Only shooting B&W - the colour editing faff.

P1505

Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
91
Location
London
Format
35mm RF
Hi.

I don’t know if this is the right place to ask this. I don’t know what I’m asking I guess. Maybe I’m over reflecting again.

Editing, specifically editing colour, kills my flow. I have thousands of images I’ve not looked at and more I’ve looked at end ignored for now because I find editing colours a chore.

This post by the way may end with me solving my own problem and deciding to sell a lot of cameras.

I love the act of photography and I love editing and making hand made books. But getting the colours to look how it felt when I made the photograph I just despise. I don’t want to sit for hours adjusting sliders or trying presets. I can’t stand it.

I’ve thought about removing the burden and buying a Monochrome camera and shooting colour film where I seem to just never need to edit after the scan. Sell the GFX etc and buy a Q2 Mono and shoot Kodak Gold on the film cameras. Or keep the GFX to scan the film, I dunno.

I need to simplify. I want things easier so I can focus on what I already do, photographing, but get more images out the other end. If I keep going as I am I’ll have 50k images I can’t be bothered to look at.

My thinking is to force the simplicity. Maybe I should spend a bit of time finding a look I like for each project and applying that preset or maybe I should find an editor to do that for me.

I don’t know what I’m asking, so I guess I’m looking for debate and conversation about the benefits of limiting yourself to monochrome or one colour film stock.
 

xkaes

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Messages
4,791
Location
Colorado
Format
Multi Format
You don't have to limit yourself, although there are LOTS of people (the majority???) that just shoot color OR b&w, but not both.

I started out shooting only color, but when I discovered B&W, I shot mostly B&W. I eventually added more color, but it's still largely B&W.

In other words, there's no perfect balance. It's up to you, and it can & will change from time to time, and subject to subject.

One "project" might be "best" in all B&W, and another in Color, and another in a mix.

It's just another tool for you to use.
 

jeffreyg

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
2,640
Location
florida
Format
Medium Format
I agree on why limit. Shoot bw film and leave the digital color which you can convert to monochrome. That’s the approach I take. I rarely print color mostly pt/pd these days. I also make an occasional hand made book and I’m doing one now but in bw
 
OP
OP

P1505

Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
91
Location
London
Format
35mm RF

I think I’d go the opposite - I just don’t like the colour from digital cameras.
 
OP
OP

P1505

Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
91
Location
London
Format
35mm RF

I wonder if limitations, or less choices, will make the editing process more enjoyable.

I guess I should try it for a month.
 

xkaes

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Messages
4,791
Location
Colorado
Format
Multi Format
Yeah, your question about B&W vs Color ends up being -- why not both.

And about Film vs Digital? Why not both?
 

cerber0s

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2020
Messages
605
Location
Sweden
Format
Multi Format
I had the same problem. I stopped shootong digital last year and went all analog. I’m much happier now, and I think my hit-rate (good photos) increased.
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,359
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format

I shoot both black & white and color, switching backs or cameras on some subjects as I walk around. If I am traveling I generally will only shoot color. YMMV
 

Alan Edward Klein

Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2017
Messages
9,448
Location
New Jersey formerly NYC
Format
Multi Format
Shooting color film still requires editing colors after the scan. Why not just shoot BW with film and then scan the film to print digitally? Simpler still, just shoot BW digitally requiring minimum editing, and then print?
 
OP
OP

P1505

Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
91
Location
London
Format
35mm RF
I find editing colour scans takes about 30 seconds, because the colours are baked in and look good by default.

My gut is saying to try shooting film exclusively for colour for a while and see how it goes. It’ll certainly help me avoid the editing phase, at the cost of cash. Each shutter actuation will be ~80 UK pence if I exclude scanning hardware costs.

That adds up fast.
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
22,778
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
P1505 said:
I find editing colour scans takes about 30 seconds, because the colours are baked in and look good by default.
Click to expand...
I'm very skeptical about claims like these. https://tinker.koraks.nl/photography/all-over-the-place-the-problem-with-color-negative-film-scans/
Of course, if you're happy with how your scans come out, that's great. You'll hear no complaints from me! But the concept of "baked in" colors - nah. There's too much going on with scans for that to be an accurate description. Speaking about color negative, of course. Positives are a different story. Those are beautifully WYSIWYG.
 

brbo

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
2,101
Location
EU
Format
Multi Format
OP is probably talking from a point where he gets scans done by a lab and considers those as basically finished images (with "baked in" colours/contrast/wb...).
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
22,778
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
That's possible, although I regularly read similar comments about colors being somehow inherently encoded into negative film. I think that's a problematic point of departure as it can result in a wild-goose chase for getting "correct" colors from color negatives.
 
OP
OP

P1505

Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
91
Location
London
Format
35mm RF
brbo said:
OP is probably talking from a point where he gets scans done by a lab and considers those as basically finished images (with "baked in" colours/contrast/wb...).
Click to expand...

