Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => Discussing Photographic Styles => Topic started by: Isaac on March 04, 2015, 11:59:13 am
-
The difference between photographing in black and white and in color are enormous; in the words of Edwin Land, black and white is "the language for delineating objects," and color photography "the language for displaying illumination."
Weston J Naef in "Intimate Landscapes: Photographs by Eliot Porter" p131 (quoting Polariod Corporation Annual Report 1977 p3)
Incidentally, "Intimate Landscapes: Photographs by Eliot Porter" seems to be available in multiple formats from the Internet Archive (https://archive.org/details/IntimateLandscapesPhotographs).
-
I wonder what "the language for displaying illumination" was (if there was one) before color films.
-
…"the language for displaying illumination" … River Edge at Sunset (http://www.photographydealers.com/wp-content/uploads/Artists/eliot-porter/intimate-landscapes/large/River-Edge-at-Sunset-Below-Piute-Rapids-San-Juan-River-Colorado.jpg) ?
-
The “I only shoot BW” photogs can sometimes do an image injustice if they stick to their dogmatic position 100%. Now, I used to be one of those types back in the 1970’s before branching out to color in the 1980’s.
(nsfw)
http://danielteolijr.tumblr.com/
I would look down on the color photogs…I was a purest. It is all ego driven nonsense. The bottom line is this - let the image dictate BW or color, not your ego.
Sometimes the image will work either way. If so, do what you like. Other times it needs to be in color or BW only. Let the image decide and do what is best for the image.
Sometimes the BW fanatics materially destroy the image without thinking about it when they drop the color. Take a look at this example. It shows how you can lose important information if you put your ego first.
http://testarchives.tumblr.com/image/110723876609
The above example could have worked in BW or color. But when it goes BW you lose the bluish light on the upper left. The blue light signifies the prostitute depicted in the graf is a male transsexual. So, that's what is lost in the BW version.
Ernst Hass on the subject from the 1981 book World Photography by Bryn Campbell.
"There are black and white snobs, as well as colour snobs. Because of their inability to use both well, they act on the defensive and create camps. We should never judge a photographer by what film he uses - only by how he uses it."
In my own case I do social documentary photography for love of freezing time. I don't do it for money or contests. As such I do whatever I like as long as I feel I have done the image justice and can stand behind the photo.
If I want to HDR an image...I do.
(nsfw)
http://bikermardigras.tumblr.com/image/105630766748
-
Well, I think that a lot of the chatter about black&white vs color is very much like the chatter about megapixel/lens quality/dynamic range/whatever, which are issues which are more easily discussed than issues like "artistic value", "vision", "coherence" and all the other non-physical content of a shot.
-
I don't have much to add to this discussion except a thank you for a link to the book. It contains some wonderful imagery.
-
If you're lucky you might find some other Eliot Porter photobooks in your local library.
-
I always shoot one roll of black-and-white, and then one roll of colour. It's pretty unusual. I don't think any other photographers work that way because most want to use a different kind of make-up for a black-and-white image. But I'm a bit more 'throw it against the wall and see what sticks' in my approach.
Rankin, p154 Image Makers, Image Takers (https://books.google.com/books?id=y99TAAAAMAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=%22I+always+shoot+one+roll+of+black-and-white%22)
I suppose with digital raw most of us work that way now.
-
If you mean a raw file can be processed into a color or B&W image, I agree. IMO the color/B&W decision is best made while comparing renderings of the image to see which works best.
-
It's no longer: either/or.
-
... the color/B&W decision is best made while comparing renderings of the image to see which works best.
If it was always the case it could indicate a lack of vision, in the sense that the photographer don't previsualize his/her shot in BW (or color) while shooting.
-
If it was always the case it could indicate a lack of vision, in the sense that the photographer don't previsualize his/her shot in BW (or color) while shooting.
"Sometimes he produced two sets of the same photo, one in black and white and one in colour…"
Henri Cartier-Bresson – Here and Now, page 221
-
"Sometimes he produced two sets of the same photo, one in black and white and one in colour…"
Henri Cartier-Bresson – Here and Now, page 221
That's why I wrote "If it was always the case it could indicate a lack of vision".
