danielheller

<p>Yes it's very nasty that they institute all these regulations/restrictions. Whatever was in the open has always been allowed to photograph.<br>

Perhaps the only way is to just avoid the parks, be more inventive, and find places in the open where NO REGGULATIONS or restrictions exist. Maybe wedding photography is to become part of "Street Photography"?</p>

<p>Pierre<br>

Because it is easier and quicker...<br>

Because the intended result wants to be graphic in nature and perhaps less three dimensional...<br>

Because someone has that character and inclination where they like to produce something fast, and have no problem with not needing to correct themselves over and over by applying subsequent layers of paint (as in an oil painting)...<br>

Because one can produce prints and duplicate their work many times and if so inclined make more money that way...<br>

Because it is one's form of preferred expression that they love the most (or maybe just more than oil)....<br>

Because someone may feel technically stronger with pen and ink than they are with oil... therefore producing better art working with that medium....<br>

Because one just feels that way that particular morning...<br>

The list is long, and may go on and on. The original question attempts to explore the reasons why some photographers want to work with B+W photos rather than color.<br>

We are on the right track here.</p>

<p>Eric - there are some of us who have a natural inclination towards one or the other (Color or B+W) and who prefer for whatever reason working mostly in one or the other. I was trying to find out what these preferences are based on and why it was that or the other way. And incidentally, the actual question (Color or B+W) was only to be based on the scenarios described in the six preceding rows to my final question.</p>

<p>Bill - You are correct in saying that the subject has a bit more depth than "I prefer chocolate over vanilla". There definitely is a preferred style in different instances, and I wanted to explore that by indicating the conditions that would lead to the preferred method. These conditions were described in the first six rows preceding the final question.</p>

<p>It seems to me that the conditions in the first six rows were not taken so much into consideration.I would have never just asked straight: What do you prefer Color or B+W?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Like someone said in one of the forums, the correct answer to any photographic question:<br>

It depends<br>

It depends on storage capacity, your desired output, if you want to make prints and how much you want to enlarge etc. etc.<br>

If you just want to use for display on the web or paste on flicker or any other social media site...<br>

then 8MP is plenty.</p>

<p>Sharing this article is, I believe, of great value and right in context.<br>

Thank you Steve.</p>

<p>The funny part about this one is that I could not wait for these two to move along and out of the frame, and then not wanting to wait any longer, I took the shot.<br>

Boy am I happy I did the way I did, they add much interest to the composition.</p>

<p>JDM<br>

The why?<br>

Because without hearing the why, the responses are not always helpful.<br>

Perhaps someone is interested to set up or move their own website and needs concrete information from members here who already have a site, which works for them very well, have gone through the process and can share their experience? That was the purpose of this post, I hope I clarified it a bit.<br>

I will try to be less "cryptic" and more precise if I can in my next post.<br>

So far the responses in this thread are very helpful.</p>

<p><img src="/photo/17647370" alt="" />I guess this is OK then...</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>Look for the HELP menu top of screen towards the right.<br>

Brings you to the Adobe Help on line.<br>

A bit choppy but you will find everything there.<br>

No need for books IMHO.</p>

<p>The best?<br>

The worst?<br>

Are you using more than one?<br>

Which do you use?<br>

And the why to all answers.</p>

<p>You are photographing for your own pleasure.<br>

You intend to display your work in a gallery.<br>

You wish to sell most if not all of your work.<br>

You want to produce what the "industry" or you perceive as "Fine Art Photography"<br>

Your subject is Landscape.<br>

How would you want your final display to be presented to your audience.<br>

In Color or in B+W ?</p>

<p>Howard - sorry to hear that you had to throw away that stuff. Kids do not see the value at least not when they are young, and perhaps never. Some wake up to realize that they have nothing to hold in their hands or to memorialize, and then it is too late. How do you know your images would not have been someday "...valued for their historical and technical merit...". These things happen way after... maybe... or maybe not.<br>

