| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/03/2002 06:32:17 PM · #1 |
I'm noticing a lot of pictures in this week's challenge were it seems as though people just took any color picture without regard to how B&W would affect it. I've seen many shots of things (especially flowers) which are normally very colorful but in B&W merely seem dull and uninteresting. I think if you are going to do a photo in B&W, there needs to be a reason for it. I think if I find myself wishing to see it in color, than I have to mark the photo down. Just my thought, and a bit of an explanation for several comments I have made.
|
|
|
|
06/03/2002 06:40:50 PM · #2 |
I'd agree, but then again, this happens every single challenge. I always find myself commenting that there's no need for B&W. This week especially the action shots (jetski) have no reason to be B&W.
|
|
|
|
06/03/2002 06:43:08 PM · #3 |
I think it's unfair to judge a photo poorly because it would look better in color...
|
|
|
|
06/03/2002 06:48:36 PM · #4 |
As a 'newbie' I'd be very interested in knowing what the "ideal" situation for b&w would be for you. I happen to like texture in black and white, so sometimes flowers would work and....same with action, I like some sports action in b&w since to me, again one without any experience, it portrays almost a professional - newspaper image. Perhaps I'm talking out of turn, but I would like to know what is the 'best' situation for b&w, any thoughts would be appreciated. :)
|
|
|
|
06/03/2002 06:52:32 PM · #5 |
I personally think that sharp contrasts add a lot to a black and white... just my preferences tho...
|
|
|
|
06/03/2002 07:12:12 PM · #6 |
There is a difference in saying that a photo SHOULD be in color vs. COULD be in color.
A lot of comments here are peoples natural desire to art direct/armchair coach. Nothing wrong with that. Folks do it all the time after watching a movie or a sports event.
If the jetski photo looks a little flat in black and white any slight mental deduction I might give a shot like that is made up for in the energy the shot creates to compensate. On the other hand the baseball stadium shot is an action shot that looks great in black and white maybe in part because the history of baseball is built on so many memories in black and white footage.
I agree with jm..contrast helps black and white a lot. Too much information can hurt a black and white. Sometimes I lose the subject/focus in all the confusion of the stuff going on.
Most newspapers still only print photos in Black and White and they don't normally limit their photos to only editorial pieces. So, a wide range of photos still have to work in black and white. Maybe Black and White has become a harder art form for the casual photgrapher due to so much color photography/media nowadays.
All I know is that when I started photography you started with black and white and graduated to color. :-) |
|
|
|
06/03/2002 07:24:32 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
I personally think that sharp contrasts add a lot to a black and white... just my preferences tho...
heh - my picture this week isn't doing too well, which is fine. Not had many comments but one says 'too contrasty' and another one says 'not enough contrast' :)
|
|
|
|
06/03/2002 07:28:45 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
I think it's unfair to judge a photo poorly because it would look better in color...
I disagree... Using black and white for photography, or more specifically changing a color photograph to black and white should have a clear, positive effect on the photo. I think the use of black and white should improve your shot, or it shouldn't be used.
Drew |
|
|
|
06/03/2002 07:31:38 PM · #9 |
yep, and the instructions say to be different to set your's apart. Well. there are no others like mine and I am suffering bitter tongue lashings.
|
|
|
|
06/03/2002 07:35:04 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by cthenk:
As a 'newbie' I'd be very interested in knowing what the "ideal" situation for b&w would be for you. I happen to like texture in black and white, so sometimes flowers would work and....same with action, I like some sports action in b&w since to me, again one without any experience, it portrays almost a professional - newspaper image. Perhaps I'm talking out of turn, but I would like to know what is the 'best' situation for b&w, any thoughts would be appreciated. :)
I'm not claiming I have experience or good taste, but I just don't feel action shots due well under b&w format. I think half the the appeal is that the vivid color draws a user in. I feel the B&W medium is reserved for those shots that are more laid back and quieter. Not a fast ball heading towards home plate.
As for newspapers, I'm not sure which paper you're reading but most of the papers I've picked up lately have a plethora of color photos and not just on the front page.
