DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> B&W vs Colour
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 27, (reverse)
AuthorThread
06/06/2002 12:33:00 PM · #1
There's been a lot of discussion here about whether some of the images in the B&W challenge would look better in colour. I've left comments on a couple that I think really would have looked a lot stronger in colour than they do in B&W.
I'm guessing that at least 95% of the images in the challenge were originally taken in colour and then converted one way or another to B&W (I followed Gordon's excellent tutorial
How about posting before and after (i.e. colour and B&W) versions when the challenge has finished?
06/06/2002 12:38:21 PM · #2
I think this is a great idea, and not just for the b&w challenge. If you make changes to your photo based on feedback, or want to post the original (if you did cropping), I always enjoy going back and looking at submissions again! I'll definitely be posting my color shot as well as a similar alternative shot that I didn't submit that would answer a lot of the comments that I've been getting.

Roll on Monday! :-)

Originally posted by Jonniboy:
There's been a lot of discussion here about whether some of the images in the B&W challenge would look better in colour. I've left comments on a couple that I think really would have looked a lot stronger in colour than they do in B&W.
I'm guessing that at least 95% of the images in the challenge were originally taken in colour and then converted one way or another to B&W (I followed Gordon's excellent tutorial
How about posting before and after (i.e. colour and B&W) versions when the challenge has finished?



06/06/2002 12:38:28 PM · #3
Not possible for me. Mine was straight out of the camera black and white.
06/06/2002 12:46:13 PM · #4
My photo definitely looks ''different'' in color but I won''t say it looks better... I can definitely see where some people would think that mine would look better in color, but I chose my photo subject because of what it *does* look like in black and white.. I will post my color version after the challenge...


Originally posted by Jonniboy:
There''s been a lot of discussion here about whether some of the images in the B&W challenge would look better in colour. I''ve left comments on a couple that I think really would have looked a lot stronger in colour than they do in B&W.
I''m guessing that at least 95% of the images in the challenge were originally taken in colour and then converted one way or another to B&W (I followed Gordon''s excellent tutorial
How about posting before and after (i.e. colour and B&W) versions when the challenge has finished?





* This message has been edited by the author on 6/6/2002 12:46:17 PM.
06/06/2002 01:14:54 PM · #5
I have shown some of my Black and White work to people that were not photographers, and had them say, wow that is cool, to bad it is not in color, when I do not think the image would have worked in color. SpikyPlant is a perfect example. This is also what I would love to have entered in the competion.
Some people just do not "get" or appreciate Black and White photograohy.



* This message has been edited by the author on 6/6/2002 1:15:46 PM.
06/06/2002 02:26:07 PM · #6
Or different people just have different tastes / opinions . . .

Originally posted by Zeissman:
I have shown some of my Black and White work to people that were not photographers, and had them say, wow that is cool, to bad it is not in color, when I do not think the image would have worked in color. SpikyPlant is a perfect example. This is also what I would love to have entered in the competion.
Some people just do not "get" or appreciate Black and White photograohy.



06/06/2002 02:55:42 PM · #7
gr8,

That is all I was trying to say. I look at some of the work of "pro" fine art photographers, and I wonder how they survive if is was not for the NEA. But someone is buying there work.

Some people love texture and tone, somw love color and brightness. Some like happy pictures, some like "edgy" work. Some folks like postcard shots, and some like abstract. Hopefully, the more people exposed to different types of work on this site, the more open they will be to different genres.

Maybe the work can be rated more for what it is, and less of what we would like it to be? Also, it seems the well written critiques can cause some photographers to try new things.

I am planning on going out and buy a reflector due to one of the comments, probably a gold one for added warmth. I have always avoided doing glamour shots, but maybe I should give it a try.

That does not mean I am going to stop the high contrast black and whites though :)
06/06/2002 03:01:10 PM · #8
Good for you, Zeissman, that's what this site is all about. :-)

Originally posted by Zeissman:
gr8,

That is all I was trying to say. I look at some of the work of "pro" fine art photographers, and I wonder how they survive if is was not for the NEA. But someone is buying there work.