-
That's why writing "If it was always the case it could indicate a lack of vision" says nothing ;-)
Meanwhile:
"I'm not keen on publishing colour photos with the article on the aesthetics of photography," he writes. "At this point in its technical development, colour photography is, as I see it, no more than a documentary tool; it cannot be a means of artistic expression, since nature offers both colour and value in abundance. We know that a painter has to choose between these two contradictory approaches. As far as I am concerned, I think this choice is a dilemma that it is currently impossible to resolve, particularly for a photographer who is interested in life."
1958, "Henri Cartier-Bresson – Here and Now", page 221
-
That's why writing "If it was always the case it could indicate a lack of vision" says nothing ;-)
It says something to those willing to at least try to understand.
-
It's innuendo that we can use to denigrate someone else.
-
It's innuendo that we can use to denigrate someone else.
You're right: we can continue Ad infinitum, but I have far better things to do.
So let's agree I said nothing and you didn't understand what I said.
-
I can't make sense of the initial quote. B&W is, to my eye, far more likely to be about chiaroscuro than color is, and isn't that "illumination"?
Also, I am slightly boggled by the laissez faire attitude toward color versus b&w. To me, they're totally different things, and it's instantly obvious whether a picture should be b&w or color. The pictures that can work either way are rare and, usually, trivial.
-
I can't make sense of the initial quote.
Is the water orange? Is the water blue? (http://www.photographydealers.com/wp-content/uploads/Artists/eliot-porter/intimate-landscapes/large/River-Edge-at-Sunset-Below-Piute-Rapids-San-Juan-River-Colorado.jpg)
-
So let's agree I said nothing and you didn't understand what I said.
I flatter myself, I have some vague understanding of how little I know about the huge world that is photography; so let me ask you -- What prizes are awarded only to photographers who "previsualize his/her shot in BW (or color) while shooting"?
-
Also, I am slightly boggled by the laissez faire attitude toward color versus b&w. To me, they're totally different things…
Given a digital camera that will record colour, what do you [do] to record the best raw file for b&w that's different from what you would do to record the best raw file for colour?
-
Given a digital camera that will record colour, what do you to record the best raw file for b&w that's different from what you would do to record the best raw file for colour?
I let the camera record a raw file and a B&W jpeg at the same time. Some cameras (e.g., Leica X) do a fabulous job with the B&W jpegs. I then have my choice of the jpeg or converting the raw file to B&W. The raw file conversion to B&W seldom beats the Leica B&W jpeg...at least IMHO.
-
You don't seem to mention whether you use the camera to make colour pictures, nor answer the question that was asked.
-
I let the camera record a raw file and a B&W jpeg at the same time. Some cameras (e.g., Leica X) do a fabulous job with the B&W jpegs. I then have my choice of the jpeg or converting the raw file to B&W. The raw file conversion to B&W seldom beats the Leica B&W jpeg...at least IMHO.
Hi,
That would depend on what one means with "The raw file conversion to B&W".
It could mean:
1. - converting the luminance component of the colour image to a monochrome image
2. - converting the luminance component of the colour image to a monochrome image, after first changing the Whitebalance
3. - converting the luminance component of the colour image to a monochrome image, after first changing the colour balance
4. - converting the luminance component of the colour image to a monochrome image, after first changing the colour balance, and with added (e.g. Quad-)toning
There are some great tools to really improve the 'conversion' process. I like Topaz Labs Black and White effects, but have also heard positive comments about Google/Nik Silver efex Pro.
Cheers,
Bart
-
I can't make sense of the initial quote. B&W is, to my eye, far more likely to be about chiaroscuro than color is, and isn't that "illumination"?
Hi,
There is more to it. There is tonal contrast from the subject reflections, augmented by the lighting contrast. When we start with a colour image, we can still change the subject's tonal contrast, like adding a yellow or orange filter for enhancing clouds in an image but now after the fact. This allows us to fine-tune the strength of the 'filter' for the optimum result. The power of that tonal adjustment is immense!
Cheers,
Bart
-
If it was always the case it could indicate a lack of vision, in the sense that the photographer don't previsualize his/her shot in BW (or color) while shooting.
I flatter myself, I have some vague understanding of how little I know about the huge world that is photography; so let me ask you -- What prizes are awarded only to photographers who "previsualize his/her shot in BW (or color) while shooting"?
+1, enlighten us Diego, sure there are photographers who at the very least claim in interviews that they know beforehand what a shot is going to be like, but claiming that those who dont 'possibly lack vision'....hmmm.
