Color or BW: I was in Torrey, Utah in early August during their weird “monsoon” season. Another storm was forming as I finished dinner. NIK “wet rocks” with modifications. Notice how...

daldds Loc: NYC

I was in Torrey, Utah in early August during their weird “monsoon” season. Another storm was forming as I finished dinner.
NIK “wet rocks” with modifications.
Notice how the black and white delineates the rain bands in the approaching storm.
There is no right or wrong to my questions: which do you like better, and why?

(Download)

Gampa

Color

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Normally, I'd prefer black and white. However, the black and white version here contains too many areas that appear to be blown out.
--Bob

daldds wrote:

I was in Torrey, Utah in early August during their weird “monsoon” season. Another storm was forming as I finished dinner.
NIK “wet rocks” with modifications.
Notice how the black and white delineates the rain bands in the approaching storm.
There is no right or wrong to my questions: which do you like better, and why?

whatdat Loc: Del Valle, Tx.

Like both. Great shots.

Huey Driver Loc: Texas

Definitely Color!

DebAnn Loc: Toronto

daldds wrote:

I was in Torrey, Utah in early August during their weird “monsoon” season. Another storm was forming as I finished dinner.
NIK “wet rocks” with modifications.
Notice how the black and white delineates the rain bands in the approaching storm.
There is no right or wrong to my questions: which do you like better, and why?

In this case, the colour.

DickC Loc: NE Washington state

I like them both but prefer B&W!!

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Color.

anotherview Loc: California

To the eye, the colored version better captures the relation of the landscape to the storm cloud. This relation constitutes the main subject. The addition of the wagon wheel (by its geometry) distracts from the subject. The wheel conjures an earlier time in history.

By the way, I've been in Torrey, Utah, several times, and it along with nearby scenes offer a lot to photograph, and so does nearby Capitol Reef NP.

daldds wrote:

I was in Torrey, Utah in early August during their weird “monsoon” season. Another storm was forming as I finished dinner.
NIK “wet rocks” with modifications.
Notice how the black and white delineates the rain bands in the approaching storm.
There is no right or wrong to my questions: which do you like better, and why?

John from gpwmi Loc: Michigan

Normally for this shot I'd expect to like the B&W, but for me it's color and I can't quite figure out why.

DickC Loc: NE Washington state

John from gpwmi wrote:

Normally for this shot I'd expect to like the B&W, but for me it's color and I can't quite figure out why.

I could still go either way, but still like the B&W best!

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

I prefer the color version because the b&w seems bland to me.

Cany143 Loc: SE Utah

Would it have been more appropriate --considering the questions you posed-- to post these in one of the specialty sub-forums (FYC, Exploration of Digital...) rather than in the Gallery section? I believe so, but you (and others) are welcome disagree. Regardless, you asked the questions, so here's what I think. And see. And more to the point, would suggest:

Leaving off considerations of subject matter and composition --both of which I find good-- what first strikes me is a problem that stems (with what I would guess results) from the manner of processing. Its as if the upper third of the image has had a graduated filter applied to darken the sky while the lower 2/3's has been left more or less as it probably was in the actual exposure. The tonal difference between the upper and lower portions of the wagon wheel may illustrate what I mean; the top is dark and the bottom is light, while 'in reality' all portions of the wheel would be tonally uniform, would they not?

The B&W version accentuates this tonal 'discrepancy.' Its as if a dividing line can be seen 1/3 of the way down from the top. Along with the top of the wheel, cliffs on the horizon line (the 'Reef' itself) is fine (is uniform in relation to itself), but the tops of the closer cliffs are much darker than their lower sections, and un-naturalistically so. Adding to the 'discrepancy' is, as Bob pointed out, the fact that portions of the lower third of the image are essentially 'blown out.' The rocks at the very bottom --and the shadows that attend them-- lack both texture and depth, a result of which is that the upper half and the lower half of the image are in competition with each other, and neither side wins.

Some may see the following as insult to injury, but I genuinely hope they can see otherwise: Not uncommonly, pairs, or multiples, of an image, or of like images, are posted and the OP asks which the viewer likes and why. That's fine, of course, and to each their own. But doing so does either of two things. It offers only what in sales would be called the 'choice close' (sales manager asks: ... which car do you prefer [meaning: which one will you buy]? the red one or the blue one? customer remembers, 'but I want a green car, and you don't have one'.), or it shows that the taker/maker of the image is unable to decide for themself which image it is that 'says' it for them. I.e., a lack of confidence.

As mentioned: better to have posted in FYC or Exploration or where ever. And I mean all of the above constructively, which I hope you'll see.

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

Cany143 wrote:

Would it have been more appropriate --considering the questions you posed-- to post these in one of the specialty sub-forums (FYC, Exploration of Digital...) rather than in the Gallery section? I believe so, but you (and others) are welcome disagree. Regardless, you asked the questions, so here's what I think. And see. And more to the point, would suggest:

Leaving off considerations of subject matter and composition --both of which I find good-- what first strikes me is a problem that stems (with what I would guess results) from the manner of processing. Its as if the upper third of the image has had a graduated filter applied to darken the sky while the lower 2/3's has been left more or less as it probably was in the actual exposure. The tonal difference between the upper and lower portions of the wagon wheel may illustrate what I mean; the top is dark and the bottom is light, while 'in reality' all portions of the wheel would be tonally uniform, would they not?

The B&W version accentuates this tonal 'discrepancy.' Its as if a dividing line can be seen 1/3 of the way down from the top. Along with the top of the wheel, cliffs on the horizon line (the 'Reef' itself) is fine (is uniform in relation to itself), but the tops of the closer cliffs are much darker than their lower sections, and un-naturalistically so. Adding to the 'discrepancy' is, as Bob pointed out, the fact that portions of the lower third of the image are essentially 'blown out.' The rocks at the very bottom --and the shadows that attend them-- lack both texture and depth, a result of which is that the upper half and the lower half of the image are in competition with each other, and neither side wins.

Some may see the following as insult to injury, but I genuinely hope they can see otherwise: Not uncommonly, pairs, or multiples, of an image, or of like images, are posted and the OP asks which the viewer likes and why. That's fine, of course, and to each their own. But doing so does either of two things. It offers only what in sales would be called the 'choice close' (sales manager asks: ... which car do you prefer [meaning: which one will you buy]? the red one or the blue one? customer remembers, 'but I want a green car, and you don't have one'.), or it shows that the taker/maker of the image is unable to decide for themself which image it is that 'says' it for them. I.e., a lack of confidence.

As mentioned: better to have posted in FYC or Exploration or where ever. And I mean all of the above constructively, which I hope you'll see.

Would it have been more appropriate --considering ... (show quote)

I think that's a great reply. And I mostly agree with your points.
But bottom line, answering the OP's question... Color, then, now and always. I've never seen a B&W photo that wouldn't look better in color.

DickC Loc: NE Washington state

Retired CPO wrote:

I think that's a great reply. And I mostly agree with your points.
But bottom line, answering the OP's question... Color, then, now and always. I've never seen a B&W photo that wouldn't look better in color.

And I feel the opposite.