B&W depends on differentiation of tones. Color depends on differentiation of
colors. They require differnt technics. Is one better than the other? No. It
depends on what you are trying to do with the photo. If you want to abstract
it B&W usually works best, if you want to realism color usually works best.
Please note the "usually" in the last statement.

Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto


----- Original Message -----
From: "Feroze Kistan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 3:36 PM
Subject: Re: Col or mono


> I am, but what you saying is the way that I've always understood it. Both
> mediums have
> their places but are not always interchangeable. I understand that the way
> you would compose, meter,
> etc, the entire approach to B&W photography is different from colour. In
> terms of what is on the negative of B&W versus whats on a trannie or a
> colour neg does a B&W neg hold more detail or info assuming all other
> conditions are equal. Say I'm shooting a head & shoulders of my friend, I
> want to keep this friendship so I try my best to produce a flattering
image.
> I shoot in colour, process at a lab etc etc. Now if I scan this in and
> convert to monotone and have it printed on a eg. frontier machine would I
> have gotten the same result/image/quality as if I had shoot on B&W?
> Feroze
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "T Rittenhouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 1:23 AM
> Subject: Re: Col or mono with digital (was: Re: I want to start a WAR)
>
>
> > IMHO, a negative that will make a supurb B&W print will only make a
> mediocre
> > Color print, and one that will make a good Color print will only make a
> > mediocre B&W one. This is because you need higher contrast to get a
> dramatic
> > B&W print, and lower contrast to get a good Color print. The above
> presumes
> > you are using color negative film for both prints.
> >
> > Ciao,
> > Graywolf
> > http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
> >
>
>

Reply via email to