How Do You Deiced If An Image Should Be Color or Black & White ?

[randall ellis]

"I do not understand this idea that the decision should be made before shooting, why?"

 

For me, the decision is part of the process of creation. If I were to just make an exposure without considering what the final outcome was to be I might as well just point the camera in a random direction and release the shutter. Exposure, framing, inclusion and exclusion of elements, color/black and white, filtration or lack thereof, all of these things are part of the process of photography for me, and they all have equal value - that is to say they are all required if I am to be able to accomplish what I set out to do.

 

When I photograph something it is for a specific reason - to convey a feeling usually, or perhaps to present something I found interesting - and in order to accurately do that I have to know what I need to do to make the results turn out the way I want, otherwise I won't be happy with the results because they won't be representative of what I felt. I work to exclude anything that will be distracting, to find the right angle that emphasizes what I want emphasized, to make sure there is detail where I want detail, and many other things, all of which require fore-thought to turn out right. Why should I work hard later and perhaps not be able to achieve what I want when I could plan it out at the time of exposure and be sure to get what I want?

 

As others have stated, there is no set way to do anything. We each must choose what works best for us, but for me, working out the details pre-exposure gives me much better results than leaving things to chance...

 

- Randy

[matthew_newton]

I decide before I start shooting if I want a picture to be in B&W or not. At least for the pratical reason that either I load B&W film in my camera or color film :D

 

That being said to me it just seems self evident that a certain scene benifits more from being in B&W then in color. Personally I feel that with some exceptions and as a lose guideline portriture benifits more from being in B&W then in color. Architecture can look fine as B&W and if the landscape is right B&W also works really well. Sometimes color is better, if you want to represent the colors themselves then of course you need to go the color route.

 

Its an issue of tonality versus hue, if you care about showing the tones of the scene, then B&W seems best to me, if you want to show the hue then color is the way to go.

[edgreene]

Portraiture begs for B&W.<br>

That and fences & roads with vanishing points, anything with five-six or more shadows or textures.<p>

Not just B&W: solarized B&W, infrared B&W, both esily attainable with film, but "phony looking" (<i>as in HDR imaging</i>) in digtal mnaipulations.<br>Some of us got interested in shooting monchormatic (C-41 B&W) but it too was ot the same as shooting ``pure`` B&W Iilford film for example.<p> B&W with deep green filters smooth out not so perfect skin.

[elliott2]

Randy,

 

I find myself disagreeing with your second paragraph, but what you describe in your third paragraph, is I suggest, how most photographers operate including myslelf.

 

For me the key issues are usually time of day, weather and subject matter. For landscape work that usually involves a little research beforehand to understand the terain, to see where the sun moves through the day and lots of walking to find the angles I want. Composition is to me the most important part and that only works when the lighting and weather conspire to work with you and not against you.

 

Whilst I shoot in colour I agree that some subjects instinctively and sometimes accidentally work better in monochrome. With film the decsion has to be made early in the process, wheras a digital workflow allows that decision to be made later, it being a simple process to strip away the 'visual noise'. I think overall it boils down to a little experience and practice, as wellas your choice of tools. For the digital workflow the hard bit is often getting the conversion right and dropping the saturation is generally the wrong approach.

 

Regards John

[doug grosjean]

Arrivinvg late to this party, but for me the deciding factor is whether the shot has (IMO) *good* color or not.

 

If the shot has really flat lighting, and color won't pop, I'll tend to go to b/w.

 

I'll also shoot a lot of b/w around here (NW Ohio) in winter because the lighting is so flat and dull that time of year.

 

And some portraits in b/w, esp. if the recipient or subject is going to put it in an older photo album with other b/w shots.

[Landrum Kelly]

To Felix Grant:

<p>

Why would you want to enslave yourself to an absolute rule of your own creation?

<p>

That is indeed your choice, but why would you want to make such a choice?

<p>

Sure, most pictures are better with planning, previsualization, or whatever one wants to call it. But there is the occasional serendipitous capture that cries out to be printed or published. To toss it because one did not see it beforehand exactly as it winds up is to me an irrational choice, but one that one is entitled to make. Again, however, why would a rational person make such an irrational choice?

