Black and white

[Abitconfused]

An image may have areas of solid black and/or solid white. Do we say black or white has no tonal information or one tone of information?

[Mike Buckley]

More precisely, true black is the absorbtion of all colors and true white is the reflection of all colors.

[James G]

???? Not really sure what the question is here?

Black and white images, in their 'purest form' are comprised of grey tones solely. Solid black would be represented by RGB (0,0,0) and solid white by RGB(255,255,255).

Arguably from a digital sensor perspective 0,0,0 represents no light captured, therefore no information, and 255,255,255 total saturation/overflow. (All pixels are naturally 'grey scale' simply being dependent on the incidence of photons.)

I'm presuming in this instance you are considering screen images. If you are referring to printed images the same principle applies but solid white would be limited by the actual colour/tone of the substrate, and solid black would be limited to the 'recipe' for the ink/pigment mix to create the darkest black.

[James G]

Mike has said it more concisely than me.

[Manfred M]

In my view, B&W has always been a bit misleading. I personally prefer the term "monochrome", as that includes what we traditionally call B&W as well as toned options (where something other black is used as the base colour) or the background material is not pure white (quite common when one prints and the print medium is not pure white).

[James G]

Do we say black or white has no tonal information or one tone of information?

On further reflection (not quite punny!), there is a semantic element to be resolved in the use and understanding of tone.

Tonal range represents a difference in visual values that are perceptible to the viewer. Use of the qualifier 'solid' implies that there are no perceptible variations to be discriminated. So single tone might be more approprite rather than no tone.

But I'm still not quite sure what is being asked.

[Abitconfused]

Here is the question in other words.

[Manfred M]

A black and white jpeg (8-bit) image can have up to 256 different tones; pure black (0,0,0), pure white (255, 255, 255) and 254 shades of gray between these two extremes. In fact most B&W photographers will tell you any B&W image MUST contain some pure black and pure white.

[george013]

A black and white jpeg (8-bit) image can have up to 256 different tones; pure black (0,0,0), pure white (255, 255, 255) and 254 shades of gray between these two extremes. In fact most B&W photographers will tell you any B&W image MUST contain some pure black and pure white.

I don't agree with the statement that a b/w image should contain some pure black and some pur white. I even think it's a caracteristic of the old images that it doesn't. Except for graphical images.

Happy New Year.

George.

[James G]

Ed, I'd restate what I said in my first post and what Manfred posted last. A lot photographers who work in black and white do argue that there should be elements of solid black and white in the image. Certainly when I first started in photography, a long time ago, it was recommended' when developing a 'balanced' print. In my experience though that was not always (for me at least), easy to achieve, or particularly appropriate for the mage.

Even in modern colour printing the 'black' and 'white' points in an image are often set directly though I usually content myself with a grey points initially.

Looking at your 'restatement' of the question I would say that your greyscale tonal range is set well. The beading on the frame (to the right) seems sufficiently black/solid, and depending on your taste does not need any adjustment

[Mike Buckley]

Just a quick comment about the photo unrelated to the topic of the thread: I've reviewed the image several times and for the life of me can't figure out how the subject stands out so nicely among everything that is so busy around it. The depth of field is just limited enough to provide sufficient separation between the subject and everything else but the blurred areas still allow sufficient details to be displayed. I would think that detail would compete with the subject but for some reason it doesn't. Good eye for being able to make all that work, though I still don't know exactly how or why it works.

[Manfred M]

I don't agree with the statement that a b/w image should contain some pure black and some pur white. I even think it's a caracteristic of the old images that it doesn't. Except for graphical images.

Happy New Year.

George.

This is something I was taught a long time ago and most photographers applied religiously, otherwise their images would be rejected by publishers for technical reasons.

This rule was repeated during the college level colour correction course I took two years ago and the reason was repeated and solidified by the instructor suggesting that if your final output was a B&W jpeg, then you had a MAXIMUM of 256 shades in the image. To get a good image you needed the full range.

Not all B&W photographers follow that rule, but in most cases, it does give you a superior image.

[DanK]

This thread has three topics already, I think.

The first is the OP's question:

no tonal information or one tone of information

I think James answered that well:

Tonal range represents a difference in visual values that are perceptible to the viewer. Use of the qualifier 'solid' implies that there are no perceptible variations to be discriminated. So single tone might be more approprite rather than no tone.

The second is Manfred's point that "monochrome" is a better term than "black and white." I agree. For example, many photographers in the days of "black and white" photography printed in sepia tones. When I was printing black and white, I used Agfa Brovira, a very high-contrast, cold-tone paper that could reasonably be called black and white. Most people I knew used warmer-toned Kodak papers that were a bit on the sepia side.

The third issue is whether all monochrome photography should have the full tonal range that we now, in the digital era, label 0,0,0 to 255,255,255. Take a look at some of the photos of Edward Steichen, widely considered to be one of the greats of pictorialist photography. Many of his photos don't come close to the full tonal range from pure white to pure dark. And also keep in mind that in the era of film, it was often no easy matter to obtain the full tonal range. I personally still like the high-contrast look that I tried to print decades ago, and most of my few digital monochromes at least come close to a full tonal range, but that is simply a matter of taste. I think this rule, like most others, should be relabeled as a "suggestion," to be followed when it helps produce the image one wants.