Some of the flower shots this challenge worked GREAT in B&W in my opinion, while others did not. I think the trick to a good B&W image is good tones. You cant have a shot where everything is gray and gets lots in the confusion. Some of the images I've seeen this challenge are like camoflauge, the subjects just don't grab you like they should.
|
|
|
|
06/03/2002 08:36:08 PM · #11 |
Instead of just taking a picture this week, I actually looked at some "masters" of bw (adams, etc), and tried to read about what made a good black and white picture. It boiled down to a couple of things. One strong point is that the picture would have a definite black and/or a definite white in it to establish contrast. The rest could be grays (or would be grays). Another strong point is that black and white is best used when showing texture or patterns. What black and white is not is just a picture converted that is all grays.
Okay. So I tried to find a pattern that had some definite black and/or white in it. I admit, I converted a color picture, because I have discovered that my camera takes lousy bw pics, I''m sure most of it is the photographyer, (black looks dark gray, white looks light gray). The irony is, like Gordon, my picture has "too much contrast," and I also have one of the lowest scores of any of my past submissions (and that, my friend, is low).
My point in all of this; I really don''t have one, I am just home alone right now, and needed to get that off my chest. Thank you.
* This message has been edited by the author on 6/3/2002 8:37:10 PM. |
|
|
|
06/03/2002 08:45:40 PM · #12 |
I have to agree with the comment that started this threat - if you take any picture and convert it to b&w and I look at it and wish I could see the colors, then it didn't work, at least IMHO, and that's how I've voted. A big part of the challenge was to learn what works and what doesn't, not to take just any good shot and convert it.
|
|
|
|
06/03/2002 09:22:20 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by gr8photos:
I have to agree with the comment that started this threat - if you take any picture and convert it to b&w and I look at it and wish I could see the colors, then it didn't work
I agree too. That is why mine is a bit different
|
|
|
|
06/03/2002 09:31:03 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
yep, and the instructions say to be different to set your's apart. Well. there are no others like mine and I am suffering bitter tongue lashings.
I think it's been brought up several times before, but I say don't let bad votes affect your style or creativity. I'd take the comments on technical aspects, and ignore the ones that miss my vision. As long as you're learning and happy with the photo, mission accomplished.
Drew |
|
|
|
06/03/2002 09:34:10 PM · #15 |
I didn't submit a picture to this challenge due to time constraints, but I would have loved to get a picture of my dad's 1956 Ford Fairlane in front of an old drive in movie theater screen, possibly a night shot at an angle from behind the car. Or if there was one around here, the car pulled in to a Sonic restaurant (where they serve you in your car I believe). Something with 50s era nastolgia.
I'm actually pretty surprised that there is only one "old car" picture.
Here's the car if anyone is interested.
I would call it an outtake, but it was taken today way past the deadline = )
In Black and white
In Color
|
|
|
|
06/03/2002 10:19:54 PM · #16 |
It seems to me that B&W photos fall into two general categories. The first is the use of B&W for the "cheap" emotional gravity it lends a picture. B&W (and sepia) imply an elegance and class that any photographer would like to have associated with their photo. That's certainly not to say that there's anything wrong with making a photo B&W or sepia, but merely that these photos aren't necessarily best suited for these mediums.
The other category are those that are traditionally considered to be B&W photography's strong points: lots of contrast, lots of texture, and lots of play between shadow and light.
My "People" submission fell very clearly into the first category. I tried to make sure the B&W challenge photo fell into the second category. We'll see! |
|
|
|
06/03/2002 10:51:42 PM · #17 |
I wouldn't go as far as to say a 'clear and positive' effect... I took a totally different route on that issue this week with my entry. Maybe this is where my 'abstract' comment came from... I did something that was definitely out of the realm of good taste when converting to black and white... When I posted my photo this week, I expected it to do either really well or really poorly for that very reason. I have been lucky with it so far :)
Originally posted by drewmedia:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
[i]I think it's unfair to judge a photo poorly because it would look better in color...
I disagree... Using black and white for photography, or more specifically changing a color photograph to black and white should have a clear, positive effect on the photo. I think the use of black and white should improve your shot, or it shouldn't be used.
