Why do you photograph in black and white?

[Photojeep]

For those of you who choose to shoot black and white, I'm just curious why.

Personally, I find I enjoy black and white in my personal work. Perhaps it's because practically all of my commercial clients want color.

So why do you do BW?

rb

[Merg Ross]

Black and white best captures my vision. I see in black and white, and my personal work is about contrast, texture and form.

Interesting you mention that commercial work often demands color. I found the same to be true.

mergross.com

[domenico Foschi]

Why, what else is there?
I have heard of such concept as color, but I haven't been able to grasp the meaning of it fully.

Okay, the smart@$$ is gone.
For the kind of subject matter I choose and the results I want B/W is my choice.
I feel I can have a more "Playful" approach with light, which becomes an almost infinite gradation of grays.
I feel also that B/W is an easier media to grasp, to be affected by.
This is my personal view, other views are equally valid.
I throughly enjoy color work, some of it is exceptional, especially when it is about color.

[Doug Herta]

I contact print using earlier processes (Kallitype,Platinum,Palladium). I guess I choose BW because alternative processes demand it.

[Daniel_Buck]

I enjoy B&W because it gives me something other than exactly what I saw, and I get to manipulate what I do see! (color filters) Some may say that B&W is what you 'felt' instead of what you 'saw' or something like that, but I don't know if that's true for me as I'm not as 'deep' as some people are. I see in color every day when I walk down the street, looking at B&W photographs takes me away from the color and shows me something different, and I enjoy that!

On top of that with a more practical reason, B&W is so simple and cheap to process. With a combo of tri-x and HC110, it is very forgiving and is a very simple process. If I could process color the same way, and for the same price, I would probably shoot more color than I do now. But I would not give up B&W.

[Vaughn]

Sometimes I think it is just habit. Sometimes I think it is because color distracts from the forms the light creates. Sometimes I think it is because one can manipulate the shades of grays and still have an image that is understandable whereas distorted color is a barrier.

Most of the time I put the thinking aside and make images.

Vaughn

[John Kasaian]

Because B&W for me is the color of memory. I've seen some beautiful colors in nature, but I remember them in B&W as I cannot put into my memory a blue-er than blue or a greener than green or a golder than gold. Film with supersaturated colors look hokey to me and when the colors shift they look even hokey-er. B&W speaks truer, I find.
I still appreciate color photographs, but not for my own work.

[Greg Lockrey]

When I got started in photography in the late 60's B&W was just "easier" to process and it was archival. Later I found out that color was just as easy but temperature controls where more critical. All of my "fine art" photography is B&W since I enjoy manipulating the tones. Color at that time wasn't considered archival and thereby not used in fine art. That's different today, however. 99% of my business is color and 50/50 for personal work.

[Brian Schall]

I do B&W because I get to do it all: take the picture, develop the film, and print the picture. Taking the picture is only part of the fun of photography. With color, you take the picture and someone else, or some other machine, does the rest. Just isn't as much fun.

[Mark Sawyer]

Seeing and creating in black and white is a tradition and a discipline that I love and respect. It is also a medium that I have learned to understand and can relate the things I want to let out through. It's a craft and an art form. And it's beautiful.

[Gary L. Quay]

Both have their place, but black and white lends itself to artistic explotation and creative techniques that color can not. Keep in mind that I do all of my work in the darkroom, so photoshop notwithstanding, the capacity of black and white paper to handle the extremes of contrast and tone is superior to color paper. There's also a certain stark beauty, and emotion in black and white that I find fascinating. I also like the fact that I can store an opened bottle of B&W developer for more than a week.

--Gary

[butterflydream]

I think because black and white image doesn't exist in nature, so it makes the image abstract. Like a dream.

I can concentrate on the shape and geometry of the object, so I like B&W.

[clay harmon]

Because on the internet, nobody knows you're a dog.

[jimi-the-jive]

personally i "see" better in b+w, if i'm playing computer games i'll ofter turn off the saturation on my screen. i think colour can often be a distraction. also the control and aesthetic.

[Walter Calahan]

Cause it's cheaper than color. Ha ha ha ha ha ha

Why paint with watercolors instead of oil?

Why sculpt in metal instead of stone?

Why why why?

The proof is in the pudding. Frankly I don't really care one way or the other. The resulting work is all that matters. B&W is just a tool of expression.

[MIke Sherck]

I don't use B&W exclusively, but the 95% of my photography which is in B&W is that way because I like the way it looks. It gives me the photograph I want to make.

