This video describes the relevance and importance of black n white films. And all the points can be said for black and white photography. We mostly shoot in color, because we can. Our cameras give a very sharp photograph and the raw file gives us the ability to change it to make sure everything is evenly exposed. But when we think about the images that we hold dear, it's often printed photos of our parents, grandparents and family members. And if they are of our grandparents, you might even get some black and white photos. They are important to us because they hold memories of people. But added to that, in my opinion, they simulate another world and gives us a chance to experience it. It creates this feeling of the past, a by-gone world where these people once lived. Black and white photos and films hold that power.
The video goes on to say that a visual image in black and white creates a different world, and allows for a different way of observing it. Shapes are created, and there is almost a battle between light and dark and black and white. One of the quotes I vividly remember is the one by Canadian Photojournalist Ted Grant:
When you photograph people in color, you photograph their clothes. But when you photograph people in black and white, you photograph their souls.
I've made a change this year. My Instagram feed has been black and white for over a month now. And it's weird to think that when shooting black and white you are limited to that and all the shades of grey in between, but I really find it liberating. I'm not sure which brands all do it, but the Fuji X cameras give you a black and white film emulation live in the viewfinder, so you are composing in black and white which makes shooting a lot of fun.
Have any of you used the Fuji cameras black and white film simulation? Do you shoot black and white at all? Let us know in the comments.
[via NoFilmSchool]
I don't photograph in black and white digitally, because
A- that would be silly
B- shooting in b/w digital is NOT the same as film which has a different grain pattern that color film, Providing a significant technical difference than merely switching to "monotone" in your DSLR
As for the need of black and white...neurologically we respond to color differently than monochrome images.
Our brain registers colors in relation to tastes, perceptions and context of our own lives. As an example some people see yellow and think, baby duck, some see tumeric, some see mustard, and some just see an M&M peanut wrapper, it's entirely subjective.
Whereas monochrome b/w requires interpretation of composition, context of elements (still subjective) but can be much more "binary" due to its lack of superfluous information. We can identify w woman crying in a clown's nose more easily as real crying or pretend crying if we don't have the red nose interfering with our brains perception of the situation...context clue.
Your opinion may vary, but neuroscience is where I'm coming from on this one
Actually the grain in film and the noise of digital is strikingly similar. Enough so that it is very easy to fool people, including serious and professional photographers. Of course this is assuming the noise hasn't been ruined (yes, ruined) by noise reduction and unnatural sharpening.
Well, that kind of depends on the film/developer/technique/film used and any number of other variables. Yes, grain from certain film stocks will line up nicely with digital noise, but that's certainly not a hard and fast rule.
I'm talking about the inherent characteristics of film. Outside of examining both with an electron microscope, I'd say it is a good rule that applies, and with all film.
It simply isn't difficult at all to make digital camera images look like film in terms of grain/noise and general appearance. Unfortunately too many people today think the goal should be to eliminate grain/noise as much as possible. Photos of today would look dramatically better if photographers would stop using noise reduction, and used natural looking and modest amounts of sharpening . Instead what we often see today are photos that look like CGI, and that are even cartoon like.
Film fans will often say that film looks more natural, but that's only because it is rare that digital is used without editing away it's natural appearance, a natural appearance that is for all practical purposes identical to film.
This topic is being raised with increasing frequency lately. Is there a shift in some people's comfort zone? - a desire for change?
The short answer to the question posed by the article is "it's all a question of taste - of personal preferences". There can BE no "absolute" truth, no "determinative" answer. Opinions have one fatal flaw - they are only capable of "agreeing" or "differing" - they are quite incapable of being either "right" or "wrong".
I suggest the world can reflect on the virtues and drawbacks of both B&W and color - then everyone can make their own choices, and we can all move on. I am not knocking B&W - I know a guy who shoots the most staggeringly great photographs and ONLY shoots B&W. But I also know another guy who shoots world class photographs in color (I have two of his shot on the wall of this room!)
For the record - the VAST majority of all of the photos I've ever taken have been B&W. Over a period of (now) six and a half decades. At the beginning, heaps of people were passionately fond of color - I wasn't - thanks to Kodacolor slides, there was a certain garish quality to their color shots and anyway, I wanted prints, not slides.
Now? - I've switched - no longer analogue, now digital - no longer B&W, now color. Why? - because it was time to try something new - because I can do my own color processing, which was beyond my financial resources during the analogue era - and most importantly, because it is more versatile than analogue ever was, and enables me to shoot pictures that were beyond the technical limits of the medium, with B&W. For example, my analogue world used to shudder and creak at 1000ASA - yikes! Life has been a voyage of discovery, and I am "discovering" all over again, thanks to digital. Only rarely do I choose to shoot B&W in this medium.
BTW - one of the poorest criticisms of color, from the other side of the fence, that I've seen lately, is a claim that the tonality of the colors in a particular image lack sufficient contrast. Quite where that takes the reader is a mystery - because that same image would presumable be an equal belly flop in B&W.
"Opinions have one fatal flaw - they are only capable of "agreeing" or "differing" - they are quite incapable of being either "right" or "wrong"."
Wrong. Opinions most certainly can be right or wrong. An opinion is simply what someone thinks about something. It can be based on the objective (facts) or the subjective (preferences). If I say that eating too much will cause a person to become fat, that is "right." That is not only an opinion, it is also fact.
While the question posed in this article is purely subjective, not all opinions are.
I shoot in RAW, later while working on images I convert in B&W or keep in color.
I've heard someone said color for Fashion, b&w for Life and I totally agree!
Seems to me, b&w photography would show better feeling of emotions, characters.
Same for movie... Ida is a 2013 Polish drama film made in B&W, wont imagine it in color.
When shooting film, i shoot 80% BW. When shooting digital, I move about 25% to BW. Those are the ones I keep in long storage.
I don't like black and white films, especially modern ones where they can obviously be shot in color. For still images, I love black and white, and usually prefer it for decor, but overall I still prefer color.
Hey Wouter! While I don't shoot B&W in-camera once I upload them to my IG www.instagram.com/CoffeeSessions they're already processed through a highlight/contrast B&W filter in LR. For my models it gives them a different look and it's "different" enough to bring attention.
Use of color (or not using color at all) is just another choice for a photographer to make when trying to communicate to their audience. That's all.
I have different reasons for different photos that I convert to monochrome. Primarily, though, it is because color (on clothing, furniture, and decor) and how color is rendered (through film stock & processing) are more affected by fashion and fad than any other aspect of photography. Color locks an image to a place and time . B&W does not, and that keeps all the baggage of being placed in time from getting in the way of what you're trying to convey. It makes it timeless and allows timeless themes to come through.
Thanks for this!
I am shooting a D750, which has a picture control feature. In order to properly shoot b&w, I have created/loaded a number of picture control presets that emulate several types of film; TriX, HP 5/400, Portra, Extachrome, TMAX,etc. It is remarkably close to film if you truly know the characteristics of these brands. I realize that each of the films can have different outcomes depending on how they are processed, but I really like the results and I too have fooled a few people....believing some digital shots were film.
Simply converting color shots to b&w, I often have to make more post modifications than expected. When using the picture controls along with comparable Lightroom presents, I can keep my workflow completely in the b&w world. Most shots I never see as color, because I believe it would distort my vision for the image.
Craig
I use a Canon 6D and shoot RAW with the screen preview in mono so I think mono. However the RAW file means I can use the colour version if I want or do the conversion to mono myself. I rarely preview and shoot in colour and then change to mono later.