For me, I prefer black and white over color. I think it allows for a little more creativity. This is my view personally, i can't (and won't) speak for others.

Don't get me wrong. Color has its place and in the right circumstances it's actually better. But when it comes to people (portraits, street photography) and buildings i think black and white is superior in that aspect.

Last summer i did some photos at the train station here in the area. its considered a "historic landmark", while the black and white looked really good, it was one of the few times i preferred color (and the ones I used to upload on this site).

So basically what I am saying in my typical (and not unusual) long winded story telling replies, is its all about choice and preferences.

I've learned early that its all about how the photographer "sees" the subject. I always see my subjects in black and white. But when i go into post processing and if it looks better in color, i run with it :)

hope that helps

B&W is not a medium. It's a technique. A medium is the CARRIER for the vision - charcoal, pen & ink, crayons, watercolors, etc.

Why is it that some people can't understand what I wrote? Is it that obtuse? I've re-read my original post in this thread from 13 pages ago, and nowhere in it do I say these things:

1) All B&W is crap
2) Your B&W is crap
3) My color is better.

I simply said, and I suggest those with a problem understanding re-read it, is that A good percentage of B&W these days is created by new photographers who don't understand how to shoot it, have a bad shot to start with and think that converting to B&W automatically makes it better.. The same goes for photographers who use selective coloring, excessive Photoshopping, and so forth. It's crap.

If that rankles your sensibility that's too bad. If it hits too close to home, that's too bad. If you have not done this, and all of your black and white pictures are perfectly marvelous, then obviously my comments don't apply to you.

Nowhere did I claim that my shots were better. Nowhere do I claim that it's not a good idea to LEARN how to shoot B&W. (It probably IS a bad idea to display your crude learning attempts in a gallery on SmugMug or Flickr as if you are the next Steiglitz or Adams, but no one seems to understand that around here.)

Of course, now some people will jump all over me for defending my position, or tell me to "lighten up" or whatnot, but I'm not doing anything more than they did when they derided my statements.

To those who want to see my crappy color, I suggest simply looking at the posts I've made in the Photo Gallery section. They may well be crap. If you think they are, convert them to B&W and see if they're magically better...

I agree with Singing Swan. Me personally, when I post a photo for critique, I expect to be told what is wrong with the photo and what is right. I also expect to be told in a respectful manner, no need to be harsh. Let the person know what is wrong with the photo and offer some suggestions for improvement as well. It is also helpful to tell them what is right with the photo if that applies. If people feel as though they are always doing things wrong they may become frustrated and maybe give up. If the photo is not a total mess-up that is nice to know as well.

My intent with this image was to use a wide aperture to create a non-distracting background and to use the plant on the left as a diagonal line to frame the subject and add a more interesting composition.

My question is have I succeeded or is the photograph better presented with a tighter crop which is represented in photo 2? Any additional critique or comments are welcomed. Thanks 8-)

The picture was taken with a Micro-Nikkor 105mm at ISO 400, f/3.2, 1/320 of a second with natural light. Download for additional resolution.