In many situations, but especially quickly changing light and lots of moving clouds, I think and have experienced it is well possible that changes in the light falling on a subject dictate a different 'best' choice of processing the raws later on (B/W vs Colour), no way on earth to tell that beforehand.
Which is not to say of course that there are (stable) situations concievable where one might choose or expect to capture a subject with a B/W rendering in mind and even then one might look back at the the final result and conclude on comparison that the coloured version looks better. I remember a posting here of a crashing wave on a rocky coast where the remaining, yet minimal, colour of the dark blue water gave an unbeatable edge to the coloured original, at least that was the consensus, nothing wrong with not agreeing ;)
Regards, Sander
-
Hi,
That would depend on what one means with "The raw file conversion to B&W".
It could mean:
1. - converting the luminance component of the colour image to a monochrome image
2. - converting the luminance component of the colour image to a monochrome image, after first changing the Whitebalance
3. - converting the luminance component of the colour image to a monochrome image, after first changing the colour balance
4. - converting the luminance component of the colour image to a monochrome image, after first changing the colour balance, and with added (e.g. Quad-)toning
There are some great tools to really improve the 'conversion' process. I like Topaz Labs Black and White effects, but have also heard positive comments about Google/Nik Silver efex Pro.
Cheers,
Bart
Hello Bart,
I wish I knew exactly what you're talking about, but alas....
I have had some luck with the Nik Silver Efx, but my fiddling with color filters, and all the pre-sets and sliders therein usually amounts to nothing, at least nothing that pleases me more than the Leica B&W jpeg straight out of the camera.
Maybe Isaac will google and post a link that will shed some light on the technical aspects you refer to above.
-
When I'm holding the camera with intent to shoot, I'm either shooting color or b&w. Frames shot in one mindset rarely make much sense when converted to the other. Unless they're shot as snaps in the first place, then it doesn't much matter, often.
Your mileage may vary. I find color to be very hard to do, anyways.
-
You don't seem to mention whether you use the camera to make colour pictures, nor answer the question that was asked.
Aren't your raw files 'colour pictures'?
And the only answer I can muster to the question is this: 'Over-expose a bit....like 1 stop or less'.
There are certainly more informed participants here than I am on that sort of question. And of course you can Google the answer if you haven't already done so.
-
a link that will shed some light on the technical aspects you refer to above.
See http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=94403.msg772683#msg772683
-
B&W is, to my eye, far more likely to be about chiaroscuro than color is...
I think than B&W is more about removing distracting elements (that is, colors) than about the specific photo content.
A good example can be seen comparing Migrant Mother with Afghan Girl: while colors has quite a role in the latter, the former would probably be worsen by the color.
In fact, many tried to color Migrant Mother (https://www.google.it/search?q=migrant+mother&client=ubuntu&hs=pEI&channel=fs&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=cJ8JVY2sOdbYavuvgOgP&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1280&bih=874#channel=fs&tbm=isch&q=migrant+mother+color&revid=978447424), and I think the original is far better.
Also, I am slightly boggled by the laissez faire attitude toward color versus b&w.
I'm too, but it's a personal thing in the sense that I'm boggled when I do not try to choose beforehand if a shot is a B&W or a color one.
Others may not be boggled at all by this.
-
Hello Bart,
I wish I knew exactly what you're talking about, but alas....
I have had some luck with the Nik Silver Efx, but my fiddling with color filters, and all the pre-sets and sliders therein usually amounts to nothing, at least nothing that pleases me more than the Leica B&W jpeg straight out of the camera.
Hi,
Just like B/W film, our sensors have a certain color sensitivity that is not uniform across the spectrum. Therefore colors, even if they have the same visual brightness, will translate to different shades of gray, depending on that sensor sensitivity.
We can modify that response by using a colored filter (attenuates certain colors and lets others pass, causing darker or lighter shades of gray) on our lens, but then we are limited to just a limited number of fixed choices. When we filter at Raw conversion time (by gently changing Whitebalance or even more drastically changing colorbalance), we can fine-tune much more precisely how certain colors will contrast as shades of gray. This allows to bring out e.g subtle shades of green/yellow as clearly visible different shades of gray, which would make a landscape much more detailed. We can also do the opposite is it distracts from another more important subject in the image.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Frames shot in one mindset rarely make much sense when converted to the other.
