OK, let me rephrase that a bit ... it's not ~always~ important that shadow detail be present. What we do with B&W is look not only to record a scene, but to create a mood, evoke a feeling. In a photo like Frank's, reducing or eliminating shadow detail allows the viewer to focus on the kiss, the subtle shading of the hands, the skin tones, and so on. Too much information in the shadows will distract from the central point of the image, perhaps making it weaker. So, even if there was a good bit of detail in the shadows, printing it down might be quite appropriate. Mood isn't always dependent on detail.
Keith Whaley wrote: > > Hi Shel, > > Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > >It's not important for the blacks to show detail. > > > Please explain. While I no longer work in a darkroom, I used to spend a > LOT of time there, looking at my B&W negs, and printing, and I was > amazed at how much detail negatives contain, vs. what a print shows. > I was fascinated with the detail in the black. . . > Which is why I don't understand your comment. Why is it not important? > Rather, why do you _say_ it's not important? >
