Jump to content

Black and White and the Olde Days


john_sidlo

Recommended Posts

This seems only tangentially related to the recent discussion of whether Street

Photography is best done in black and white.

 

My son posed this question to 3rd graders in his bilingual class at PS28 in Harlem:

 

"Do you know what Manhattan was like 300 years ago?"

 

A student answered authoritatively:

 

"Back then, everything was in black and white."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's exactly why I have a problem with unnecessary use of B&W (I suppose sometimes its

use can be justified). B&W photos are experienced differently from color ones in that the

viewer relegates them to a bygone era, and in this way the reality depicted in the photos is

perceived in a less immediate way, like it no longer matters anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>>...unnecessary use of B&W<<<

 

What is un/necessary? It's always a choice no? Besides colors don't depict reality exactly neither. Velvia and Kodachrome are/were not exactly natural yet they are quite popular to say the least. All photographs are only representation of reality. Lastly, third graders' reality probably isn't a good measure of reality even though they provide some pretty nifty alternative:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I choose B+W for street photography because most of the time color would be a distraction to the elements of the picture I am emphasizing. The only time I shoot color (for myself) is when Color IS the subject of the photograph. Good examples, cotor as subject, were shown by Jeff Spirer in the related thread. Very few photographers have mastered Color Street photography, although it can be done as exhibited by Alex Webb. He does it great in color, but it is very unusual.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sometimes see a potential image that gets passed up because it would not translate well

into black & white. I wonder if color photographers do the same. I believe a lot of the

thought process is the exact same whether you use color or black & white. What I look for in

an image from another photographer is intelligence, a point of view, and, the seemingly rare

trait, uniqueness. These can be expressed no matter what film or memory card you load in

your camera. I'm not even sure if there's much of a need for discussion. A great image is a

citizen of the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good answer by your son's student, John. I imagine your son gets a kick -- although at times in the form of an overdose -- from the blunt pronouncements issued by his 3rd graders. :)

 

That's an interesting generalization, Eugene, and not one I'd dismiss out of hand, but you and I are viewers as well. Do you relegate b & w photos to a bygone era and attach less immediacy to them ?

 

I believe I don't do that. And I wonder if we move the 'test' age group up a bit, so they're older than John's son's 3rd graders, whether this loss of immediacy would be prevalent ? I don't know the answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p><i>What is un/necessary?</i></p>

 

<p>Alright, this is very easy to define. The use of B&W is unnecessary when the

photographer's reasoning behind rendering a photo in B&W is that a color version would not

be exciting enough. This is especially significant to digital, although I imagine many film

photographers think this way too. All other uses of B&W are necessary.</p>

 

<p>Was this clear enough?</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p><i>Besides colors don't depict reality exactly neither.</i></p>

 

 

<p>It's not about something depicting reality or not. It's about what people perceive as

more real (today it is color, while in 1960s it might have well been B&W) and less

real.</p>

 

<p><i>Velvia and Kodachrome are/were not exactly natural.</i></p>

 

<p>Why bring up an extreme example all of a sudden? Try Portra or Pro 160s.</p>

 

<p><i>All photographs are only representation of reality.</i></p>

 

<p>Yes and no.</p>

 

<p><i>Lastly, third graders' reality probably isn't a good measure of reality</i></p>

 

<p>Au contraire, they are the perfect measure.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I asked my son about his reaction to the student's comment. He said that he thought the answer was a good one, because he used something he did know: His experience with the past was mostly with old photos and movies which were always black and white. Since photographs are now in color, and from his 8-year-old's perspective cameras today faithfully capture reality in color, reality must have been black and white. Otherwise those 300 year old digital cameras would have been in color.

 

A typical 8 year old has a tough time wrapping their mind around the idea of how things were 300 years ago. Or for that matter that a photograph is not necessarily a true representation of reality. I mean, that color photo of him, his mom and sister taken last Sunday seems pretty exact, right? Color, clothes, couch, grins and pouts, and everything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

categorising photography into black & white or colour seems to limit how we would interpret an image...it's just a choice made by the artist like the choice of paint an painter uses...I prefer to see it as just another creative choice rather than as representing something in itself which overpowers our understanding of the image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...