Is B&W Photography for Snobs

[Joxby]

Perfect example.

The original of this shot was not that great... the colors were everywhere because the DJ played a constant colored disco light thing, even during slow songs... AND my flash burned a bit too bright probably being a little too close...

so i blurred a bit to bring the foreground up and made it black and white (actually a little sepia) to concentrate on the seperation of the couple and the background!

I dis-agree with the seemingly demeaning cheapening of the discipline of B/W.
It is not a photoshop rescue filter for cocked up colour, some would have little appreciation for the skill and effort that goes into a no choice B/W winner, they would simply assume it was a poorly shot colour rescued by conversion, that turned out good by more luck than judgement.
I dont think B/W shooters can get the credit they deserve for their work when they are constantly undermined by "well thats crap, nevermind, make it B/W then I dont have to shoot it properly, thats all its good for anyway"
I'm not saying dont convert, just try to concieve your shot as B/W, or at least respect it.
If you were working for a client who wanted a mono scene specifically (personal preferences aside), I'm sure you'd shoot with that foremost in your mind...

 

[Lol999]

When I came back to photography 2 years ago I started with colour film because:

I had only used colour
I didn't know what sort of photography I wanted to move into i.e nature, landscape, still life etc
I didn't think I was good enough to shoot black and white!

It was only after a while I realised the types of images I like to shoot work better in b&w than colour, so now I shoot exclusively b&w.

having said that, I am starting to appredciate the potential of colour for some street work, having just read a Martin Parr book confirms that!

B&W for snobs? That's just an attitude or opinion from those afraid to try it or make it work for them in their shooting.

 

[Artograph]

If I may add my 2 cents worth....LOL......I'm still a newbie to "serious, hobbie" photography, ...but I LOVE B&W!!

It seems to me that there is a bit of an impression that B&W is (too) "artsie", and maybe sometimes that may be truer than not. I also think that there are people who can't/don't/won't see B&W for the beautiful tool that it is. For example, I did some flowers in B&W....bold and crisp at the front and somewhat faded in the background. These flowers were two-tone and very interesting to look at on thier own. Everyone I showed them to said, ".....yeah, but I wonder what it looks like in COLOUR!?". I dunno....I thought they were fantastic!!! LOL!!

I have a friend who said that she thinks some B&W is "OK"....but that portraits must be in colour....again I disagree!! I did some very cool shots in B&W of my sister and my niece.

I guess for me, it all boils down to what the subject is.....and what the "feel" of the photo is.

Also, as a beginner it sure is fun to experiment with colour and B&W!!

:O)

 

[Chris of Arabia]

Is B&W Photography for Snobs

Yes it is and we'd like to keep it that way.... layball:

 

[Jeff Canes]

Yes it is and we'd like to keep it that way.... layball:

:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:


Wow this is the most action I gotten in awhile on TPF, now go take a look at my nice color shot of ducks


The Adams and Weston color books I ordered came. Wish there was an easy way to share them with every one. I have read a lot of negatives reviews about the Adams book. But at first look most of the prints look fine to me. Never read anything about the Weston book. But prints don’t look that grate.

 

[Seefutlung]

... Although, many times I am told that my digital B&W images look like film images- I do not strive for that. B&W in digital capture is just different from film which is what I like...:mrgreen:

Grain notwithstanding, we have similar backgrounds and I think with our history we tend to create B&W ditigal photos which look like what we were trained to make film B&W photos look like.

Interestingly, I read that people tended to think that B&W equated to realty because most newspapers run B&W and snapshots are in color.

Gary

 

[abraxas]

If B&W ISN'T for snobs, then my mission is pointless.

 

[fmw]

B&W is for subjects that render better in B&W. Color is for subjects that render better in color. B&W is also for darkroom printers.

Sometimes you may intend to shoot a subject in one medium only to learn later that the other medium suited it better. I don't know that there is any snobbery in it.