For me, color is too literal, too documentary. When I photograph a tree, I'm not making a picture of a tree, it's something else. B&W both helps to make it more abstract and less like a tree, as well as allowing me to better show what else the photograph is really about.

Plus, prints are just *so* beautiful: I've seen few color prints which evoke a similar reaction in me.

Mike

[Bill_1856]

I switched from color to B&W in the '80s because it was cheaper (before digital), and the dye-transfer darkroom sessions were killing me.
Now, I switch easily between them, depending on the subject matter.

[bigdog]

Because on the internet, nobody knows you're a dog.

:D

[evan clarke]

Because I just like it!!..Evan Clarke

[Brian Ellis]

Color tells us what things look like, black and white tells us what they feel like.

[Steven Barall]

It just so happens that the world looks perfectly nice in black and white. Nature uses colors for the purpose of survival in some way like for attracting mates or for propagation in the case of flora. Certain colors are better for photosynthesis or for attracting the bugs that carry along the stuff that the plants need to make new plants etc.

With photography on the other hand, the Photographer's own mating rituals seem to be satisfied just as well with shades of gray meaning that if you're in art school and you want to get some action, chicks seem to go for the brooding artiste type and that usually means black and white. Well that pretty much explains that. Is there anything else that anyone wants to know?

[Peter Collins]

Brian Ellis says it very well and sparingly. I think A. Adams used the phrase "departures from reality" and those spare words work for me.

[Richard M. Coda]

Yes, Brian hit the nail on the head.

Me?

It just looks cool.
I'm colorblind (I'm red-green... always hated those stupid tests with the numbers in the circles) but do see colors
Total control.
I really do "see" in black & white.

When, on the rare occasions I do shoot color (I am still learning) the SUBJECT is color, no matter what I am actually photographing.

[David Luttmann]

For me, it’s a chance to capture an image that is completely different to what I see. I can create dark, moody images in B&W that to my eyes, work better than in color.

I preferred this image in B&W than the color version. It’s not that the original shot on Fuji NPS was bad….it’s just that it could not represent my mood and what I envisioned there.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Because is what I do better? I admire those who can do great color work like Masiel or Tenneson. For me doing good color work is far harder than doing good B&W.

[Pat Kearns]

I to, like Richard, am color blind. I see colors but they are not the same as what noncolor blind people see. That is frustrating. I can see and relate better with the tonalities in black & white photography.

[Don Hutton]

For me, it’s a chance to capture an image that is completely different to what I see. I can create dark, moody images in B&W that to my eyes, work better than in color.

I preferred this image in B&W than the color version. It’s not that the original shot on Fuji NPS was bad….it’s just that it could not represent my mood and what I envisioned there.I'm not sure why you posted that image if it's not shot in B&W. From one who is continually accusing others of poor comprehension and a lack of reading skills clearly it needs to be pointed out that the OP was asking why people shoot in B&W - your example is shot in color, later converted...

[David Luttmann]

I'm not sure why you posted that image if it's not shot in B&W. From one who is continually accusing others of poor comprehension and a lack of reading skills clearly it needs to be pointed out that the OP was asking why people shoot in B&W - your example is shot in color, later converted...

Because I saw the image in my mind as B&W :rolleyes:

[sanking]

Because I saw the image in my mind as B&W :rolleyes:

I am confused.

Your original answer to the question was, "For me, it’s a chance to capture an image that is completely different to what I see."

Sandy King

[David Luttmann]

I am confused.

Your original answer to the question was, "For me, it’s a chance to capture an image that is completely different to what I see."

Sandy King

What I see, and what I envision in my mind are two different things.....at least according to the voices.... :D

4x5 NPS is just what I happened to have in the camera.

[Vaughn]

I think David is trying to differeniate between what he saw (with his eyes) and what he Saw (in his mind).

I don't think the OP's main question here is about what the original method of capturing the image, but instead the final result -- a B&W image/print.

Just my two cents worth -- send me a stamped envelope and I'll send you the change.;)

Vaughn

[David Luttmann]

I think David is trying to differeniate between what he saw (with his eyes) and what he Saw (in his mind).

I don't think the OP's main question here is about what the original method of capturing the image, but instead the final result -- a B&W image/print.

Just my two cents worth -- send me a stamped envelope and I'll send you the change.;)

Vaughn

You got it Vaughn!

I was in a field with a nice fog that day. I hadn’t loaded any B&W film into my holders. I just grabbed the camera and the 3 holders I had….that were loaded with 4x5 Fuji NPS. I spent an entire afternoon seeing how the fog moved through the trees and grass in various locations. I cropped this image a bit as I preferred the longer aspect ratio.