<p>

That is why I say that the <i>final</i> decision is not made at the time of capture. A decision is made then, and it is an important one, or else we should go off shooting at random. Nonetheless, the first decision is a decision that can be appealed to my own reason--and I reserve the right to reverse my earlier decision.

<p>

--Lannie

[felixg]

John Elliot: "It is a process that works for me."</p>

<p>That's good, then. As you say, there is no right or wrong answer. I just gave my own answer to Jon's original question: how I make the decision.</p>

<hr>

<p>Randall Ellis explains well what I did not.</p>

<hr>

<p>Landrum Kelly: "Why would you want to enslave yourself to an absolute rule of your own creation?"</p>

<p>I've no idea. Certainly I would not do so.

[Landrum Kelly]

"Turning a colour image into a monochrome one afterwards, because it didn't work in colour, isn't a viable answer." --Felix Grant.

 

Perhaps you meant something else, Felix. My apologies.if I misunderstood you.

 

--Lannie

[randall ellis]

The guy that I always thought would love photoshop is William Mortensen...

 

- R

[randall ellis]

Doh! Wrong thread - please disregard my post (doing two things at once - bad idea)

 

- R

[felixg]

Landrum: "Perhaps you meant something else, Felix. My apologies if I

misunderstood you. -- Lannie"</p>

<p>No need for apologies (but thank your for them anyway), I didn't mean

something else, I just meant it <b><i>for me</i></b>.</p>

<p>But it's not (to use your words) enslaving myself to a rule of my own

creation, anymore that using a camera instead of a pencil (for example) would

be. I could, on the logic of that question, ask why you choose to enslave your

self to working with what the camera captured instead of what you wanted - but I

wouldn't, because it would be an equal non sequitur to what you have said.</p>

<p>There are two separate things.</p>

<p>(1) We all do what works for us (not, I hope, what we have chosen to be

enslaved to).</p>

<p>(2) Jon K asked what worked for me; I answered. <i><b>For me</b></i>, it is

not a viable option (ie, an option that works, an option which delivers

satisfactory images) to leave the decision until post processing. Not because I

have "decided" it shall be so, but because it happens to be that way: if I can't

see the final picture I am after when I press the shutter button, I never find

it later.</p>

<p>This may be for all sorts of reasons, and most of them will certainly be down

to what I am, not what photography is. My vision works in a particular way, I

was trained by Ansel Adams and shaped by a generation which had previsualisation

as a dominant philosophy, I am naturally limited even, I ... I ... I ... all of

it, I freely admit, "I", none of it in the nature of photography. But it's not a

rule of my own making, following it is not a matter of willed choice ... nor, in

my personal opinion is it enslavement though you may see it otherwise. </p>

<p>You may well find that you can do what I cannot, or cannot do what I must, or

whatever, but that doesn't mean that either of us is a slave to a rule of our

own creation. Slave to our own natures, talents, abilities perhaps; though I

would personally say openly accepting of and creatively using our own natures,

talents, abilities.

[philip_lam]

Still an amateaur here but the first vivid picture has a bright colour to it that really stands out in a bunch of black and white pictures. However, the old man gets blended into the background. The second the B&W picture finish loading, I starred at the old man, scratching his head. Don't know if this is intentional but the title "Take Your Time" at the background is not helping the old man who is frustrated - correct me if I'm wrong but this seems to be the message intended in this picture.

 

Like Aitken said, it really depends on what you are trying to capture. Wanting to see textures, to focus on objects with less distractions from the surrounding, to play with the scenary, these are some of the reasons why I would go with b&w. Bright colours on the other hand is very cheerful to look at and captures what you see.

 

I don't want to say it so vaguely but this question really depends on your what you are trying to say or show in your image. As a fellow novice in the group, it won't hurt to say to keep taking pictures (black and white or colour) and test things out. If you're unhappy with colour, try b&w next time in a similar situation. Sooner or later, you'll find your answer.