Some people love texture and tone, somw love color and brightness. Some like happy pictures, some like "edgy" work. Some folks like postcard shots, and some like abstract. Hopefully, the more people exposed to different types of work on this site, the more open they will be to different genres.

Maybe the work can be rated more for what it is, and less of what we would like it to be? Also, it seems the well written critiques can cause some photographers to try new things.

I am planning on going out and buy a reflector due to one of the comments, probably a gold one for added warmth. I have always avoided doing glamour shots, but maybe I should give it a try.

That does not mean I am going to stop the high contrast black and whites though :)



06/06/2002 03:22:58 PM · #9
B&W and color are different mediums just as oil and acrylic are different medium for a painter.

Generally, an artist selects a medium based on the image they are attempting and how the medium can help them convey image to viewers.

In my view art is a one-to-one communication between the image maker and the image viewer. It is a given that each viewer will take something different from the image - something unique to them. Particularilly when we consider all the prior experience the viewer is using to evaluate the image being viewed. Another consideration is the image maker's intent, and background.

People are generally predisposed toward color because that is the way we see the world. Using B&W implies that the image maker what's to abstract the subject for some reason. Thus tonality, and composition become significant contributors to the visualization for the image maker and viewer. When these elements do not deliver a strong image, the viewer tends to want to see the color. For example, there is a submission in this challenge -a female profile- that is very contrasty and grainy looking. Without regard to its other characteristics, when viewing this image there is no desire to want to see color.

DMW

Originally posted by Zeissman:
gr8,

That is all I was trying to say. I look at some of the work of "pro" fine art photographers, and I wonder how they survive if is was not for the NEA. But someone is buying there work.


06/06/2002 04:50:29 PM · #10
Originally posted by dmward:
B&W and color are different mediums just as oil and acrylic are different medium for a painter.

Generally, an artist selects a medium based on the image they are attempting and how the medium can help them convey image to viewers.

In my view art is a one-to-one communication between the image maker and the image viewer. It is a given that each viewer will take something different from the image - something unique to them. Particularilly when we consider all the prior experience the viewer is using to evaluate the image being viewed. Another consideration is the image maker''s intent, and background.

People are generally predisposed toward color because that is the way we see the world. Using B&W implies that the image maker what''s to abstract the subject for some reason. Thus tonality, and composition become significant contributors to the visualization for the image maker and viewer. When these elements do not deliver a strong image, the viewer tends to want to see the color. For example, there is a submission in this challenge -a female profile- that is very contrasty and grainy looking. Without regard to its other characteristics, when viewing this image there is no desire to want to see color.

DMW


This is very well put. I wonder if it should be posted as a tutorial? - perhaps expanded a bit for that.





* This message has been edited by the author on 6/6/2002 4:50:52 PM.
06/06/2002 05:06:03 PM · #11

Maybe I did not make my point clear. Are you denying that some people just have very closed minds about what they like? Or that learning about or being exposed to new styles can''t change a person''s perception of what "good" is?

I have met many people that think black and white film has no purpose. They would look at an Ansel Adams shot and want to see color. To them black and white became useless when Kodachrome was invented.

I have met people that only want to see literal interpritations of objects at their best, and others that think the way urine splatters on a sidewalk is art, and has great meaning.

I know personally, the art classes I have taken have opened up a new world to me that I might otherwise have ignored.

Originally posted by dmward:
B&W and color are different mediums just as oil and acrylic are different medium for a painter.

Generally, an artist selects a medium based on the image they are attempting and how the medium can help them convey image to viewers.

In my view art is a one-to-one communication between the image maker and the image viewer. It is a given that each viewer will take something different from the image - something unique to them. Particularilly when we consider all the prior experience the viewer is using to evaluate the image being viewed. Another consideration is the image maker''s intent, and background.