So it's your mindset when taking the photo that's different, not your camera settings?
-
Hi,
Just like B/W film, our sensors have a certain color sensitivity that is not uniform across the spectrum. Therefore colors, even if they have the same visual brightness, will translate to different shades of gray, depending on that sensor sensitivity.
We can modify that response by using a colored filter (attenuates certain colors and lets others pass, causing darker or lighter shades of gray) on our lens, but then we are limited to just a limited number of fixed choices. When we filter at Raw conversion time (by gently changing Whitebalance or even more drastically changing colorbalance), we can fine-tune much more precisely how certain colors will contrast as shades of gray. This allows to bring out e.g subtle shades of green/yellow as clearly visible different shades of gray, which would make a landscape much more detailed. We can also do the opposite is it distracts from another more important subject in the image.
Cheers,
Bart
Thx, Bart. I will be experimenting with these ideas, for sure.
-
Also, I am slightly boggled by the laissez faire attitude toward color versus b&w. To me, they're totally different things, and it's instantly obvious whether a picture should be b&w or color.
I'm too, but it's a personal thing in the sense that I'm boggled when I do not try to choose beforehand if a shot is a B&W or a color one.
This photo is well known: Island of Sifnos, Greece, 1961 (http://www.magnumphotos.com/CorexDoc/MAG/Media/TR2/4/d/5/0/PAR18964.jpg).
Cartier-Bresson also made a colour photo "Island Houses, Greece, 1961", apparently from the same position, without the child and showing the sky above the leftmost building ("Henri Cartier-Bresson – Here and Now", page 221).
Given the capabilities of digital cameras, wouldn't Cartier-Bresson have passed raw files to a retoucher who may well have processed the well-known "Island of Sifnos" photo in both colour and b&w?
-
Yups, i love to do that, because it seems much classy... love that effect
-
Yups, i love to do that, because it seems much classy... love that effect
To do what?
-
Frames shot in one mindset rarely make much sense when converted to the other.
Well --
Very few, if any images (especially the disembodied, decontextualized artifact/arty-fact we call the photograph) make sense when read as a single image. … The important question to ask is not, "Does the work say what I wanted it to say?" Instead ask, "Can I take responsibility for what it is saying?" (https://books.google.com/books?ei=71UQVcSABZHroASv_4CABw&id=b7NaAAAAYAAJ&dq=photo-editing+and+presentation&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=%22Can+I+take+responsibility+for+what+it+is+saying%3F%22) … from time to time, one will receive new insights and learn new things when one engages with a medium. … Sometimes your pictures will closely correspond to your pre-visualized notion. Sometimes they will be vastly different.
-
Harsh lighting? Try B&W. Subtle lighting? Try thinking about color.
In the film days, I shot B&W because it was cheaper and I could do the processing myself. Pure pragmatism.
-
Harsh lighting? Try B&W. Subtle lighting? Try thinking about color.
Mmmm... not so sure... https://www.flickr.com/photos/21290636@N06/ (https://www.flickr.com/photos/21290636@N06/)
-
I am glad that I clicked on that link. Thanks for posting.
-
I am glad that I clicked on that link. Thanks for posting.
You're welcome ;D
-
Wow, great photos at the link. I especially like the B and W jellyfish, for some reason it looks even more delicate in B and W.
-
Mmmm... not so sure... https://www.flickr.com/photos/21290636@N06/ (https://www.flickr.com/photos/21290636@N06/)
Yes - makes you wonder why we need colour in pictures at all......
Jim
-
So let's agree I said nothing and you didn't understand what I said.
I'm posting this because I really really like this quote!
-
Since reading Nick Devlin's excellent article on photographing in Cuba with the Leica Monochrom, https://luminous-landscape.com/cuba-no-colour/ , I have been seriously thinking about some aspects of this issue: more often than not, I will shoot in color with the idea of converting some, or all of my images to black and white. I occasionally will set my EVF to show in B&W, but since I am shooting in raw, the images will always have color available. More and more I am beginning to think this may be a cop-out; that knowing I have the color image available changes how I (sub)(un)consciously view the scene as I am shooting. Here's the dilemma: I'm not particularly fond of in-camera jpegs, which shooting in true B&W mode would produce, nor can I afford a Leica Monochrom (either version). I invite discussion on this.