Alan - I can fully sympathize with you about your work hanging in the garage... My wife did not want to hang my oil paintings in the living room. Not that she did not like them, it was just, you know, the colors did not match the color of the couch... EDUCATION. We fought a little bit, my ego was deeply hurt, but I got over it.<br>

Marc+1</p>

<p>If you were to receive a commission to shoot a sunset for a magazine you would probably do it.<br>

If you were building your portfolio would you shoot a sunset to include it in your portfolio or do you consider it Kitsch?</p>

<p>Holly, it is rather difficult to make a precise recommendation without knowing more details about your photography, subjects etc. What's good for photographing people is not so good for Landscapes for instance.<br>

You need two items: camera and film. The camera's most important element is obviously the lens and you'll have to decide if you like soft or sharp and there is ample information about this on the internet and these forums. I think you are looking for a soft lens to go with the pastel colors. But that was not really your question. You also want a film that is not saturated, and I presume you are looking for medium format film correct?<br>

If the camera you have is it, then we proceed to the choice of films<br>

Portra which was recommended above is a good color negative film and not very saturated.<br>

Apart from that, what do you intend doing with the film negatives. Printing from negatives or scanning? If the answer is scanning, you could do many things in software to get the pastel look you want. A word of advice here. If you do want to scan, you would need to seriously consider shooting color slides and not color negative film. Slides are much easier to scan than color negative film.<br>

Hope this helps a bit.</p>

<p>Yes, love these Film Noir movies.<br>

"The Third Man" in particular and "Sunset Boulevard"...</p>

<p>I feel good...<br>

(Dan, thanks for the compliment in the opening post)</p>

<p>Dick, I totally agree with your statement “…I think the term "fine art" has a certain snob appeal…”, perhaps the question should have been phrased differently maybe” Is your photography Art?.<br>

From the responses so far, I also realize how difficult it is to answer the question with a straight yes or no. The conclusion,(right or wrong) is that apparently many are leaning more towards associating photography with craft, or at least a good portion of their body of work.</p>

<p>Architecture was mentioned here briefly in connection with art, so I would like to take the opportunity to give you my perspective on that association.</p>

<p>First off, I would never think of asking an Architect “Is your work Art?”</p>

<p>With Architecture, it’s like this…<br>

It has been defined by many as the intersection or combination of Science + Art. However, from personal experience (I practice the profession) I can say I believe that in most disciplines (building types as in residential commercial etc.) it has a lot more to do with Science than it has to do with Art. The only time that it might fall into anything even remotely associated with Art would be in the “institutional” sector where a client makes a definite effort steering the design in that direction, for a multitude of possible reasons. And then, it would perhaps become a “work of art” somewhere down the line in the future, if sufficient efforts are made to publicize it or if indeed it is a work of art. Many will contradict this statement, but it’s just the way I see it.</p>

<p>Architecture is a product created for the purpose of being used by people over time. It is “produced” by many creators which include the design team of architects, engineers, consultants and contractors (although contractors only execute the design). Even if the initial designer “who shaped the form” wants to claim credit as “the Artist”, they would not say that, they would be the “Architect of” so and so building, and although you might hear they say “…I designed that building…”, the title can never be fully and exclusively theirs because of the stated above.<br>

With a painting, sculpture, print or photograph, it’s all originating from one person and belong to that one person, although I can’t say that a printer as an example, has nothing to do with the final look of the work and has no artistic input but is solely a CRAFTSMAN.</p>

<p>James, it is a great formula.<br>

I am afraid though that in reality, the"... $2,500 price tag..." would not be so easily achievable.<br>

An oil painting by an established painter, perhaps, but a print of a photograph probably not.<br>

Unless one were to be famous or famous and dead.</p>

<p>A loaded question.<br>

You will have to try until satisfied!<br>

The answer for me at this point in my life:<br>

Film (Hasselblad 503cw and 903swc medium format 6x6 cameras)+ Scan with the best (Hasselblad Flextight X5 scanner). I am fully satisfied and can say that the output of this combination is stunning.<br>

If however I was shooting commercially, the gear would probably be different.<br>

Best to you and Good Luck.</p>