Ansel Adams, by the way, shot plenty of color. He used a Hasselblad primarily for color while he used B&W primarily in his view cameras. The reason Adams shot primarily in B&W and with large negatives was that it lent itself better to his strongest talent - image manipulation in the darkroom. You can do things with B&W printing that you can't do with color and Adams did it better than almost anyone. It isn't that hard for most of us to make a composition and negative similar to Adams. It is nearly impossible for the rest of us to make a print like his, however. If he could have had the same kind of image control with color, he would have shot more color. How do I know this? Well, he told me so at a photography workshop a long time ago. If he made it seem artsy to print B&W then so be it. His strongest skill was in the darkroom, after all.

 

[abraxas]

B&W is for subjects that render better in B&W. Color is for subjects that render better in color. B&W is also for darkroom printers.

Sometimes you may intend to shoot a subject in one medium only to learn later that the other medium suited it better. I don't know that there is any snobbery in it.

...

Actually, I'm finding that most of my mid-day, bright sun, landscape shots come out better in B&W.

I've been playing around with people shots lately and find that the conversion makes it fun and I can make things look the way I want without sad skin tones due to my colorblindness. Shooting people is becoming fun for me.

 

[Rick Waldroup]

Grain notwithstanding, we have similar backgrounds and I think with our history we tend to create B&W ditigal photos which look like what we were trained to make film B&W photos look like.

Interestingly, I read that people tended to think that B&W equated to realty because most newspapers run B&W and snapshots are in color.

Gary

Gary, you are exactly right. I remember the first time I picked up a DSLR, I thought, wow, this is cool, but how do I get really good B&W images out of this thing?

Just the other day, my wife came running into my office very upset. She said, "There is something wrong with my camera (she has a Nikon Coolpix 5000 P&S) there is no color on the screen. All the color is gone." The day before, I saw the little camera laying around and I picked it up and started playing around with it. In just a few minutes, I had switched it over to the B&W mode and snapped a few shots. I forgot to re-set it when I was through. But she seriously thought something was wrong with it. She has never shot anything in B&W in her life.

The very first roll of film I ever shot was B&W. I had my own darkroom by the time I was 16 years old and continued to operate a complete B&W darkroom up until early last year when I finally made the complete transition to digital.

Old habits are hard to break.

 

[Rick Waldroup]

Actually, I'm finding that most of my mid-day, bright sun, landscape shots come out better in B&W.

I've been playing around with people shots lately and find that the conversion makes it fun and I can make things look the way I want without sad skin tones due to my colorblindness. Shooting people is becoming fun for me.

What is it like to be a photographer and to be colorblind? I really am curious. I would think it would be very difficult. Do you see any color at all or just partial color? Exactly how does it work?

 

[abraxas]

What is it like to be a photographer and to be colorblind? I really am curious. I would think it would be very difficult. Do you see any color at all or just partial color? Exactly how does it work?

I see color, I just have a hard time telling certain shades of red/orange and yellow/green apart.

It hasn't made much difference until I started processing my work. What little I did with film was always done by others, and in 96 when I bought my first digital I rarely did more than brighten and pump up the contrast.

In the last year since I've started learning PS I've found if I stay off the heavy color sliders and saturation I'm not in too bad of shape on my landscape stuff. My color adjusted people shots look wierd.

I'll never be a jet-fighter pilot. I can't mess with electrical wiring, and have to read the label on prescription bottles (everyone should anyhow), so it's not too bad.

I don't get to park in the handicap parking either- I asked. Speaking of cars and color blindness, the kids used to scream when I would go blazing down the road toward a red light, "Daddy, daddy, oh, please stop daddy, the light is RED, oh God, please stop!", and I would slam on the brakes just in the nick of time skidding up to the intersection -- I can see the colors on the light just fine. I just liked to scare the hell out of them. And I'd always think, "I should have been a jet fighter pilot."

 

[skieur]

Originally Posted by Jeff Canes
Is B&W Photography for Snobs

Yes it is and we'd like to keep it that way.... layball:

Actually, black and white is for the larger percentage of men than women who are colourblind as well as those who render to black and white shots that are not good enough for colour.

skieur