People are generally predisposed toward color because that is the way we see the world. Using B&W implies that the image maker what''s to abstract the subject for some reason. Thus tonality, and composition become significant contributors to the visualization for the image maker and viewer. When these elements do not deliver a strong image, the viewer tends to want to see the color. For example, there is a submission in this challenge -a female profile- that is very contrasty and grainy looking. Without regard to its other characteristics, when viewing this image there is no desire to want to see color.

DMW

Originally posted by Zeissman:
[i]gr8,

That is all I was trying to say. I look at some of the work of "pro" fine art photographers, and I wonder how they survive if is was not for the NEA. But someone is buying there work.


[/i]




* This message has been edited by the author on 6/6/2002 5:06:23 PM.


* This message has been edited by the author on 6/6/2002 5:15:23 PM.
06/06/2002 06:32:06 PM · #12
I seems we are approaching the same view from different perspectives. I agree that some people have closed their minds to new inputs and have a narrow perspective. The one concept I do have trouble with is a universal "good" taste. It seems to me more appropriate to speak in terms of good technique, etc. since "taste" is very personal and subject to a life history of experience. to wit; there are two definitions of "freedom" that can be applied in a political context; a rational definition and an irrational definition. One, definition suits totalitarion governance and the other suits democratic goverance as embodied in the US Constitution. "Good" when applied to one's taste in art, food or a number of other things is even more clouded.

Seems to be best for us to focus on technique and let the "good"ness of an image remain a silent experience between the view and the image maker.

DMW

Originally posted by Zeissman:

Maybe I did not make my point clear. Are you denying that some people just have very closed minds about what they like? Or that learning about or being exposed to new styles can''t change a person''s perception of what "good" is?

I have met many people that think black and white film has no purpose. They would look at an Ansel Adams shot and want to see color. To them black and white became useless when Kodachrome was invented.

I have met people that only want to see literal interpritations of objects at their best, and others that think the way urine splatters on a sidewalk is art, and has great meaning.

I know personally, the art classes I have taken have opened up a new world to me that I might otherwise have ignored.

Originally posted by dmward:
[i]B&W and color are different mediums just as oil and acrylic are different medium for a painter.

Generally, an artist selects a medium based on the image they are attempting and how the medium can help them convey image to viewers.

In my view art is a one-to-one communication between the image maker and the image viewer. It is a given that each viewer will take something different from the image - something unique to them. Particularilly when we consider all the prior experience the viewer is using to evaluate the image being viewed. Another consideration is the image maker''s intent, and background.

People are generally predisposed toward color because that is the way we see the world. Using B&W implies that the image maker what''s to abstract the subject for some reason. Thus tonality, and composition become significant contributors to the visualization for the image maker and viewer. When these elements do not deliver a strong image, the viewer tends to want to see the color. For example, there is a submission in this challenge -a female profile- that is very contrasty and grainy looking. Without regard to its other characteristics, when viewing this image there is no desire to want to see color.

DMW

Originally posted by Zeissman:
[i]gr8,

That is all I was trying to say. I look at some of the work of "pro" fine art photographers, and I wonder how they survive if is was not for the NEA. But someone is buying there work.


[/i]


[/i]

06/06/2002 07:00:53 PM · #13
Boy, you really love to nit pick.

I was trying to start a conversation on what affects a person''s perception of what is "good" (or as you like to put it what affects their "taste", and how that affects our scores.

If we do not understand what the intended audiences likes and dislikes, we may never get there attention.

Contests like Black and White, may expose people to some type of photographs would never bother to look at before. The first textural photograph someone sees, they may dislike, just because they have not reference for it. After comparing several images where tone and texture, not color are the primary points of interest, they may grow to appriciate it more. "Small Wonder" is a perfect example, some people may have never seen an abstract child portrait before, and may think it is a poor image strictly based on that fact. If such a person is exposed to more images like that, they may stop trying to focus on what they think should be the center of interest, and start focusing on what is the center of interest (the babies delicate hand).

