Those curtains?
With that wallpaper? 
(Has to go and lie down)
To be continued....
Chat Forum
Black and white
-
Posted 8 months ago #
-
If anyone is at all arsed about superb black and white cinematography,
'La Règle du jeu' has just started on Film 4.G'night.
Posted 8 months ago # -
skin tone is so much easier with bw.
bw conversion from a colour photo with the channel mixer is so much easier than straight digital bw.shoot slides for a bit,that'll make you a better photographer.
or turn off the monitor,you should know what you're doing.if not.learn.
modes aren't a transferrable skill.knowing how to expose is.children are much less predictable than shooting sports.If I wanted to shoot kids I'd get a d2hs,cheap.5mb files are plenty big enough.great af.nice body.
lighting conditions generally don't change very much.so manual is fine for most situations.better actually.shots might be free and unlimited.but time isn't.
neither is energy,for posing,for concentration.or for selecting the keepers out of a 12gb card.
people, they get bored,be they wives,girlfriends,friends,relatives.
why so many pictures of cats,dogs?because they don't get bored.so,learn lighting.learn exposure.when you've got that dialled,well it becomes automatic,and faster,not to mention more precise.
asides from expressive.my d200 meters fine,but I prefer using a sekonic.mostly it's the same.
mostly.
I won't even get started on flash.and I won't even consider getting started on multiple flashes.my advice.fx is too expensive.bodies are worth naught after a few years.lenses are the better buy.
nice long tele lenses are even nicer longer tele lenses with dx.
plenty of good nikon wa lenses.some good dx primes.most important thing is never the equipment.
any cyclist knows that..asides from tripods.good tripods are niceness itself.
Posted 8 months ago # -
I only go for black and white if I can't get the white balance right after endless faffing, or if the colours look shit in general. This photo looked awful in colour bit in BW I think it looks alright (despite the framing of the planes being a bit close to the edge). The planes stand out from the sky much better than in the colour version. Don't have the original for comparison at the minute so I can't post them both.
Posted 8 months ago # -
A fully manual camera has all the creative options possible, it's knowing how to achieve those options that counts.
I'd agree and the creativity is all pre loaded into the photographer.
A really good
colourB&W photo is all about the colours that are captured - Ernst Haas
Which is why not all photos look good in B&W.Posted 8 months ago # -
Then, too often, they resort to Photoshop to correct their bad technique, and try to save otherwise crap photos
but does that matter if you end up with something that still looks good ?
photoshop is only a tool just like other tools that photogtraphers have used over time to create their finished work - exposure times, light, filtering, developing etc etc.
look how manipulated blumenfeld's work is but it's still fantastic.
arguing against photoshop is like arguing against cubase in music. they're actually tools that enhance and enable creativity not limit or negate it.
just my two penneth
Posted 8 months ago # -
So I spose what I'm saying is, that the real skill lies in not having to rely on the tech, but to have the intuition to know what will happen once you've set the cam up and pressed the button
Agreed. I've never said understanding is not important - of course it is, and I've said that many times.
What I am trying to say is that if you are a beginner, it's better to get shooting FIRST and then learn about manual mode later, rather than starting off in manual and spending ages staring at your screen rather than shooting.
or turn off the monitor,you should know what you're doing.if not.learn.
This 'learn' part is what we are talking about!
Posted 8 months ago # -
photoshop is only a tool just like other tools that photogtraphers have used over time to create their finished work - exposure times, light, filtering, developing etc etc.
The main difference being that an already good photo is taken and enhances against a crap photo is taken and made average. The same as music. How many over produced singers can sing well live on stage?Posted 8 months ago # -
The main difference being that an already good photo is taken and enhances against a crap photo is taken and made average
i don't think that you can actually apply that as a general rule. so long as you end up with a good image, wgas how it was created. in the end, it's all creativity.
The same as music. How many over produced singers can sing well live on stage?
in truth probably far fewer than you could ever imagine but i bet there are albums in your collection that you consider incredible that could never be reproduced live. look at the stone roses for example, seminal first album, can't sing live to save his life.
point i'm making is that it's all about coming up with a finished product. whichever way you got there, it's all legit so long as the product is worth looking at or listening to. it doesn't need to be quantified in any other way.