I was waiting for the fog to role back and cover this path again, but it was starting to clear so after a half hour of waiting for the fog, I gave up and took the shot before the sky brightened up more.

B&W conversion was done with an emulator I have written as a photoshop action. Toning was done with one of Ken Lee’s curve adjustments (downloadable from his web site)....with minor adjustments myself.

Regards,

...from me and the voices :D

[Don Hutton]

I don't think the OP's main question here is about what the original method of capturing the image, but instead the final result -- a B&W image/print.
VaughnActually Vaughn, I believe that capturing a color image and reworking it later to fit a completely different aesthetic and previsualizing and shooting in B&W are world's apart - certainly for me. I could be the only guy on the planet who feels that way...

[David Luttmann]

Actually Vaughn, I believe that capturing a color image and reworking it later to fit a completely different aesthetic and previsualizing and shooting in B&W are world's apart - certainly for me. I could be the only guy on the planet who feels that way...

You can previsualize a scene for B&W regardless of the film loaded. The GG image is always color. I wanted a B&W image on print. Does it look different than that straight from B&W film....you bet. But then again, so it would with many alt processes.

Regards,

[Eric James]

...The GG image is always color...

[paulr]

I have some long-winded theories about the differences, but for my work it probably comes down to how I happen to be seeing things. When color relationships are a big part of what's attracting me to a subject, obviously I choose color. When form and texture are what attract me, then b+w. And why one or the other might win out might come down to mood.

For most of my photographic life, I did nothing but b+w. Then I started seeing interesting things that were about color. It was a bit of a crisis, because I didn't know what to do about it. I didn't know anything about the materials or tools. So quite a few years went by before I took the plunge and learned how to work in color. Since then it's been a simpler choice.

At any rate, I tend to get immersed in projects revolving around a central theme, and any given project (so far) has been either color or b+w, not both.

[Ken Lee]

No matter how objective they are, monochrome images will always be just a little subjective. The trick is in finding a balance between the two.

[steve simmons]

Hmmmmm

so you can only photograph in the medium of your final result?!

How do you photograph in gum, platinum, carbon, etc. There must be capture media out there I am not familiar with. Please educate me.

This ether/or argument that gets reenacted in so many ways seems silly to me. Even in traditional photography we alter the capture media all the time when we darken or lighten a print in the darkroom, burn and dodge, make an alt process print, etc.

:)

steve simmons

[David Luttmann]

Hmmmmm

so you can only photograph in the medium of your final result?!

How do you photograph in gum, platinum, carbon, etc. There must be capture media out there I am not familiar with. Please educate me.

This ether/or argument that gets reenacted in so many ways seems silly to me. Even in traditional photography we alter the capture media all the time when we darken or lighten a print in the darkroom, burn and dodge, make an alt process print, etc.

:)

steve simmons


Apparently, according to some, it's only wrong when I do it :D

I agree fully. The final print would look somewhat different had I used B&W film…..but which film? Different B&W films have different spectral sensitivity curves. NPS is what I had in the camera. With this film, I can replicate the response curves of many different B&W films. This allows me to concentrate on composing an image in the GG that I contemplate will work for what I have in mind for the final B&W output.

If I happened to use B&W film, all the better as I feel B&W film has the highest resolution available.

[Merg Ross]

The question was, as I understood it, why do those who photograph in black and white choose to do so. Simply, I want the result to be black and white with tones in between. There are different ways to achieve that result, but my preference is panchromatic film. Certainly there is some manipulation involved between capture and print.

[Vaughn]

Actually Vaughn, I believe that capturing a color image and reworking it later to fit a completely different aesthetic and previsualizing and shooting in B&W are world's apart - certainly for me. I could be the only guy on the planet who feels that way...

Choosing which medium to capture an image will certainly affect the outcome, as does the medium choosen to print or otherwise display the image. In one way or another we tend to be slaves of our chosen tools. How bizarre for anyone to capture an image in B&W, then hand-color it!;)

Worlds apart...well, perhaps continents apart...but both equally valid.

Vaughn

And I like Steve's post -- I capture an image in silver, but print it in either carbon in a gelatin matrix (carbon prints) or in a mixture of platinum and palladium

[domenico Foschi]

I mean, really fellas....
What is this pettiness?
It goes on and on ...
It is old, it is stale, it is discouraging.
Negativity never solved a thing.
Put your anger in your work.

