make your photographs the way you like and show them, share them. If they provide the thrill to other photographer, younger photographers, that you feel they do, those others will emulate them. Don't go telling those folks that their capture medium is wrong or deficient, or that you dislike their expression, because then they won't listen to you.

G

 

[Out to Lunch]

wonderful photos come in all kinds of kinds

Amen to that.

 

[Michael Markey]

I love a Photo that moves me, pulls me in
Gets me thinking, stirs my emotions

Does not matter whether it’s ‘punchy’ , a full tonal spectrum of greys, or lots of rich inky blacks
😉

I`m the same Helen .
It`s content for me first and foremost.
Unless the tonal range is really off like HDR I don`t mind but …..
I do like the work of Henry Wessel and I like John`s work ,I just have no desire to reproduce that look in my own work .

I have two rolls of film to develop at the moment.
Ilford has another roll of mine but they are on lock down ,hence the home developing.

I`ve had to re purchase beakers and tanks …. and quite frankly I`ll take what ever comes out of the process .
Just hope the content is worth it that`s all .

 

[John Bragg]

I`m the same Helen .
It`s content for me first and foremost.
Unless the tonal range is really off like HDR I don`t mind but …..
I do like the work of Henry Wessel and I like John`s work ,I just have no desire to reproduce that look in my own work .

I have two rolls of film to develop at the moment.
Ilford has another roll of mine but they are on lock down ,hence the home developing.

I`ve had to re purchase beakers and tanks …. and quite frankly I`ll take what ever comes out of the process .
Just hope the content is worth it that`s all .

I'm sure there will be good shots to enjoy Michael. I like your film output, espescially the moody stuff like the Lancaster shots.

 

[jsrockit]

It all depends on what style you choose to do and what you are trying to accomplish. There are no right or wrongs in photography if the images work. I like both high and low contrast images... but it has to fit the image.

To the OP... why would you care what others are doing? If you don’t like that look, purposely do the opposite and make it work for you.

As far as losing the capabilities and knowledge of the past, I think that is a bit too much. Developing film to be low or mid contrast is not that hard. I mean honestly you can just start at base ASA and stock development times.

 

[John Bragg]

It all depends on what style you choose to do and what you are trying to accomplish. There are no right or wrongs in photography if the images work. I like both high and low contrast images... but it has to fit the image.

To the OP... why would you care what others are doing? If you don’t like that look, purposely do the opposite and make it work for you.

As far as loosing the capabilities and knowledge of the past, I think that is a bit too much. Developing film to be low or mid contrast is not that hard. I mean honestly you can just start at base ASA and stock development times.

The opening post was intended to promote healthy discussion on the current fashion and trends. At no point did I take issue with your right or anyone elses right to do things your way. I celebrate that right as you do. Thanks for your input.

 

[LCSmith]

Needs context for style, subject matter and season.

I suspect the majority of 'soot and whitewash' photos you're complaining about are street style images. To get the f8/f11 and 1/250s+ shutter speed you're going to have to push, mostly when overcast or during the winter.

Yes. Lazy photography which results in a uniform aesthetic among lazy photographers, which results in pictures that are uniformly mediocre and ugly. With a little practice judging distances you do not need f8 or f11, even with a 50mm lens, to get what you want in focus. I know people who can catch the fly with f/3.5 on their Rolleiflex. Practice.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

My honest and brutal opinion - OP thinks he is kind of mentor on how film scans should looks like on Flickr 🙂
Meanwhile....
It was one of RFF mentors who knew photography since using his Graflex at school and who told us here how well known street photogs were pushing Tri-X @1000.
Well before any digital. Tri-X @1000 during the day. In seventies. For obvious and practical reason.

 

[Vince Lupo]

Dunno, I look at the work of Bill Brandt, for example, some would definitely characterize his work as 'soot and whitewash' (Ansel Adams may have even been referring to him when he used the term), so nothing really new. Maybe a lot of today's photographers who are working that way think they are in fact doing something new? Or maybe Bill just executed it a heck of a lot better?

 

[helen.HH]

Drool, sigh, heart skips a beat... Yum to Bill Brandt

 

[LCSmith]

Obviously there's nothing wrong with pushing film or with stopping action or with a contrasty aesthetic so long as it is done well and with intention and reason.

But it is mostly not done with intention and reason. It is mostly done out of mediocrity.

 

[Michael Markey]

I envy folk who can get the look that they`re after
Right now these two rolls of HP5 are looking at me saying …. do you feel lucky punk 🙂

 

[John Bragg]

My honest and brutal opinion - OP thinks he is kind of mentor on how film scans should looks like on Flickr 🙂
Meanwhile....
It was one of RFF mentors who knew photography since using his Graflex at school and who told us here how well known street photogs were pushing Tri-X @1000.
Well before any digital. Tri-X @1000 during the day. In seventies. For obvious and practical reason.

I do not class myself as any sort of mentor. Merely trying to stimulate some thought and healthy discussion. I will always do so in a polite manner. I am not trying to promote my personal aesthetic and have very deliberately not posted a single image on this thread. I respect your right to an opinion about me, even if you don't know me beyond this forum.
Kind regards, John.

 

[retinax]

What irks me much more is presenting flat scans without real whites or blacks as finished pictures because "that's the unaltered original" or "film looks like that".

 

[jsrockit]

Obviously there's nothing wrong with pushing film or with stopping action or with a contrasty aesthetic so long as it is done well and with intention and reason.

But it is mostly not done with intention and reason. It is mostly done out of mediocrity.

Aren’t you describing photography as a whole though? Or anything in the world that takes skill really?

 

[helen.HH]

To the OP , John

Excellent thread
Gets us out of catatonic ‘pandemic’ mode
Using some heart and brain muscles
Thank You

 

[Vince Lupo]

Drool, sigh, heart skips a beat... Yum to Bill Brandt

I have his 'Portraits' book, and many of the images definitely fall into that 'soot and whitewash' category.

Funny but at the very beginning of the book there is a note: "Bill Brandt has personally supervised the reproduction of his prints, and has given his full approval to the final appearance of the pictures in the book."

I guess just in case someone thought that the printer made a mistake 🙂

 

[jsrockit]

I have his 'Portraits' book, and many of the images definitely fall into that 'soot and whitewash' category.

Funny but at the very beginning of the book there is a note: "Bill Brandt has personally supervised the reproduction of his prints, and has given his full approval to the final appearance of the pictures in the book."

I guess just in case someone thought that the printer made a mistake 🙂

That’s awesome. 🙂

 

[LCSmith]

Aren’t you describing photography as a whole though? Or anything in the world that takes skill really?

I think that's fair.