Nope, I scan myself. And post conversion I find I just done need to do much if anything.

There is something so perfectly imperfect about them that I cannot get to with digital colour. It all seems so fake.

Anyway, made my decision. New macro, scanning bits, and a ton of film ordered. The Q2M will likely be ordered within 1-2 months.
 

MurrayMinchin

Membership Council
Subscriber
Joined
Jan 9, 2005
Messages
5,481
Location
North Coast BC Canada
Format
Hybrid
Not claiming to be an expert of any kind here, but I enjoy the amount of control one has making B&W prints from digital colour files.

When taking B&W images in digital monochrome or with B&W film you can, for example, put an orange filter on the lens to deepen a blue sky, but when editing a colour digital file as a B&W image you can still use the colour editing controls, even when the final print will be B&W.

This means you can deepen the blue sky, lighten that red building, make those yellow flowers pop, and lighten the green grass...all at the same time.

Sure, a monochrome digital camera would probably give more detail, but I never print larger than 11x14 (even from 4x5 negatives) so the digital prints look pretty good to me.
 
OP
OP

P1505

Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
91
Location
London
Format
35mm RF

It’s that level of control I’m hoping to avoid. I want to get 80% there and be done.

My goal is to spend less time editing, more time shooting, while avoiding chemicals.
 

MurrayMinchin

Membership Council
Subscriber
Joined
Jan 9, 2005
Messages
5,481
Location
North Coast BC Canada
Format
Hybrid
P1505 said:
It’s that level of control I’m hoping to avoid. I want to get 80% there and be done.

My goal is to spend less time editing, more time shooting, while avoiding chemicals.
Click to expand...
I used to do pin registered sharp and unsharp masking in the darkroom...what I described can be days faster!
 
Last edited:

Lachlan Young

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Messages
4,943
Location
Glasgow
Format
Multi Format
koraks said:
although I regularly read similar comments about colors being somehow inherently encoded into negative film
Click to expand...

It's more that there was/ is some data to tell the scanner which baseline correction routine to do for base/ mask - i.e. Fujicolor, Gold (same difference with analogue machine printers with different channels for different stocks/ manufacturers) etc, and then baking whatever LUT etc on top of that. They were designed to let largely semi-skilled operators produce better than acceptable results fast - they can improve truly awful negs quite a bit, but on a really good neg are often quite some way from what a high end scan or darkroom print can deliver. At some point, I guess I should dig out the Portra Printer Control negs I've got here and see what people make of them.
 

beemermark

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
867
Format
4x5 Format
Sorry I got lost at the OP. What is colour editing faff. I wish some poster would realize some of us are over 30.
 

Romanko

Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2021
Messages
889
Location
Sydney, Australia
Format
Medium Format
@P1505 I periodically experience the exact same problems that you described.

You feel like you have taken a ton of images already and you want to shoot even more, yet you don't want to spend too much time editing your film images, and it bothers you that you don't do much with them. My situation is even worse because I also shoot digital and end up with even more images waiting to be edited and printed.

I partially solved the problem by revising my workflow and eliminating the steps that I do not enjoy doing or require too much time. I stopped repairing my old cameras and only use a few that I know work. I found a good film lab that I can trust with developing my colour negatives and slides (I still develop B&W). I developed a camera scanning workflow that allows me to get consistent results from my scans with minimum effort. I moved from Darktable to Affinity Photo which I actually enjoy using. And finally, I bought a Canon Selphy printer and started printing the images that I like most.

I am now going through the photos I taken this and last year (a lot of them are digital). My plans are to compile a body of work that I can have printed as a portfolio similar to what Kyle Mcdougall did with his Slate Country series and the prints what Ben Horne is producing annually.

Also, as others said you do not need to limit yourself to shooting only colour or B&W if you enjoy both. Focus on your projects and artistic goals and they will dictate the choice of media. (Ideally). Life is more complex of course.
 

brbo

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
2,101
Location
EU
Format
Multi Format

I gather that OP shoots a ton of digital images, doesn't like editing them and sees the solution in shooting only film for colour images since his scanning works very well for him and scans need no or very little editing to get him to what he likes.
 

Romanko

Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2021
Messages
889
Location
Sydney, Australia
Format
Medium Format
brbo said:
I gather that OP shoots a ton of digital images, doesn't like editing them and sees the solution in shooting only film for colour images since his scanning works very well for him and scans need no or very little editing to get him to what he likes.
Click to expand...

Oh, that solves the problem! Shoot too much film and you go broke quicker than you expected.

Jokes aside, if @P1505 loves shooting colour film and the look of it when scanned this is great. I wish I could say the same. Hybrid colour negative process is still a bit of a struggle for me but I am getting better at it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…