-
...
that knowing I have the color image available changes how I (sub)(un)consciously view the scene as I am shooting.
Here's the dilemma: I'm not particularly fond of in-camera jpegs, which shooting in true B&W mode would produce, nor can I afford a Leica Monochrom (either version). I invite discussion on this.
My two cents: every constrain you set is a good thing, because it sets some framing for your shooting.
It's very much like "prime lens are better then zooms for learning".
On the jpeg matter, I'll go for the jpeg until the technical qualities of the photos became the main flaw.
Just as an example, look at this photostream (https://www.flickr.com/photos/felicita73/): the shots may lack definition, but I'll be mooooore than happy to shoot like this.
-
Black and white are colours.
-
More and more I am beginning to think this may be a cop-out; that knowing I have the color image available changes how I (sub)(un)consciously view the scene as I am shooting. Here's the dilemma: I'm not particularly fond of in-camera jpegs, which shooting in true B&W mode would produce, nor can I afford a Leica Monochrom (either version).
Just choose to make monochrome images and then keep to your decision: as-if you'd loaded B&W film into your camera.
The raw provides 3 different monochrome images which enables great processing flexibility (see From Oz to Kansas: Almost Every Black and White Conversion Technique Known to Man (http://books.google.com/books?id=MHJ72cbgSH8C)).
-
Just choose to make monochrome images and then keep to your decision: as-if you'd loaded B&W film into your camera.
That doesn't address the issue of camera-generated jpegs which, although almost good enough, aren't.
-
Just choose to make monochrome images and use raw -- "raw provides 3 different monochrome images which enables great processing flexibility".
-
I flatter myself, I have some vague understanding of how little I know about the huge world that is photography; so let me ask you -- What prizes are awarded only to photographers who "previsualize his/her shot in BW (or color) while shooting"?
B+W or colour film photography competitions would be one example.
-
I used to shoot film, so had to make a conscious decision as whether to use B+W or colour [as well as what ISO to set] and I carried two cameras. Now I only need carry one and I don't need to think B+W, colour or ISO anymore, most of the time that is. Though sometimes as ripgrifith said above, I set screen[jpeg] to B+W to remind me that some shots I thought of as being B+W. Though as I don't shoot jpeg anymore I unless I remember to look at files on import before LR does my standard colour render on them and LR previews are built.
I do wonder how well I would do with B+W photography with digital if I hadn't spent years shooting B+W film.
-
I guess the overall question I would want to ask is, how, if at all, would your B&W shooting change if you didn't have a raw color image to fall back on?
-
Just choose to make monochrome images and use raw -- "raw provides 3 different monochrome images which enables great processing flexibility".
This misses the point: if you shoot raw, there's a part of your brain that knows you always have a color image available, and my question was, and is, does this affect how you shoot?
-
This misses the point: if you shoot raw, there's a part of your brain that knows you always have a color image available, and my question was, and is, does this affect how you shoot?
Yes, it does.
-
Nowadays, we don't HAVE to use the red, yellow, green filter beforehand. I imagine that having considerable experience in B & W conversion methods helps one identify possible lower-contrast images that work in B & W but are "meh" in color.
-
This misses the point: if you shoot raw, there's a part of your brain that knows you always have a color image available, and my question was, and is, does this affect how you shoot?
Nope, it assumes you're capable of keeping to your decision.
So, "there's a part of your brain that knows" you are only going to use those 3 filtered monochromes to make a monochrome image.
-
Nope, it assumes you're capable of keeping to your decision.
So, "there's a part of your brain that knows" you are only going to use those 3 filtered monochromes to make a monochrome image.
It's not the same, and you well know it, but, as usual, you are intent on trying to elicit an argument. I'm not going to bite; it takes more energy than you are worth.
-
Apparently you don't trust yourself not to make a colour image :-)
They give us those nice bright colors
They give us the greens of summers
Makes you think all the world’s
A sunny day, oh yeah
I got a Nikon camera
I love to a photograph
So mama, don’t take my Kodachrome away
-
It is nice not to have to carry a pocket full of colored filters. I am sure that the Leica M240 is a nice camera, but out of my price range. I am better off learning how to swap between "color" mindset and "B&W" mindset when searching for images to shoot.