[David Luttmann]

Choosing which medium to capture an image will certainly affect the outcome, as does the medium choosen to print or otherwise display the image. In one way or another we tend to be slaves of our chosen tools. How bizarre for anyone to capture an image in B&W, then hand-color it!;)

Worlds apart...well, perhaps continents apart...but both equally valid.

Vaughn

And I like Steve's post -- I capture an image in silver, but print it in either carbon in a gelatin matrix (carbon prints) or in a mixture of platinum and palladium

I think most will agree with you Vaughn,

It's just that Don and Jorge have made it a hobby to attack me personally so regardless of what I do, it is wrong. That is why I added Jorge to ignore, to avoid the namecalling I normally have sent my way. It's much quieter now :)

[kev curry]

Enjoyable thread.........I was just discussing this with my partner the other day and for me I find that colour photographs seldom have the power to move me in the way that Black and White can. They possess a strangely enduring character, I just love the medium. I doubt I could ever tire of this beautiful art form.
Long live Silver:)

kev

[John Bowen]

For those of you who choose to shoot black and white, I'm just curious why.

rb

I feel like it's the late 70's and I'm back in philosophy class....but the answer is "Why Not?" :rolleyes:

Actually I like B&W better then color...oh yeah, and b&W will last longer than color :D

Interesting thread..

[Bill_1856]

ENOUGH! (As****es).

[Kirk Gittings]

Hmmmmm

so you can only photograph in the medium of your final result?!

How do you photograph in gum, platinum, carbon, etc. There must be capture media out there I am not familiar with. Please educate me.

This ether/or argument that gets reenacted in so many ways seems silly to me. Even in traditional photography we alter the capture media all the time when we darken or lighten a print in the darkroom, burn and dodge, make an alt process print, etc.

:)

steve simmons

Along those lines......When I envision an image in b&w but find all my available filters wrong or to blunt for the tone change I want, it is time for some color negative film where I can get the change I want in the b&w conversion process. Even though it may be shot on color film, the intent is b&w and I never consider one of these images anything but a b&w image

[Andrew O'Neill]

I think it's all mental with me. I've always been attracted to blacks, grays, whites. As a kid colouring with my sister, I always went for the black crayon. I like drawing with pencils and charcoal. I guess getting into black and white photography was the logical way for me to go...

[r.e.]

It's a pity that van Gogh didn't realize that he would have been a greater painter had he used only black paint and white paint, or just charcoal.

[Kirk Gittings]

It's a pity that van Gogh didn't realize that he would have been a greater painter had he used only black paint and white paint, or just charcoal.

B&W would not have made Van Gogh a better painter anymore than color would have made Edward Weston a better photographer.

[Don Hutton]

B&W would not have made Van Gogh a better painter anymore than color would have made Edward Weston a better photographer.

Maybe, but at least no-one could have chewed his ear off about it....

[sanking]

Along those lines......When I envision an image in b&w but find all my available filters wrong or to blunt for the tone change I want, it is time for some color negative film where I can get the change I want in the b&w conversion process. Even though it may be shot on color film, the intent is b&w and I never consider one of these images anything but a b&w image

It is pretty amazing what kind of control you can get in making the B&W conversion from color negative film in CS3 to B&W. When I was in China last fall I exposed several rolls of color negative film with a Mamiya 7II camera, in conditions of very great subject light range. When I looked at the negatives I figured the range was so great that the negatives would be difficult or impossible to scan and print. However, just to see what might happen I scanned one of the most difficult looking ones, then took it to the B&W conversion in CS3. Wow, I was amazed at how the use of one of the various color corrections evened out the very high densities in some area of the print.

I am thinking back on the subject brightness range in the conditions in which those negatives were exposed and believe it must have been at leat 15 stops. Capturing that range with B&W film would certainly have been possible, but not without special developing procedures. With the color negative film I just exposed for the shadows and had the film developed at a local lab.



Sandy King

[r.e.]

B&W would not have made Van Gogh a better painter anymore than color would have made Edward Weston a better photographer.

Yes, that's my point.

[sanking]

Maybe, but at least no-one could have chewed his ear off about it....

Yeah, and without the color of the blood who would have noticed?

Sandy King

[Don Hutton]

Yeah, and without the color of the blood who would have noticed?

Sandy KingWould have been even more dramatic if he'd had grey gunge oozing out.

