Selective Coloring: Am I on the Right Track?

[RichieTang]

Selective colouring is a bit like the overuse of HDR. Ever since the effect first appeared on DSLRs about 5 years ago, every man and his dog was doing it. It is one of those post processing effects that overwhelmingly ends up making a photograph looking amateurish because so many amateurs would just use the effect because it was "cool" at the time or for the sake of it.

As @tirediron mentioned, it does have its uses but they are few and far between for the vast majority of photographs. Product and advertising it definitely has its place. I personally have desaturated certain backgrounds (white backdrops mainly) because they were too warm/cool or had colour cast of some kind in them. Desaturating a white backdrop and leaving the subject matter in colour is selective colouring but, it's so subtle that people wouldn't immediately, if ever notice it. I'm definitely in the "less is more" camp and selective colouring as in the images you have posted are just too "in your face" with what has been done.

Thanks, I am definitely going to try a less "in your face" approach by reducing the color of the subjects so they pop out less.

As for the effect looking amateurish, I feel the same about Black and White and just about every other effect. Anything can look amateurish in amateur hands, the goal is to use the effect that just about anyone with fingers can do nowadays, and making it look professional. As for everyone hating sc, coupled with knowing first hand that there are consumers out there that like it, to me it seems that there is a niche market that has very little competition because professional photographers (with self-esteem issues) don't want to look like amateurs in the eyes of other photographers. I would rather compete with 10 photographers in sc than 100,000 in b&w.

 

[Geaux]

What I find funny is that you call Black and White amateur, yet we wouldn't even be here today (as photographers), if it wasn't for black and white starting it all. Whereas, selective coloring screams "omg, I just pirated photoshop, look what I can do!"

Sure, the general public seems to love it, but that doesn't make it any better. Do what you do, but also don't compare selective coloring to black and white and stop being so defensive when people call you out on it. You asked on a public forum their thoughts on a subject matter that is normally frowned upon.

With that being said, I agree with others in this thread questioning why you colored what you colored and it mostly doesn't make sense. The only one that makes sense is the chicken, but you colored the one that stands out the most in the image, so it defeated the purpose of selective coloring.

 

[photoguy99]

B&W can look incredibly amateurish. It can scream LOOK I JUST PIRATED SILVER EFEX AND NOW I AM ANSEL ADAMS!

Also, the OP got a couple of really fairly snotty responses from the residents, and was justifiably irritated by them.

 

[RichieTang]

What I find funny is that you call Black and White amateur, yet we wouldn't even be here today (as photographers), if it wasn't for black and white starting it all. Whereas, selective coloring screams "omg, I just pirated photoshop, look what I can do!"

Sure, the general public seems to love it, but that doesn't make it any better. Do what you do, but also don't compare selective coloring to black and white and stop being so defensive when people call you out on it. You asked on a public forum their thoughts on a subject matter that is normally frowned upon.

With that being said, I agree with others in this thread questioning why you colored what you colored and it mostly doesn't make sense. The only one that makes sense is the chicken, but you colored the one that stands out the most in the image, so it defeated the purpose of selective coloring.

1. I know how to get people to look at a thread so I can receive the feedback that I want to receive. Otherwise It'll end up like the other ones that don't get any feedback at all (pointing this out can effectively stop this thread, but I've already gotten enough feedback to work on). Also I am simply giving my reply to other peoples' opinion...if that is not allowed/frowned upon, then most conversations in life are moot.

2. Black and White did start it all...so did the loincloth in clothing, CRT televisions, computers the size of buildings, landline phones, and scratching your history on caves. Just cause it started it all doesn't mean it's not tacky to go back to the original. You know what society usually calls someone who reverts to using something outdated/old? A hippie or a 80 year old retiree.

My point being: Any category imaginable has both amateurs and professionals. Yes I am an amateur at photography, doesn't mean I should switch styles just so I can do what everyone else is doing. I wasn't born a sheep (which is ironic cause my zodiac is a sheep ).

 

[480sparky44 43]

......... I would rather compete with 10 photographers in sc than 100,000 in b&w.

That alone should tell you something.

 

[AKUK]

Thanks, I am definitely going to try a less "in your face" approach by reducing the color of the subjects so they pop out less.

As for the effect looking amateurish, I feel the same about Black and White and just about every other effect. Anything can look amateurish in amateur hands, the goal is to use the effect that just about anyone with fingers can do nowadays, and making it look professional. As for everyone hating sc, coupled with knowing first hand that there are consumers out there that like it, to me it seems that there is a niche market that has very little competition because professional photographers (with self-esteem issues) don't want to look like amateurs in the eyes of other photographers. I would rather compete with 10 photographers in sc than 100,000 in b&w.