Posted 8 months ago # -
Ohh I do LOVE a bit of B&W.
For portraits especially, and stuffs with texture.
For example:
IMG_5871 by PeterPoddy, on Flickr
IMG_5861 by PeterPoddy, on FlickrSometimes B&W shows the light really well too, sort of suggesting it rather then shouting about it:
Candle by PeterPoddy, on FlickrBut this one needed the colour I think, to show the decay better
Hinge by PeterPoddy, on FlickrPosted 8 months ago # -
I took the plunge nearly 4 yrs ago and got a DSLR...I started out not understanding the principles of photography and through trial and error (still lots of error) and using the internet to explain things, I gradually got the basics right in my head. Once you grasp the relationship between aperture and shutter speed a lot falls in to place. Putting theory into practice initially i likened to changing your golf swing - you have some many things to think of you struggle to get it right - thats when you have to practice - take your camera on every walk or ride - pretty soon it becomes natural.
Assuming you have an eye your images should improve - you will start to look at the world differently, lining up shots and noticing details where you wouldnt previously...this is particularly frustrating if you dont have your camera with you...moral, take it wherever and whenever you can. Get a decent camera bag if this helps you.
Another help with composition for me was getting a prime lens - 50mm F1.8 in my case. You cant stand in one place like you can with a zoom. The quality is instantly better (unless you have £1000 zooms) and the depth of field control adds an extra dimension.
Finally I was luckly enough to inherit a relatives Pentax ME Super Film SLR -
Something i would have struggled to get a picture from 4 years ago, is a joy to use - challenging yes and it certainly makes you concentrate but all those key principles that had to be learnt to get the most from a DSLR, mean I can now use a film camera competently. The principles are still the same.
My latest camera fun is a DIY body cap pinhole for my DSLR...Anyway good thread - I also have to say best thread of all has to be Takas ongoing photos of the month, some aw inspiring shots on there from some talented photographers - keep it up ! Heres one for me that I knew would be B&W -
[img]
Boardwalk Shadows by matzophotographic, on Flickr[/img]Posted 8 months ago # -
I'm amazed no-ones mentioned that if pR0n is in black and white, it must be art
Posted 8 months ago # -
Hoodie - like that pic.
Another help with composition for me was getting a prime lens - 50mm F1.8 in my case. You cant stand in one place like you can with a zoom.
Hmm.. you do know that standing closer to something and zooming out produces a different shot to standing further away and zooming in, don't you? Moving further away with a prime lens is NOT the same thing as zooming out, not at all. There's a lot you can do with a zoom that you simply can't do with a prime.
Posted 8 months ago # -
There's a lot you can do with a zoom that you simply can't do with a prime.
Likewise you've got extra stops with the prime that you won't have with your zoom.
I love my nifty 50. Very rarely off my camera as it makes an excellent portrait lens on a DX sensor. And yes it does make you think a bit.
(I have the 18-70 which obviously covers 50mm too - but I rarely use it despite it being a good lens).
Posted 8 months ago # -
Yeah dont have anything against zooms, started off with just a Nikon kit zoom lens but for me the quality of image from a prime compared to say a typical kit zoom lens, means the prime tends to spend a lot of time on the camera.
I know the difference between positioning and zoom - I just feel they make you think more..
If I had £1k burning a hole right now id get an 18-70 F2.8 and love the flexibility of zoom but sadly i dont...still onwards and upwards, got this shot by dangling the afore mentioned prime out of my bedroom window at the street below...abstracts where its at !! (and in this case, i think the colour makes it).
[img]
Urban Lines by matzophotographic, on Flickr[/img]Posted 8 months ago # -
Of course, Graham - those extra stops are lovely. It's horses for courses, but to say that one is better or the right way to go is a bit silly. I have two primes, the Sigma 30mm because of its f1.4 - it's great for portraits but a bit long for a lot of stuff. Very sharp tho. The other is the 25mm f2.8 pancake which I only have cos it's tiny.
PS another great pic hoodie
Posted 8 months ago # -
I didn't bother taking a colour photo of this and definitely think it's better B/W than it would be colour....
This was taken on a P&S and I think it looks better B/W
Posted 7 months ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