[Merg Ross]

Since Kirk made mention of Edward Weston, take a look at his color work from 1946 and 1947 using Ektachrome and Kodachrome. Compare, for instance, his Kodachrome of "Rock, Point Lobos,1947" with "Point Lobos, 1930" (same subject, silver gelatin print). And then, read his short essay from around 1953 entitled "Color as Form". He had the ability to embrace both color and black and white. I believe it was Steve who mentioned the "either or" proposition. I agree, it makes no difference, some happen to be masters of color, some of black and white, and occasionlly some do both extremely well.

[Bruce Watson]

The proof is in the pudding.

Really, it's not. The original phrase has been mangled unmercifully for a long, long time. Its origin isn't clear, but it's arguably most famous use comes from Cervates' Don Quixote thusly: The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

Sorry. I'm just feeling very pedantic today for some reason. Hopefully this phase won't last too long and I can go back to photographing. Sigh...

[Vaughn]

Really, it's not. The original phrase has been mangled unmercifully for a long, long time. Its origin isn't clear, but it's arguably most famous use comes from Cervates' Don Quixote thusly: The proof of the pudding is in the eating.snip

"Hey, Honey! Have you seen that new proof sheet I was looking at last night?"

"The proof is in the pudding, Dear."

[Benno Jones]

I'm probably just stating what others have said in a different way, but I think the brain processes black & white differently than it does color, treating it as abstraction regardless of whether the image is familiar or not. I think most people will accept b&w abstracts as such while they'll spend lots of time trying to figure out just what a color abstract "is".

[domenico Foschi]

B/W being an abstraction of the commonly perceived world, frees us in transforming it even more, reducing it to tonalities and shapes and relationships that affect "alternative sensory organs".

[Marko]

How about Albrecht Dürer (http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/durer/)?

I could never decide if he was better at color or B&W, it always depended on the mood I was in...

[Photojeep]

As the original poster, I should have asked my question with better clarity. :(

I was wondering why you make black and white photographs. No matter how you got there...

I apologize for starting some on a discussion of the merits of straight bw capture versus color converted to bw. Such was NOT my intention.

Again, my apologies for poor wording. :(

(But I have enjoyed your responses though! Keep 'em coming.)

[Bruce Watson]

For those of you who choose to shoot black and white, I'm just curious why.

I use both B&W and color and so have thought fairly long and hard about this very question. I've concluded that the reason I use B&W materials for some scenes is that what I want to show in the final print needs it in some way. The most "normal" way that the image needs B&W is that the colors are distracting and get in the way of allowing one to focus on the underlying detail, textures, and rhythms of the scene.

[Vaughn]

Photojeep...

All discussions here tend to be free-for-alls and take many twists and turns. Personally, I like that. A direct question on what ASA to give to T-Max100 can lead to comparing the visual acutance of different developers with old Panatomic-X film.

So don't worry about framing your question tightly...it does not really matter. You started off a great discussion!

Vaughn

[katie cooke]

Why? Because I do. Because I love it.

I've been thinking about this back and forth since the question was posted, and had a four paragraph long ramble with lots of reasons and details, but, no, it all distills down to that. Try to define love, or really explain why you love someone: you could make a long list of reasons, but not one of them could ever convince another person to love that person in the way that you do, or even make sense of it.

[Joseph O'Neil]

As the original poster, I should have asked my question with better clarity. :(

I was wondering why you make black and white photographs. No matter how you got there...



-snip-

Because I'm colour blind.
:D

[Brian Ellis]

Because is what I do better? I admire those who can do great color work like Masiel or Tenneson. For me doing good color work is far harder than doing good B&W.

I agree completely. I did no color until a couple years ago, then started doing more and more of it just to do something different after so many years of black and white. Man, talk about hard. The few good ones still just look like post cards, the many bad ones look like snapshots. That literalism (?) of color is just so hard to get past. And I absolutely can't see in b&w if I have color film in the camera or am using a digital camera. As soon as I'm equipped to shoot color all seeing in black and white goes out the window.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

I agree completely. I did no color until a couple years ago, then started doing more and more of it just to do something different after so many years of black and white. Man, talk about hard. The few good ones still just look like post cards, the many bad ones look like snapshots. That literalism (?) of color is just so hard to get past. And I absolutely can't see in b&w if I have color film in the camera or am using a digital camera. As soon as I'm equipped to shoot color all seeing in black and white goes out the window.

Doesn't your dslr have a b&W setting? My little digigizmo has it so I can have it in b&w as well as sepia. Looks like crap, even in the wonderful 3 in lcd screen...LOL.

