They don't know what B&W portrait is anymore

[shadowfox]

Last weekend I was at my local Costco dropping off a roll of film when I glanced over to my side and a mother and a daughter were reviewing prints.

Those prints were big (13x19 maybe) and they are B&W... well, sort of.

It is (grasping for words here..) *hideously* grey to put it mildly. They must have invoked the magic button that says "Desaturate" and called it a day.

No highlights, no shadow, forget about contrast, tone, and texture. It's spiffy clean, flat, and grey. If it were a picture of a foggy morning over a drab landscape; seen through a bedsheet, that would probably work out great! but not for a portrait of a darling daughter (or *any* daughter for that matter).

Yet they went on reviewing the prints and suffice to say that they were more than okay with the results. My wife (who is usually the first person to see my prints out of the darkroom) couldn't believe it either.

Now, I am not trying to be mean or put anyone down. But I am saddened with the lack of awareness of even the most basic qualities of a decent B&W photograph among those who actually do care about having B&W prints for themselves.

Is there anything *I* could do for them? yes, I could offer to do a proper conversion to B&W, choose a better paper, and Costco (or whoever) can reprint those.

But that's just a drop in a bucket (and what are the odds that they would be open to a stranger (me) with a strange offer).

Can we do better as a community that appreciates B&W? Your thoughts?

 

[jsrockit]

Now, I am not trying to be mean or put anyone down. But I am saddened with the lack of awareness of even the most basic qualities of a decent B&W photograph among those who actually do care about having B&W prints for themselves.

People in general, unless into photography, don't know what they are looking for when they get prints....color or B&W. It's like when you listen to music and you also make music, you hear things a bit differently than the person who just listens to music.

 

[JohnTF]

Costco has their good and bad days, I am not sure how to slant the odds in my favor, but I had some B&W scans printed well one day, maybe the stars were aligned?

I was told they had B&W paper, and that I had a choice to "choose" B&W or have it printed via the color parameters, -- I tend to choose some of each and toss the ones I do not like.

One day, the enlarged printer was putting out all prints tinted green, and no it was not St. Patrick's day.

The scary thing was they were already a reprint job I had returned for, and they put them in an envelope for the client (me) to pick up as if it was all normal, store was 45 minutes closed when I was escorted out with decent prints, they never told me what caused the problem, it was not the paper, they changed out the paper on the third reprint.

Clue should have been that the smaller prints were not green.

As to the public, I had some hand prints out of my darkroom of shots I had taken in Europe, and my boss who thought he was the brightest guy at work asked me "Don't they have color in Europe?".

Regards, John

 

[hxpham]

All the black and white photos I see are hideously and literally black and white with no beautiful thick, lush grey midtones ):

 

[shadowfox]

People in general, unless into photography, don't know what they are looking for when they get prints....color or B&W. It's like when you listen to music and you also make music, you hear things a bit differently than the person who just listens to music.

I realize that, of course. But they obviously wanted a B&W portrait. So somewhere along the line, there is some appreciation (of B&W images). With just a little information, they could have a much better print than what they are getting.

And I'm not trying to put down Costco (or any other printers) either. It's up to the customer whether to push back or be satisfied with the results, no?

My point is, with a little exposure to good B&W prints, anyone whose goal is to have a B&W portrait made should be able to get better results. And guess what, I see a lot of good B&W around here in RFF. Maybe we ought to arrange public showing once in a while.

An idea for a collaboration (locally or not)?

 

[NaChase]

My local Coscto seems to do a pretty good job. Moreover, for C-41 they can't be beat! $1.50 per roll? Yes please!

 

[gavinlg]

It most likely came from a digital camera (correct me on this if I'm wrong!) and therefore would have probably been a flat and grey file.

All one needs to do to improve a digital b&w file immensely is crank the contrast up in photoshop or elements or iphoto or whatever. It's so easy to get a decent range of tones (up to a certain point). I guess it's just education though - I'm sure some people see me ordering a cappuccino from my favorite coffee store and say "if only he know something about good coffee, he could get _____ style instead and it would be so much nicer"

 

[JohnTF]

Honestly? Getting it done at Costco is probably the last thing I'd consider. It's a side business for them at best, employed by underpaid kids that couldn't care less. 😉

Best bet is to process the image the way YOU want, and send the file off to a printer/service (e.g. AdoramaPix, MPIX, yada yada). If THEY can't get it right - then all hope is lost...

I have been disappointed by much more expensive printers than Costco.

I do have a good tailor in Uruapan, but unfortunately he can only do so much, working on the fabric alone. ;-) He does make Jorge look better.

I held on to some 6x9 negatives for years until I printed them myself, but I just cannot put in the hours in the darkroom any longer.

Regards, John

 

[robert blu]

I have seen similar appreciation of a poorly converted to B&W photo. I think that it is important the printing, but if digital the preparation of the file is the main point. In the wet darkroom you dodge, burn different areas with different times and than applies other tips to get the result you desire. In digital print you have to do this on the file. It is not a question of only convert, but to decide where you need something hell (eyes?) or something darker (hair?) . But to evaluate this if you have nat a wet darkroom experience is very difficult.
robert

 

[KenR]

Lack of comparison

Lack of comparison

Most people have never seen a fine print (color or monochrome) and so have no basis of comparison. Even my humble efforts look good to most people, because complared to the crap that they get from their own cameras, they are reasonably well composed, reasonably well lit and occasionally well printed. Obviously mine don't belong in a museum, but by frequenting museums and galleries and by reading photo books at least I know what to aim for.

 

[d_ross]

Part of the issue is that many people now consider a B&W photograph simply one without color! The issue isn't with the printers, it's with, as has been mentioned here before, the lack of exposure to fine prints of either color or B&W by those very masses