The viewers (or critics) frame of reference is important to deciphering the criticism too. For example: If an image is intentionally blurred to produce an effect, and a reviewer tells the artist they needed to use a faster shutter speed to stop the action, did the photographer have bad technique, or does the viewer just like images to be sharp all the time? Perhaps the photographer should be used an even slower shutter speed to really accentuate the blur.

My point is, someone that has only listened to classical music would probably not make a good jazz critic.

Please no more lectures.


Originally posted by dmward:
I seems we are approaching the same view from different perspectives. I agree that some people have closed their minds to new inputs and have a narrow perspective. The one concept I do have trouble with is a universal "good" taste. It seems to me more appropriate to speak in terms of good technique, etc. since "taste" is very personal and subject to a life history of experience. to wit; there are two definitions of "freedom" that can be applied in a political context; a rational definition and an irrational definition. One, definition suits totalitarion governance and the other suits democratic goverance as embodied in the US Constitution. "Good" when applied to one''s taste in art, food or a number of other things is even more clouded.

Seems to be best for us to focus on technique and let the "good"ness of an image remain a silent experience between the view and the image maker.

DMW

Originally posted by Zeissman:
[i]
Maybe I did not make my point clear. Are you denying that some people just have very closed minds about what they like? Or that learning about or being exposed to new styles can''t change a person''s perception of what "good" is?

I have met many people that think black and white film has no purpose. They would look at an Ansel Adams shot and want to see color. To them black and white became useless when Kodachrome was invented.

I have met people that only want to see literal interpritations of objects at their best, and others that think the way urine splatters on a sidewalk is art, and has great meaning.

I know personally, the art classes I have taken have opened up a new world to me that I might otherwise have ignored.

Originally posted by dmward:
[i]B&W and color are different mediums just as oil and acrylic are different medium for a painter.

Generally, an artist selects a medium based on the image they are attempting and how the medium can help them convey image to viewers.

In my view art is a one-to-one communication between the image maker and the image viewer. It is a given that each viewer will take something different from the image - something unique to them. Particularilly when we consider all the prior experience the viewer is using to evaluate the image being viewed. Another consideration is the image maker''s intent, and background.

People are generally predisposed toward color because that is the way we see the world. Using B&W implies that the image maker what''s to abstract the subject for some reason. Thus tonality, and composition become significant contributors to the visualization for the image maker and viewer. When these elements do not deliver a strong image, the viewer tends to want to see the color. For example, there is a submission in this challenge -a female profile- that is very contrasty and grainy looking. Without regard to its other characteristics, when viewing this image there is no desire to want to see color.

DMW

Originally posted by Zeissman:
[i]gr8,

That is all I was trying to say. I look at some of the work of "pro" fine art photographers, and I wonder how they survive if is was not for the NEA. But someone is buying there work.


[/i]


[/i]

[/i]




* This message has been edited by the author on 6/6/2002 7:09:12 PM.
06/06/2002 07:08:25 PM · #14
zeissman,

it seems as if dm *is* in fact conversing with you, and what's more, expressing his/her own opinion. i didnt get the impression there was a 'lecture' in progress. : )
06/06/2002 07:10:35 PM · #15
B&W and color are different mediums just as oil and acrylic are different medium for a painter.....

. The one concept I do have trouble with is a universal "good" taste. It seems to me more appropriate to speak in terms of good technique, etc. since "taste" is very personal and subject to a life history of experience. to wit; there are two definitions of "freedom" that can be applied in a political context; a rational definition and an irrational definition....


Read like lecture to me, I think someone even suggested posting the first one as a tutorial.




Originally posted by magnetic9999:
zeissman,

it seems as if dm *is* in fact conversing with you, and what''s more, expressing his/her own opinion. i didnt get the impression there was a ''lecture'' in progress. : )





* This message has been edited by the author on 6/6/2002 7:16:40 PM.
06/06/2002 07:29:36 PM · #16
I originally used the black and white feature of my camera to take the original shot for the challenge. However, my black and white mode really limits what camera features I can use. It's almost like an "auto" mode. I ended up switching back to manual mode and converted the colour image for the challenge.

