Quoting Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
regarding> > http://www.fotocommunity.com/pc/pc/cat/2213/display/2790694>
> I'd like to see this in B&W, or with a slight sepia tone. People shoot
> too
> much color, perhaps because it's what they're used to seeing, or because
> it's simpler to do (esp in digital), and a lot of photos are diminished by
> that apoproach. A ~good~ thoughful B&W conversion may lift this from the
> ordinary into something a bit more interesing and with greater impact.
I disagree with you here on a couple of points: First, I don't think *this*
image is diminished by being in colour; there are few colours here with the
clothes being B&W and the other elements being muted colours.
Second, I think the application of *sepia* generally makes the finished
product about the process rather than what was going on in front of the lens.
The original picture then becomes an ingredient in the production of a piece
of what the producer considers artwork; I think in this case the image is
about sharing something the photographer saw and a moment he experienced.
(For that reason, the tilt doesn't bother me.)
Third, I think that b&w vs. colour *is* largely a matter of taste and
opinion, and I disagree with your opinion that "people shoot too
much color" although I agree that the reason for all this colour shooting is
that they see in colour. To me, for instance, colour photographs are more
interesting to look at than b&w ones because they are more "real". To hold my
attention, a black & white photograph has to be REALLY compelling in its
content (some people on this list consistently shoot such compelling
monochrome images.)
My own history with black & white may explain my prejudices in this area:
Although I have taken a few b&w photographs because I thought the subject
matter needed b&w, most of the b&w I have ever shot was done in that medium
either because I was restricted by my budget (years ago) or because I was
restricted by the end use. I've read somewhere the suggestion that b&w
photography would've never come up if the first technology to produce
photographs had produced colour; frankly I suspect this is true. It started
out as a limitation of the technology! like coarse grain in low-light shots,
and sometimes reintroducing the limitation serves no purpose.
Of course, sometimes it DOES serve a purpose ...
But, this photograph we're discussing has a pretty clear content; isn't
cluttered with any brightly-coloured distractions; doesn't need
any "artistic" help like conversion to black and white or (shudder) sepia or
(retch) infrared or cross-processing or (scream!) semi-conversion to negative
to improve it. It's a slice of life and as such, is great just the way it is.
IMO.
Of course, I am in no way suggesting that your opinion ("people shoot too
much color ... ") is not valid but since I hold an opposing opinion, I
thought I would share it.
ERNR
