rbeebephoto In reply to dragonmaster12 [2008-08-26 02:49:30 +0000 UTC]
thank you!
I'll send her a note to check out her pics here!
-----------------------------------------------------------
There can - CAN, possible but no guarantees - be a stronger sense of "visual drama" in the absence of multi-color tones, when things are reduced to degrees of grey, from black to white. In one respect, it takes the viewer (and the photographer-editor) back to the initial film days of photography, when b&w was all there was...if you wanted color, you reached for a bit of chalk after-the-fact, and did your deed by hand on the print. The misconception these days is that "if it's black-and-white, it's gotta be great because it's more artistic." Which is a pile of crap, but there are w-a-y too many individuals out there that will bite on that and be reeled-in by lousy photography, just because it's f*cking grey tones! (meaning there may NOT be a black or a white)
Black-and-white is also a basic visual sense we have, that is over-ridden by our eye's color receptors. In low-light, the color sense shuts down (think of it like ISO 100 "film" that needs far more light that is possible in a 1600 "film" realm, while the grey receptors are still merrily marching along) Go out into the dark of night - like a dimly-lit back yard - and see how much "color" you are aware of...take a look at a dark scene, then look at a digital image of the same scene, and you'll be amazed how much color you swear wasn't there!
Maybe I still enjoy a GOOD b&w is because of what the viewer can find in those subtle shades when the color clues are removed. You said it rather nicely, actually! "abit more of a raw feel abit more crisp and dramatic" I still have a passion for that "visual drama" after all these years dragging a camera around with me.
Richard
👍: 0 ⏩: 1