capturing the soul in an image !
Dec 19, 2019 16:49:43 #
Monochrome will capture the soul of an image if the colors aren't interesting , still color can produce interesting photos but B&W goes all the way to the soul + B&W can be more forgiving . It has been said when you shoot in color it only gets to the surface . So everybody commit on this subject .
Dec 19, 2019 16:52:35 #
Imagemine wrote:
Monochrome will capture the soul of an image if the colors aren't interesting , still color can produce interesting photos but B&W goes all the way to the soul + B&W can be more forgiving . It has been said when you shoot in color it only gets to the surface . So everybody commit on this subject .
What's there to say? You already said it, so it must be true.
Dec 19, 2019 17:14:45 #
In many situations, color can be used to express mood or feel. Why would one want to avoid the use of color? I don't understand this "soul" you are taking about. If anything, removing color from an image may possibly achieve the opposite - suck the life out of it. I certainly would not want to live in a world void of color!
Dec 19, 2019 17:37:56 #
rook2c4 wrote:
In many situations, color can be used to express mood or feel. Why would one want to avoid the use of color? I don't understand this "soul" you are taking about. If anything, removing color from an image may possibly achieve the opposite - suck the life out of it. I certainly would not want to live in a world void of color!
Because “Everything looks worse in black and white”.
Dec 19, 2019 17:42:59 #
Imagemine wrote:
Monochrome will capture the soul of an image if the colors aren't interesting , still color can produce interesting photos but B&W goes all the way to the soul + B&W can be more forgiving . It has been said when you shoot in color it only gets to the surface . So everybody commit on this subject .
We've gone around the monochrome
- color issue a few times but I always find it an interesting topic. I love B&W but I also believe that content/subject is the most important aspect of a photograph. And some content is better in B&W, some in color. So it all depends.
Dec 19, 2019 17:59:12 #
Easier said than done. If you want to make a statement like this, post an image. Outside of that it's only hearsay. Photography is capturing images, not talking about them........
Dec 19, 2019 18:09:34 #
martinfisherphoto wrote:
Easier said than done. If you want to make a statement like this, post an image. Outside of that it's only hearsay. Photography is capturing images, not talking about them........
But this is a discussion forum! I think the OP is simply asking for comments on his topic....
Dec 19, 2019 18:30:24 #
Ysarex
Loc: St. Louis
Imagemine wrote:
Monochrome will capture the soul of an image if the colors aren't interesting , still color can produce interesting photos but B&W goes all the way to the soul + B&W can be more forgiving . It has been said when you shoot in color it only gets to the surface . So everybody commit on this subject .
That's too close to a direct quote that you shouldn't leave it un-ascribed: Ted Grant (who was probably listening to Walker Evans when his brain slipped). Last time I checked the earth was in color -- it really does work better that way. Now the moon -- that's where B&W photographers should go.
Joe
Dec 19, 2019 18:55:22 #
Imagemine wrote:
Monochrome will capture the soul of an image if the colors aren't interesting, still color can produce interesting photos but B&W goes all the way to the soul + B&W can be more forgiving. It has been said when you shoot in color it only gets to the surface. So everybody comments on this subject.
First off, it's not monochrome, that would be a stark black/white result with no different tones. What we really produce is greyscale images with an entire range of tones. For convenience sake, we call them B&W.
Back to your original question, like everything else in life, the answer is: it depends. It depends on the subject and composition. Find an image where color is not necessary to tell the story, but B&W creates one. The two images of sunrise from Zabriski point illustrate. The color version is nice, but you do not see the fabric of the rock and shadows as well as you do in B&W. But, if the image was of a Rose in full bloom, you would lose the drama of the colors if the image was B&W.
So, there is no fixed answer, you have to play around a bit.
Dec 19, 2019 19:09:38 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
Because “Everything looks worse in black and white”.
But "Mama took your Kodachrome way"
Dec 19, 2019 19:12:17 #
The willingness of some people to slam the door against thoughtful discussion never ceases to amaze me. You'd think nobody had heard of Henri Cartier-Bresson, Dorothea Lange, Walker Evans, or that guy with the alliterative name...now who is that? 🤔
Dec 19, 2019 19:25:19 #
Imagemine wrote:
Monochrome will capture the soul of an image if the colors aren't interesting , still color can produce interesting photos but B&W goes all the way to the soul + B&W can be more forgiving . It has been said when you shoot in color it only gets to the surface . So everybody commit on this subject .
I love B&W photography. It's lucky in a way that B&W photography was invented before color became practical, and it resulted in a great body of work in the history of photography. But I can't agree that only B&W can capture the soul of image and color only gets to the surface. Both have their strengths and weaknesses, and having the choice between them gives photographers a great resource. I spent many years shooting mostly B&W, especially for my serious personal photography. I disliked color because I didn't have the control over color in the darkroom like I did B&W. But now with the amazing control of color that digital photography gives me, I find I much prefer doing color.
Dec 19, 2019 19:29:41 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
The willingness of some people to slam the door ag... (show quote)
Its embedded in the current culture Linda... Everyone is angry; take your stand, man your guns and fire away. Had your TV on lately ? There is no honest dialogue. That's why we have 15 pages of postings in which the same thing is repeated 100 times; no one even takes the time to read the previous postings in order to get into some kind of dialogue because they are so eager to post their opinion without even reading or listening... Ok, back to my Sam Adams... or was that Ansel Adams you alluded to ?
Dec 19, 2019 19:35:36 #
MrBob wrote:
I haven't watched the news for 10 years, and you've succinctly expressed why. I think a Sam Adams would work better than Ansel right now Its embedded in the current culture Linda... Every... (show quote)
Back to the OP: here's one that was mostly colorless to being with. Shadows, textures and a story about neglect and aging.
And one that is all about color, light and optimism.
Dec 19, 2019 20:46:03 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
The willingness of some people to slam the door against thoughtful discussion never ceases to amaze me. You'd think nobody had heard of Henri Cartier-Bresson, Dorothea Lange, Walker Evans, or that guy with the alliterative name...now who is that? 🤔
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.