How do YOU see?

[PFMcFarland]

I've never given this much thought, no matter how many times the subject has come up over the years. There have been many a time though while I was shooting one film stock or another when I thought the opposite would have been a better choice. Using a digital camera now has eliminated that conundrum. But when you load that roll of Acros or Ektar, you're stuck with it for the time being, so you better plan your scenery hunting appropriately. At least now one doesn't have to have two cameras dangling from the neck just in case.

I think I concentrate on contrast and the angle of light more than anything else. If the scene doesn't hold any interest in color then it likely won't in monochrome either. I can visualize a scene in b&w, but I don't lock that in for any long period, because the next scene might need to be in color.

PF

[GrahamS]

If the scene doesn't hold any interest in color then it likely won't in monochrome either.
PF

I disagree, Phil. Many times I have seen something that is seemingly meaningless in colour, but is wonderful in B&W.

[PFMcFarland]

If the scene doesn't hold any interest in color then it likely won't in monochrome either.
PF

I disagree, Phil. Many times I have seen something that is seemingly meaningless in colour, but is wonderful in B&W.

Let me expound on that. I'm talking about particular scenes that to me look too flat in lighting and color. I have converted shots like that into b&w, and while it may look better, it doesn't necessarily make it more interesting. It's not a hard rule, just kind of something I've noticed over the years.

PF

[scott]

Okay, after reading through everyone's comments, here's where I'm at right now: Largely, you're all convincing me (again) that digital is the way to go. Cheaper, easier, more options, smoother workflow. Case in point:



Shot yesterday, in poor light, on my Canon G9X mII. Brought home, copied to hard drive, played with in CS5. The original was underexposed which preserved the cloud detail. Pulled the detail into the façade, made the verticals near-ish to vertical, converted to grayscale. No developing, no scanning, instant feedback on the exposure and composition. But you all know that.

We move back and forth between PA and DE these days. I love shooting film, and again, sometimes process is what I'm more interested in. Truth be told, I'd rather shoot this one on large format, where I can get the lines vertical in camera, and have all the resolution I'll ever need. But I'm tired of dragging three camera systems back and forth. I think digital is going to win out, at least for the time being.

That said, I was always wanting to see this image in B&W as a final photo. Just doesn't look right in color. For what it's worth.

Scott

[GrahamS]

Scott, your image isn't showing up (for me, anyway.). Just a placeholder.

[scott]

Scott, your image isn't showing up (for me, anyway.). Just a placeholder.

Weird. Try this, Graham:

St. Peter's Church by Scott, on Flickr

[GrahamS]

It's there now. Thanks, Scott, whatever you did, worked. That's a superb B&W rendition. It looks as though it was a 6x6 negative.

[titrisol]

Now that Pentax and Leica are launching monochorme versions of their digicams this discussion becomes relevant again
There is some buzz pro and con them and I think it depends on how you see the world

[Julio1fer]

A good discussion.

When I was young, shooting in color was a rare luxury, and then only done with slide film on special occasions, such as a trip. I got to see everything in terms of the B&W tones. When I could afford color, it was an additional angle and often a headache. Much later on, with C-41 in the mainstream, the situation reversed. Eventually I got to shooting only slides!

So, it may be more a question of what is available and what is your personal preference. Nowadays, for me is B&W on film and color in digital.

It is so easy to desaturate a digital color image, enhance a color channel if needed, etc. I do not understand the Leica or Pentax move, but then I may be too old to understand the current market. Maybe B&W has a special artistic halo, maybe these cameras could allow better definition or they would be simpler and more ergonomic.

Although the world is in color, IMHO some subjects often come out better in B&W, for instance portraits.

[GrahamS]

I was going to say exactly what Julio has said. So please read his post again which will save me the trouble of typing.