Drew[/i]
|
|
|
|
06/04/2002 12:15:01 AM · #18 |
| If you're wishing to see the colour in a photograph, I think that says more about your personal taste than about the photo. Black and white can lead you, if you're open minded enough, to consider shapes and textures in an image where colour would distract you from those things. In my opinion, black and white or colour are both valid choices for any subject depending on what the photographer wanted to emphasise. It's not up to the photographer to compensate for you if you don't want to look at a scene in a different way. |
|
|
|
06/04/2002 01:26:49 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by lisae:
If you're wishing to see the colour in a photograph, I think that says more about your personal taste than about the photo. Black and white can lead you, if you're open minded enough, to consider shapes and textures in an image where colour would distract you from those things. In my opinion, black and white or colour are both valid choices for any subject [i]depending on what the photographer wanted to emphasise. It's not up to the photographer to compensate for you if you don't want to look at a scene in a different way.[/i]
Very true, and nicely said. Though, I would certainly argue that some of the photos in the challenge are only black and white because the challenge required that they be -- not because the artist wanted me to look at the scene a different way. All speculation, I suppose ;)
Drew |
|
|
|
06/04/2002 03:09:56 AM · #20 |
I have commented on a few photos this week that they were too sharp for my tastes. B&W can certainly show drastic contrast, but if the edges are too harsh, or just too clean, for me it detracts from the image.
I think B&W has to have a certain softness to add life back into it.
But what (to me) constitutes good B&W? I love B&W, and it is for one main reason... it can de-emphasize soemthing that is normally pretty alarming (like a flower in foreground) and really put the emphasis back onto whatever subject you want. Even with foreground and background BOTh in tight focus, the background item can take the attention of the observer if it is interesting, and the foreground object is downplayed.
Why?
Light.
B&W is a photo of pure light and dark. Colors and such cannot draw your eye. if the sun shines bright on a flower, that flower will stand out. No matter what color it is, or what color the other objects are, a light object with bright light on it takes center stage. But finding a sfot light and allowing it to enhance what YOU want to be the primary focus is the key I think.
A red sportscar parked in front of a tree with the sun shining down can be very dramatic. The same pitrue in B&W can actually take the car and make it seem mundane, but the light danging through the leaves and beaming to the road below... now that is amazing. It makes you look at what is creating the vibrance you see, and not neccessarily the actual item that is being made vibrant.
Example?
This is actually a very nice pic my ife took with the camera while I was at work. it was at a local art festival over the weekend.
The bench
Notice the colors on the bench itself are central to the picture. But lets look what happens after we go B&W....
B&W Bench
Now the kids, and more specifically my Son, is the central figure. The light hitting him is more prominent than the color of the paint on the bench. I left a shade of color in this one to show where the orange WAS on the bench, and how now it has completely become secondary to the image.
Man I love B&W.
|
|
|
|
06/04/2002 09:48:15 AM · #21 |
Gordon, you said :
heh - my picture this week isn't doing too well, which is fine. Not had many comments but one says 'too contrasty' and another one says 'not enough contrast' :)
After a half a dozen entries here as I work to improve my digital skills, this is exactly what I am trying to achieve now. If I can get a few people saying : "I like it for xxx" and a few others saying "You need to improve the xxxx", then I feel I have hit the mark. Obviously, I would like to have everyone in positive agreement, but the chances of this happening are quite low here.
BTW, keep up the good work.
Jim |
|
|
|
06/04/2002 11:55:24 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by i3ullseye:
I have commented on a few photos this week that they were too sharp for my tastes. B&W can certainly show drastic contrast, but if the edges are too harsh, or just too clean, for me it detracts from the image.
I think B&W has to have a certain softness to add life back into it.
I have to disagree. I like a lot of soft B&W photography. It can really set an evocative mood in photos. However, I also like very contrasty B&Ws where the removal of color brings out crisp edges on what is being shot. My top two this week are both like this. To each their own. :-)
|
|
|
|
06/04/2002 01:26:44 PM · #23 |
| And the moral of the tale is that if you get a comment from 13ullseye that your pic is too sharp, andone from Amphian that says your pic is too soft, you've hit the mark. {g} |
|
|
|
06/04/2002 02:19:11 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by irae:
And the moral of the tale is that if you get a comment from 13ullseye that your pic is too sharp, andone from Amphian that says your pic is too soft, you've hit the mark. {g}
Makes you wonder why the hell we are subjecting ourselves to this sort of torture.
|
|
|
|
06/04/2002 02:31:40 PM · #25 |
[
* This message has been edited by the author on 6/6/2002 7:27:11 AM. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 05:00:42 PM EDT.
