Little Essay on Black and White Photography - can you help?

[LaFoto]

On 7 January next year I am supposed to do a little presentation/essay on the ins and outs of black and white photography, what's important, how it differs from colour photography, what you need to observe when you go out meaning to photograph in black & white, what you need to observe when you convert colour photos into black & white and so on.

Any ideas you have, any things that YOU feel are important in this field, might help me build my presentation.
Do you feel you can help?
I'd be very grateful!

 

[gsgary]

Are you sure it is not about b+w film photography

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2

 

[LaFoto]

Yes, I'm pretty sure about that.
Though it might not hurt if a small part of said presentation were about blac&white film photography, too. Like a little introduction touching on the history of photography. Darkroom work and all that (which I witnessed back in time when I was a mere child but never practised myself; I wasn't allowed to touch anything...! )

 

[table1349]

https://www.google.com/search?q=eff...raphy&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&safe=off

 

[amolitor]

b&w does the following things:

- abstracts the picture one step further from reality
- emphasizes the graphical qualities of form, line, and so on

these are neither good nor bad, but I find that they make the job of making a good picture somewhat easier. There's that much less reality mucking around in there, and there are fewer dimensions to manage.

In b&w conversion the single biggest issue, by far, is achieving tonal separation where necessary. Lots of people over-think this and spend a lot of time fussing around with very fancy conversion tools to not very much effect. But, there is a real issue here, where masses need to be tonally separated (to serve the graphical qualities alluded to above) they should be. Separation of masses through attention to the conversion process creates separate masses where there was once one (duh) and also creates line at that edge of separation (somewhat less duh).

There are some secondary issues of tonal placement for pleasing effect, etc etc, but these are generally pretty easy to do with burning and dodging. You can also tonally separate masses this way, but it's hard to get it right after the conversion's been botched. Might was well do it -- if possible -- at conversion time, and save the burning, dodging, and curves adjustments for tonal placement that is NOT about separating masses.

 

[longbaugh]

One of the biggest uses for b&w for me is to reduce the distraction of color if color is ancillary to the intended conveyed meaning.

 

[Derrel]

My feeling is that design elements such as line, shape, mass, texture, and tonal value come to the forefront when a shot is B&W. When hues are removed, then the other design elements become more important, or sometimes spring to the forefront. Photos that have subjects that have strong lines, or interesting textures for example, might not work as well in full color as they do in B&W if the light has odd color casts, or if the color temperature of the light itself becomes a subject or becomes a major part of the photo. At sunrise and sunset for example, the light from the sun is low in the sky, and that can provide a nice source for strong side-lighting, which as we know, can easily reveal forms, shapes, and help reveal texture. But....the strong, really warm sunrise and sunset color temperature of the light can often make the pretty-colored light itself seem to be the subject. Black and white can help eliminate color's distraction potential in shots where something besides the "colors" is what is the most important thing.

 

[pixmedic]

One of the biggest uses for b&w for me is to reduce the distraction of color if color is ancillary to the intended conveyed meaning.

or if you mucked up the color or exposure. :mrgreen:

when in doubt, throw the color out!

 

[gsgary]

And for real B+W shoot film and wet print

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2

 

[LaFoto]

Thank you all so far for your answers, there's already something there upon which I can build my presentation! Nice to be having friends on a forum such as this who actually "speak" to me; that's nicer than Googling matters, and the conversation is what these forums are about, aren't they?

Gary, once you have some time on hands, would you like to elaborate? Just so I can put some of what you mean to say about film and wet print into the presentation, too?

Amolitor, I particularly find your mentioning the abstraction helpful! Thanks for that! :hugs: <- to all

 

[peter27]

You may use this if you wish:

 

[LaFoto]

OK, thanks for that, Peter.

And thanks to all the others, also for the link - I've meanwhile checked out a good many articles that hide behind that link. Lots of useful info out there. Not that I hadn't known that myself, only was I thinking, hey, I've been member on this lovely photography forum for coming up to 10 years, so I might as well go ask some of my friends there what they think.
By now I think I've got enough material to start writing my essay/preparing the presentation.
I might come back for some specific questions, if I may, and you might be willing to help me out?

 

[amolitor]

Of course you may! A photo forum is a place where you talk about photography, after all.

 

[Designer]

This may or may not be of any help, but if you wish to convey a simple way to evaluate a scene for its potential in B&W, find a blue transparency to "preview" the shot. The blue eliminates the color so one can evaluate the B&W effect even before taking a photo. I had a nice piece of blue glass that I used many years ago, but I haven't seen it for a long time.

As to digital vs film, I think the tonal range is greater with film.

 

[TCampbell]

I once had a mentor I respected who was quite good at putting together presentations, papers, and essays, etc. (incidentally, he was not a photographer). But I once asked him how he came up with his content or ideas for his papers and presentations.

He told me to ask myself two questions:

1) What questions do find people asking you about... over and over.

and

2) When you look at the results of their work, what questions do you find that those same people are NOT asking... but probably should be.

I have noticed that beginner photographers will sometimes start converting their images to black and white and, for some of these images, I want to ask them what made them feel compelled to display that particular image in black & white... why not just leave it in color? I often find the beginner just doesn't know -- they're experimenting without any guidance. Not all images look best in black & white. But a few hints as to when B&W would be better would help them on their way.

For certain scenes, it is the color that "makes" the scene... remove the color and it's blah.

I think of black and white as being much better at depicting structure, rhythm, texture, and certainly contrast. I also find it's extremely good for suggesting moods of solitude, despair, but can also be used to depict peace or hope or purity (think extremes of either "low key" or "high key" photography.) If I want to shoot a portrait of someone to show the wisdom and experience of their years, then I probably want to accent the texture of their skin, their hair, their eyes... and this is more easily done in B&W where elements such as texture, structure, contrast & tonality are dominant attributes.

There are the opposite cases... for example, the compositional balance of an image might come through it's color hues rather than through it's tonality -- convert to B&W and it loses that balance (e.g. think color wheel balance). I'm normally going to think of color as a stronger way to depict a sunset -- but might make an exception if the structure and texture of the clouds and landscape play stronger than the colors.

As a segue... you typically need good contrast of light and shadow to depict texture and structural elements -- lighting angles become very important and you may need to emphasize that when deciding how to perform the black & white conversion (ironically "color" filters are used to emphasize images meant for black & white). In astrophotography, we think of images as being either "linear" or "non-linear". "Linear" simply means the tonality of a pixel as compared to other pixels is actually representative of the camera data (in other words, we didn't mess with levels and curves adjustments). "non-linear" means the differences between pixels have been manipulated and exaggerated -- areas which might really only have subtle tonality might be exaggerated to show much stronger contrast then you would have noticed in real life. The tonality of the image has been stretched (or compressed) -- so we think of that image as "non-linear."

That is to say that the manipulation of the data to show the elements in the way you intend is as much a part of the B&W image creation process as the original choice of framing and composition of the image.

Good luck!