I have what seems these days to be a peculiar thought process. If I set out to make black and white photographs with a camera that is capable of making color photographs my brain seems to decide that some images are fine in black and white but it reserves the right to decide that other scenes would be better captured in color.
So in spite of my best intentions my brain insinuates, manipulates and ultimately demands that I see some scenes in color and other scenes as black and white and further insists that I make reasonable decisions about which scenes will look best with or without color. Since I don't want to piss off my brain; it is one of my favorite organs, I follow along and rationalize my capitulation as "mental flexibility." An un-hardening of the gray matter.
I know I should be more stern with my brain. After all, if want to be a black and white photographer I should have the freedom to shoot everything in a mush of gray; if that's what the scene itself dictates. But my brain keeps butting in and saying things like: "Hey, you actually like this particular scene because you are drawn to the vivid and contrasting colors. Don't be a meat head. Switch to your "standard" or "vivid" profile! It's okay."
At other times my brain and I will both look at a scene and surprisingly find ourselves in harmony and agreement. In those cases my brain will say: "Hey, I get it. It's all about the contrast and the content. Color wouldn't really add anything --- and most photographers think contrasty black and white is more.....creative. Go for it!" And I do. I go for it.
The problem is, if I hold a fully functional camera in my hands and have every intention of taking black and white images, I know that the camera can still take color images and that forces me to surrender to something scary: Logic. The logic of using the camera's potential to the fullest and admitting that some scenes are better rendered in color while others are better rendered in B&W (or "monochrome") and that my camera and I have the power to identify which are which and make the most of our engagement with the subject. Working together.
I have to grudgingly admit that though my first attempt to photograph my coffee and croissant at Mañana Coffee this morning was in B&w my brain was correct. The image does work better in color.
Lesson learned.
11 comments:
Try adding the Midjourney Robert Frank AI filter to your images. You may get color or B&W depending on how the AI sees it.
Good suggestion Frank. But if I can use the AI stuff I'll want it to mix Robert Frank and HCB and drop in a hint of Avedon. All in one photo.
Time for Tri-X.
It might be enlightening to some readers why you think th color one works better, not me of course..
Did you have that same feeling when you had B&W film in a camera? The ground glass as always in color, but I shot vanishingly little LF color. In those days, weren't we thinking about color in relation to what filter to use?
Hi Edward Richards, Back in the film days, early on, I remember shooting for a lot of editorial outlets which ran a color image as the opening spread for story (magazine and newspaper supplements) and then the rest of the story in B&W. We tried to anticipate which scenes or moments would be special enough to be used in color. Most of us (photographers) carried two cameras with us while shooting. Example: A Nikon F2 over each shoulder. One loaded with Tri-x for black and white and the other loaded with Kodachrome or Ektachrome for the color. If a shoot looked good we'd cover it in both. Switching cameras back and forth (anything to keep from having to use Panalure....).
In the 1990s we had wishy washy art directors who thought they "might" want color on an annual report but also thought black and white might look cool. I used Hasselblads on those jobs and kept different emulsions (color and black and white) loaded in 12 exposure backs. If an art director was uncertain we'd cover with both.
And, to make matters even screwier I always used Polaroid 100 speed black and white test film because it was quicker and more exposure accurate than the color stuff. So, if there was ever a chance to be a bit confused it was while working back then.
As to large format ---- I shot about 20,000 sheets of 4x5 sheet film from 1981 through 2001. About 90% of it was color transparency. But still proofed with black and white Polaroid. My most used filter in the large format days was either a graduated neutral density or a circ. polarizer.
My brain latched on to whatever was in the camera. We were able to interpret color pretty well. Even with B&W test materials. And black and white even more so.
James, the color one works because it's a photo/scene with not that much real contrast and we lose the detail that makes the croissant understandable at a glance. It's rendered in B&W as just a mush of middle and dark tones. The soft colors actually create more differentiation between the various items than do their grayscale equivalents. And the color definition of the pastry makes it much more readable. But I'm guessing you knew that.
Just curious, since in my recollection you have never done the following:
Have you borrowed from someone a digital B&W camera, and used it for a week or so on your walkabouts? Something like a Leica Q2M? If you hadn't, do you think maybe it would be a "brain stretcher," or a "brain pacifier," since there would be nothing for you two to argue about?
MikeR. I've shot so much black and white photography over the years I can't imagine having a mono-only camera would make any difference in the way I regard making photos. My brain is well pacified and ultimately stretched. As I am getting older by the day I don't think I want to spend a week disproving an approach to photography and psychology that I already find suspect. But thanks. P.S. as humans we would always find something to argue about. But it would be unfair since I am almost always correct.
Croissant and coffee, the true meaning of life.
Nice to read. A fully functional brain in a highly functional photographer.
Post a Comment