My photo was taken with black and white in mind but it just wasn't reasonable for me to actually shoot it in black and white.
06/06/2002 08:01:17 PM · #17
When going digital, I think that is the best way to do it. The tonal range is going to need to be adjusted anyway. Black and White film show much more contrast than color. This way you have too images, and can pick which one you want to print. I definitely want both of mine.

Originally posted by dpchallenger:
I originally used the black and white feature of my camera to take the original shot for the challenge. However, my black and white mode really limits what camera features I can use. It's almost like an "auto" mode. I ended up switching back to manual mode and converted the colour image for the challenge.

My photo was taken with black and white in mind but it just wasn't reasonable for me to actually shoot it in black and white.



06/07/2002 02:12:19 AM · #18
What, no takers?
06/07/2002 04:48:23 PM · #19
I agree that with a digital camera, capturing the image file in color makes sense. First, the image capture device is filtered so that certain pixels capture Red, others Green, and others Blue. Changing the capture mode to B&W simply converts the color information to gray scale information. While it is true that B&W negative film captures a wider dynamic range than color negative file, I have not seen anything to indicate the same is true for digital cameras.

Being able to convert the color image to B&W using one of several methods using an image editing program offers substancial "digital darkroom" flexibilty for the photographer.

And as mentioned, there is still a color image file.

DMW
Originally posted by Zeissman:
When going digital, I think that is the best way to do it. The tonal range is going to need to be adjusted anyway. Black and White film show much more contrast than color. This way you have too images, and can pick which one you want to print. I definitely want both of mine.

Originally posted by dpchallenger:
[i]I originally used the black and white feature of my camera to take the original shot for the challenge. However, my black and white mode really limits what camera features I can use. It's almost like an "auto" mode. I ended up switching back to manual mode and converted the colour image for the challenge.

My photo was taken with black and white in mind but it just wasn't reasonable for me to actually shoot it in black and white.



[/i]

06/07/2002 04:54:03 PM · #20
Originally posted by Zeissman:
Boy, you really love to nit pick...

Please no more lectures.


To bad you interpret one expressing their point of view, with examples substantiating it, as lecturing. I was attempting discourse in persuit of knowledge.

One man's attempt to be clear in detail is another man's nit pick.

DMW

06/08/2002 07:28:08 PM · #21
lecture - to discourse before an audience or class

Originally posted by dmward:
Originally posted by Zeissman:
[i]Boy, you really love to nit pick...

Please no more lectures.


To bad you interpret one expressing their point of view, with examples substantiating it, as lecturing. I was attempting discourse in persuit of knowledge.

One man's attempt to be clear in detail is another man's nit pick.

DMW

[/i]


06/10/2002 12:37:56 AM · #22
Originally posted by Jonniboy:
How about posting before and after (i.e. colour and B&W) versions when the challenge has finished?

My before and after


06/10/2002 01:04:39 AM · #23
the color version of mine is available at the naturalight link, but as I barely beat out naked shaving guy, I doubt anyone cares.

Originally posted by Jonniboy:
Originally posted by Jonniboy:
[i]How about posting before and after (i.e. colour and B&W) versions when the challenge has finished?


My before and after


[/i]


06/10/2002 01:44:11 AM · #24
I'm very surprised that Hannah Rests came so low. I gave it 8, and lots of people have given you their opinions of it in the forums, but your score is determined by a huge number of people who don't like familiar things to be photographed in an unfamiliar way. Don't take it personally, it's the nature of this place.
06/10/2002 03:27:46 AM · #25
Ziessman isn't past your bedtime? I'm getting a kick out of some of your comments, especially your critique of the naked shaver!


Originally posted by Zeissman:
the color version of mine is available at the naturalight link, but as I barely beat out naked shaving guy, I doubt anyone cares.

Originally posted by Jonniboy:
[i]Originally posted by Jonniboy:
[i]How about posting before and after (i.e. colour and B&W) versions when the challenge has finished?


My before and after


[/i]


[/i]

Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 06:25:09 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 03/28/2024 06:25:09 AM EDT.