Monochromia BW and toned monochrome only (HIGH quality only!!!)

Reply to B&W or Color - which one is better ?

nobody@flickr.com (southernmuso) — Wed, 02 Jan 2013 21:24:36 -0800

Ha, well there's a question! And a great quote from Monochrome guy
I shoot in both, usually monochrome for cloudy days and color for other.
There's something about cloudy days that seem to create an emotion and they seem to offer an introspective depth but on the other hand what would a great sunset shot be without color?
I guess my answer is already in the mix, go with the mood of the moment, why not even shoot both at the same location. You have everything to gain and nothing to lose!

Reply to B&W or Color - which one is better ?

nobody@flickr.com (MonoChrome Guy) — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 14:22:57 -0700

MonoChrome Guy posted a reply:

A very famous photographer which I'm afraid I can't remember their name said, " When you photograph someone in colour you photograph their clothes, but when you photograph someone in black and white you photograph their soul".
And I tend to agree with them, I only create monochrome photos come on over and have a look and tell me what you think?

Are there "B&W Only" shooters out there ?

nobody@flickr.com (Meiki67) — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 05:38:52 -0800

Meiki67 posted a new topic:

As I said in the previuous post I worked more than 30 years only B&W - today almost only color which I turn sometimes to B&W in the "darkroom".

From a professional point of view would be interesting to know if there are people who also nowadays shoot only B&W

Meiki

B&W or Color - which one is better ?

nobody@flickr.com (Meiki67) — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 05:34:01 -0800

Meiki67 posted a new topic:

I just stumbled upon this interesting group - thank you for let me be a member - I'll try to surf as much as possible (not an easy job with 41.000 items (-;)
From my youth in the sixties until the late nineties I have only worked in B&W - now with the digital age this is another peace of cake. Today I shoot only color (and perhaps also RAW) but sometimes I try the b&w button on the different programs I work with - and look - the result is also nice. I would be glad to upload these experiments here.
And for the cases where i cannot decide which one is better I have created the group To bw or not to bw ?
Would be nice to have your learned advice on my photos !
In case you ask yourself a similar question - you are invited to post there.
Meiki

Reply to Digital or analogue? pure BW or color toned?

nobody@flickr.com (king_deeder) — Fri, 03 Jun 2011 19:24:28 -0700

king_deeder posted a reply:

im a huge film enthusiast, and although i develop and print my own pictures, i like to use flickr for my digital photos, most of my black and white photos ive edited in Photoshop and have taken at least 2 hours for each of them, with extensive detailing

is it ok if i post them?

Reply to Digital or analogue? pure BW or color toned?

nobody@flickr.com (PicFreak42) — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 05:52:10 -0800

PicFreak42 posted a reply:

I know this is an old thread, but here are my comments anyway.

As far as mono is concerned nothing beats a well crafted film based darkroom printed image for tonal depth and 'soul' - however I use both film and digital and although I stand by what I say regarding film, digital is here to stay and just keeps getting better. To view I use both CRT monitors and flat screen LCD. The quality of the viewed image depends upon the quality of the monitor and I have no issues with either. - ( I use a Lacie CRT and an Apple 27 inch flat screen) Both need to be profiled regularly to give their best.

If I have learned anything in my years as a photographer though, is that if you have a creative mind then the camera or the medium is almost irrelevant as 'art' can be produced using a pinhole in a cardboard box to a full frame £x quid digi.

For what it's worth I think 35mm film is best used traditionally as that is where it yields best results, scanning the negative particularly with fast films always seems to lead to coarse grain as a result of grain ailiasing, much better deal scanning MF film though. - Sorry if this rambles on a bit but the subject is interesting!

Reply to Digital or analogue? pure BW or color toned?

nobody@flickr.com (dlingham) — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 22:30:18 -0800

dlingham posted a reply:

I can only endorse Bobby's views. Analogue is very much still alive and kicking. I hope this does not turn into another digital v film thread. All forms of image making should be encouraged, not consigned to history.

Reply to Digital or analogue? pure BW or color toned?

nobody@flickr.com (Bobby_Chitrakar) — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:44:59 -0800

Bobby_Chitrakar posted a reply:

Hi Andre,
"..days of the optical print on fiber-based paper is over. The reasons for toning with sepia or selenium are long past.."
I beg to differ. There are a lot of photographers still doing Silver Prints ( on RC and Fiber papers). Fiber papers and chemicals for silver and other types of printing are still commercially available.
People are still doing even tin types, dagguerotypes, albumen prints, salt prints, platinum prints, POP prints, Collodian process etc. The list goes on.
Viewing on computer screens are very common these days but that does not mean hard copies are not viable anymore.
Atget used cumbersome Large Format equipment when the newer smaller cameras were available at that time. His photographs have stood the test of time.
Cheers,
Bobby

Reply to Digital or analogue? pure BW or color toned?

nobody@flickr.com (Andre Easter) — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:01:04 -0700

Andre Easter posted a reply:

I used to use only "pure" B&W. But begining a few years ago something changed with our technology. No, I do not mean digital cameras, I mean posting on the World Wide Web. We no longer see photographic prints on paper as much as we see pixels on a screen. We scan our negatives or load our memory sticks directly into the computer. We optimize our photos with PhotoShop or some other software depending on how it looks on the screen in front of us.

But this is where things begin to get tricky. An image optimized on an older CRT screen will look nothing like the photographer wants when it is viewed on a newer flat-screen LCD monitor. What we see iin front of us depends on what kind of screen we are staring at.

Pure B&W doesn't look so good on these newer LCD screens. If you are lucky enough to be using an older CRT you may not notice it, but the LCD screen bleaches a photo (or increases the gamma) to the point where pure B&W becomes light blue/grey.

In order to create the optical illusion of an older selenium-toned and optically printed photo, I need to add just a little digital color to my scanned negetive B&W. I have worked out my secret formula and it works for me. For better or for worse, the days of the optical print on fiber-based paper is over. The reasons for toning with sepia or selenium are long past. However in this Brave New World of 21st Century photography, there are new and legitimate reasons to modify the pure B&W into something that bears a resemelance to the older toned prints.

Digital or analogue? pure BW or color toned?

nobody@flickr.com (*M.H*) — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 14:02:24 -0700

*M.H* posted a new topic:

Tell us about your style !!! : D