I agree with you that any effect can look amateurish in the hands of amateurs. Like you say, B&W images often are poorly done because to most newcomers, a black and white image is just a desaturated image, whereas more experienced photographers and editors know that there is significantly more involved to produce a photograph with impact in that medium. Mostly this stems from the lighting at the time of capture. If it lacks contrast to begin with, then in all probability, it's going to lack impact as a monochrome image.

Of course there will always be customers out there that like the SC effect. I've been asked for it in the past and at the end of the day, you meet your clients requests. You just don't necessarily display those images in your portfolio for others to see. The reason for this is that more often than not, the SC effect is requested on images that it really doesn't work on and is the primary reason why I didn't display the images.

I don't know so much about self-esteem issues being the reason (I dare say it is for some) but, more to the point that certain effects can detract from your body of work and potentially be off-putting to other clients. If you're producing something that is deemed kitsch by a potential big client, that may cost you a job or repeat business. They may also be looking for something different or a specific style and if you're putting out work that every schmo can do at the click of a button, you'll look run-of-the-mill and get passed over.

If on the other hand the SC was requested on an image that did merit it, then of course it would be included in the portfolio. At the end of the day, your work is also your marketing to other potential clients and is why professionals are more picky. So I wouldn't put it down to snobbery or ego as to why professionals tend to steer clear of selective colouring, it's more from a sensible business ethos. Also, going off of the amount of "professional" photographers just local to me (and I use that term loosely because most are just snappers with a dslr and rudimentary editing skills), you'll be competing with an equal amount of photographers in SC, as you will in B&W. Look through any world reknowned photographer's websites/portfolios and you'll be extremely hard pushed to find SC images, outside of advertising/product photography. There is a reason for that.

 

[RichieTang]

Thanks, I am definitely going to try a less "in your face" approach by reducing the color of the subjects so they pop out less.

As for the effect looking amateurish, I feel the same about Black and White and just about every other effect. Anything can look amateurish in amateur hands, the goal is to use the effect that just about anyone with fingers can do nowadays, and making it look professional. As for everyone hating sc, coupled with knowing first hand that there are consumers out there that like it, to me it seems that there is a niche market that has very little competition because professional photographers (with self-esteem issues) don't want to look like amateurs in the eyes of other photographers. I would rather compete with 10 photographers in sc than 100,000 in b&w.

I agree with you that any effect can look amateurish in the hands of amateurs. Like you say, B&W images often are poorly done because to most newcomers, a black and white image is just a desaturated image, whereas more experienced photographers and editors know that there is significantly more involved to produce a photograph with impact in that medium. Mostly this stems from the lighting at the time of capture. If it lacks contrast to begin with, then in all probability, it's going to lack impact as a monochrome image.

Of course there will always be customers out there that like the SC effect. I've been asked for it in the past and at the end of the day, you meet your clients requests. You just don't necessarily display those images in your portfolio for others to see. The reason for this is that more often than not, the SC effect is requested on images that it really doesn't work on and is the primary reason why I didn't display the images.

I don't know so much about self-esteem issues being the reason (I dare say it is for some) but, more to the point that certain effects can detract from your body of work and potentially be off-putting to other clients. If you're producing something that is deemed kitsch by a potential big client, that may cost you a job or repeat business. They may also be looking for something different or a specific style and if you're putting out work that every schmo can do at the click of a button, you'll look run-of-the-mill and get passed over.

If on the other hand the SC was requested on an image that did merit it, then of course it would be included in the portfolio. At the end of the day, your work is also your marketing to other potential clients and is why professionals are more picky. So I wouldn't put it down to snobbery or ego as to why professionals tend to steer clear of selective colouring, it's more from a sensible business ethos. Also, going off of the amount of "professional" photographers just local to me (and I use that term loosely because most are just snappers with a dslr and rudimentary editing skills), you'll be competing with an equal amount of photographers in SC, as you will in B&W. Look through any world reknowned photographer's websites/portfolios and you'll be extremely hard pushed to find SC images, outside of advertising/product photography. There is a reason for that.

Thanks this is very helpful. If I was looking to be a professional photographer as my choice of career, I would have done everything you've said. You've definitely confirmed for me everything I've wanted from photography. I now know for certain I don't want to have my hobby, something I enjoy, as my main source of income (thereby effectively drawing out the fun out of it).