I think the adjustment to "seeing" in color is the hardest thing. I don't know about you, but I am too used to visualize the final print which I think it does not work in color. It is hard to "see" how the finish print will be in color. I don't know how Tenneson does it, since it seems she is using strobe lights, she must have spent a hell of a lot of money on polaroids.
When I go out I try to see what I could picture in color....not a damn thing so far, the reason I have not forked over some money to buy transparency film. I guess I am doomed to black and white.. :)

[Brian Ellis]

Doesn't your dslr have a b&W setting? My little digigizmo has it so I can have it in b&w as well as sepia. Looks like crap, even in the wonderful 3 in lcd screen...LOL.

I think the adjustment to "seeing" in color is the hardest thing. I don't know about you, but I am too used to visualize the final print which I think it does not work in color. It is hard to "see" how the finish print will be in color. I don't know how Tenneson does it, since it seems she is using strobe lights, she must have spent a hell of a lot of money on polaroids.
When I go out I try to see what I could picture in color....not a damn thing so far, the reason I have not forked over some money to buy transparency film. I guess I am doomed to black and white.. :)

It has a b&w setting but that can be changed with the push of a button. It seems to be the possibility of shooting in color that messes my mind up. When I carry only b&w film the possibility doesn't exist. I've mentioned this problem before and others have acknowledged the same problem so it isn't totally crazy (or maybe it is but I'm not the only crazy one).

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

It has a b&w setting but that can be changed with the push of a button. It seems to be the possibility of shooting in color that messes my mind up. When I carry only b&w film the possibility doesn't exist. I've mentioned this problem before and others have acknowledged the same problem so it isn't totally crazy (or maybe it is but I'm not the only crazy one).

That is a funny quirk. I guess in my case I am afraid of falling into the post card trap. Here we have plnety of small towns where people paint their houses in really bright colors, but how many pictures of a door with a bright pink wall can you take? It is the typical color shot that tourist come to take here, and of course the poor people.....another of my pet peeves.

[Daqlon]

The world is colorful enough :)

[Michael Graves]

Like Katie said.....

'cause I like it. Nuff said.

[Clay Turtle]

Don't shoot alot of b&w any more but it was how I was taught when I started with 35mm & when I started shooting large format . . . guess what?
PS Just got the 5x4 Bender together & was on my way down South (Glades) stopped by & spent the night with my nephew. After supper we were talking & I ended up doing my first shot as a b&w table top of one of his model cars. It made for a nice evening at home. We did the setup on a mirror, used a Ace Hardware Calender (little short & painted out the logo). Shot it & processed the film at the kitchen sink all in one evening, we both enjoyed it.

[Frank Petronio]

Because photos of lewd, naked girls in color are called porn.

[Greg Lockrey]

Because photos of lewd, naked girls in color are called porn.

Only if they are correctly exosed and in sharp focus. :rolleyes:

[Frank Petronio]

Porn is in sRGB too....

[Clay Turtle]

As a rule I tend to shoot the scene as it presents itself & therefore I carry (generally color slide & negative as well as b&w. As others have stated sometimes I shoot color negative but transform it to b&w because it looks better to me. Hm . . . Hadn't considered it but a digital file from a positive could be transformed into b&w as well. Hadn't really considered that idea. Hey, thanks for the thought!

[Miguel Coquis]

B&W endless "palette" have great plasticity and matches easily with my brain "matière gris" !!!
Dynamic ranges moves like Yin and Yang:-)

[eddie]

i do both.

B&W is a bit easier for me in that i can do it all very easily. i mean mixing the appropriate chemicals to printing on silver paper or VDB. i like being able to use big negatives (well, big for me). i enjoy the process from loading the holders to mixing the various chems to burning and dodging in the DR.

on the color side i enjoy shooting some of the great colors i see. sometimes that great blue sky with giant puffy clouds that are colored from white to gray to dark gray/purple just talk to me in color. i find that many great color scenes also look good in B&W. but some very busy not so good color scenes look better in B&W. the draw back is i do not do my own color printing. so that means scanning and working with PS....that is something i do not have very much knowledge in and have not learned....someday i will learn but for now i have so many other things to learn that my schedule is over full........

eddie

[Nick K]

Well, I do some things in infrared. I like the ethereal and otherworldly aspect of infrared. Possibly because it highlights the fact that what we are experiencing with this photo is a fabrication based on reality but not a representation of reality. Never thought about it much deeper than that.

But I will tell you that as of right now, I chose to not use black and white usually because I feel that color (for me) adds a very important, sometimes critical, element to my photos.