Why do you choose to shoot or process in B&W?

[Mike Buckley]

However I think the approach to B&W is more related to sculpture where as the approach to colour photography is more akin to painting.

Don't forget that there are several forms of fine art that are not sculpture that are monochromatic, including some that have been in existence for thousands of years. Compare them with photography, which is still less than 200 years old by most people's definition. If you want to include the camera obscura as a tool of photography (most don't), add a "measly" 300 years.

[William W]

. . . I just thought I'd ask. What makes you decide to shoot a scene in B&W or to convert images? What are you trying to accomplish or to avoid? What do you want us to see that we would miss with color?

You’ve spoken a lot about ‘the scene’ and respondents have mentioned ‘texture’, ‘shape', ‘form’ and similar words.

It seems there has been a lot of discussion about ‘scenes’ - the thread seems skewed thus - and there are some nice examples to explain the points of view.

I don’t shoot a lot of “scenes” in the sense of “landscapes”.

But from one who does make many Portrait Photographs - I answer thus:


“What are you trying to accomplish or to avoid?
What do you want us to see that we would miss with color?”

• I want to focus the viewer’s eye into the image.
• I want the viewer to understand the meanings of it and reasons for it.
• I want to evoke emotion. Perhaps subtle at first.
• I do not want to complicate these processes with lots of colour ‘noises’.

***



These all were made in Colour, but B&W was chosen for publication of each:

Sample 01 (circa 1970’s):


“Football Grand Final – The Battle is Over”

***

Sample 02 (2008)


“Change room before the Race” – (Semi-Finals, Olympic Selection)

(Not actually in the Change Room - just flexing and limbering her back after pulling the straps of her warm up costume, as she was walking down the hallway into the Change Room to suit up into her Racing Suit. I liked the down lights in the hallway, as she flexed to loosen up her shoulders. I pulled three shots - this was the best lighting.)

***

Samples 3 & 4 (2010)

Available Light Portrait - Woman on Deck Chair at Resort.

***

Available Light Portrait - Woman on Deck Chair – I asked her to move under the shade of a tree.


WW

[jcuknz]

there you go. There are a lot of us that still haven't been able to come out yet. It's okay, it's safe out here in b & w world.

lol

[Mike Buckley]

John (Shadowman) asked me in another thread about this, so I have copied my response to this thread for the convenience of anyone who wants to see it in the context of the other responses posted here:

I've been thinking about this a lot since reading and posting in Terri's thread, especially while post-processing my monochromes. I'll list the reasons I convert specific images to monochrome. As you review them, keep in mind my relatively inexperienced perspective: I have been making conversions only for a year and, unlike Donald who has a keen ability to "see" in black-and-white, you could count the images on one hand that I thought in terms of monochrome before releasing the shutter.

The reasons I convert a particular image are as follows:

1) Converting can eliminate colorful elements that are distracting.

2) Converting can emphasize shape, strong lines, texture and the like.

3) Converting can produce pleasingly rich, dark tones in relatively high-contrast images with a wide dynamic range. I like portraits and candids produced in this style because the dark tones inevitably draw attention to the subject's eyes.

4) Converting can produce subtle nuance in relatively low-contrast images with a narrow dynamic range.

5) Converting to monochromes toned with colors such as gold and/or brown are pleasantly warm.

6) Converting timeless images to monochromes, whether toned or not, reminds the viewer of photographs that were made before it was possible to capture color photographs. (Having said that, I also like toned monochromes that are not at all timeless and wish photographers wouldn't reserve that style for use only with timeless scenes.)

7) Converting to monochrome using a gold-brown toning resembles today's look of an albumen print made in the 19th century.

8) Converting to monochrome can present options for crops that are not viable in the color version.

9) Converting to monochrome simply works for whatever reason, despite that sometimes I'm not able to decide exactly what that reason may be and despite that the photo may only be just as pleasing in different ways, not necessarily better, than the color version.

[rambler4466]

Here is another version of what Mike B has described:

"In photography there are two basic elements of design -- tone and colour. These make visible and often actually create the lines, shapes, textures, and perspective....on which all visual expression depends.
In black-and-white or monochromatic pictures, it is the contrast of tones --- the degree of the intensity of light --- that reveals and defines lines, shapes, textures and perspective. But where two or more colours are present, colour contrast also helps to establish these visual elements." Freeman Patterson, Photography and the Art of Seeing, p. 105

Look again at GrumpyDiver's photo of the wreck on the beach.

Andrew76 : "I think that B & W photos are actually harder to produce well. It's so much more than pressing a button in PP, as we unfortunately see sooooo often!"

Look at onOne Perfect 7 B&W software that helps one process black and white as if it were color. It allows you to change the look of individual color in a B&W, for example the red in a canyon wall. You can also use a dodge and burn brush tool and many other PP features. It is worth a look and offers a free trial. It works as a stand alone or with other PP software.