Luckily, I have other means of bringing in much more income (and more stable too) that requires very little of my time and I find very enjoyable, which gives me the incredible luxury of doing photography for fun on the side. So when the "odd" customer wants SC, I'll be able to produce professional work that those who think SC is nothing more than a gimmick that requires no other consideration for B&W, color, contrast, composition, etc, cannot provide.

From this, you can gather that I am putting a portfolio for just SC, and a portfolio for the more "pro-tographers recommended" pieces. No one will be able to deter me from SC, so constructive criticism such as the one you gave is definitely well appreciated.

perhaps people can stomach SC better if they think of it as the same as post-processing B&W...with a little patch of color. Most of your effort will still be on editing the B&W for good contrast, oh and taking a good picture.

 

[Braineack]

no.

 

[Overread19 7]

MODERATOR NOTICE

You are all free to hold your own likes and dislikes, but please can we stop trying to force ones dislike of something over another member. If the OP wishes to use selective colouring then let them - trying to force or mock them to change (or as a couple seem to be - trying to start a fight) is very impolite and not an attitude we want on the site.

By all means disagree and share your reasoning why; but keep it polite.

 

[waday]

My favorite use of selective coloring is #3. It evoked emotion for me, which #1 and #2 didn't.

In terms of processing, and absolutely IMO, I think you're on the right track for #2 and #3. The coloring in #1 was too subtle, and it was lost for me. I'm assuming you colored the building behind because of the Ford logo/name? Trying to link the newer Toyota dealership to the defunct Ford dealership? It wasn't readily apparent to me.

In #2, the bright yellow barricade demands the viewer's attention, but for what purpose? It's a kid standing on a barricade. The composition does not evoke any emotion for me. I know you stated that your intention was to link the gutter to the shoe-less kid, but I did not make that connection looking at the photo. It looks disorganized to me.

I think #3 is the best of the series. It evokes emotion for me, especially with the chicken looking at the camera. Good work.

 

[DavidVote]

B&W can look incredibly amateurish. It can scream LOOK I JUST PIRATED SILVER EFEX AND NOW I AM ANSEL ADAMS!

Also, the OP got a couple of really fairly snotty responses from the residents, and was justifiably irritated by them.

What's up with the obsession with black and white? I get that it creates contrast and get rid of distracting colors / colors that don't go well together in shots such street shots, but I think I've seen less than a couple black and white photo that blew me away.

I also get that photography started out in just black and white. I know, I have a film camera that I used to shoot and develope my own black and white films on.

But this is coming from a guy who likes noise and grain, and thinks every color is pretty in some way or another.

And to OP:

Yes, I believe that selective coloring would be beneficial to a photo if used in the right context. It's just another tool in photography just like HDR is. You can't slap HDR onto any image and call it good. Know when and where to use it, recognize the appropriate situations in which to use it.

I find it funny how some people rips on other people's preference in photography even though photography is probably as subjective as things get.

 

[gsgary]

For me there is never a reason to use selective colour

 

[W.Y.Photo]

I agree with everyone else that the 3rd is the best.. However I completely disagree with everyone saying number 2 is the best processed. The colors are too vibrant and they make the image seem gross and over processed. The selection for color (in terms of the boy and fence, not the gutter) is good however. The opposite is true for #1 The processing is nice and the subtle color makes it seem more like a complete image rather than a cardboard cutout shoved on a black and white photo.. however, the selection is off and makes the viewer unsure of what to look at. That's not to mention that it really is an uninteresting image and no amount of selective coloring will make the subject matter itself better....

#3 is really quite on track. Though I always feel quite annoyed looking at selective color images I think it gets the closest in terms of what you are trying to do with the process..

I like that you are willing to go against the grain with your methods of processing and I appreciate that. The greatest artworks were made by people who were willing to break the rules or straight up change the rules in order to make the work that we now consider masterpiece's. I think if you work hard and keep striving to be better at it you could really take SC and turn it into something good rather than having people scoff and scowl at it; in order to do that you need to be willing to work hard and improve it from something typical to something extraordinary.

 

[photoguy99]

I mainly do black and white because color is too hard. I usually can't make any sense of color.

I appreciate some color photos but I have no skill with shooting then.

 

[gsgary]

I mainly do black and white because color is too hard. I usually can't make any sense of color.

I appreciate some color photos but I have no skill with shooting then.

You should try shooting colour then, you never no you could get some good shots