Seeing in Black and White

[DREW WILEY]

Taking hold of a bull's horns and back flipping over it was a sport of the Minoans millennia ago. They had particularly sadistic sports too. Those Spanish fighting bulls are actually quite small, but fast. The preferred rodeo bulls were huge Brahmas. A rider's points were not only based on how long he could how on, but how big and active the bull in question actually was, determining the amount of the prize. Therefore breeders sought to produce bulls as big and mean as possible. And clowns in the arena risked themselves luring the bull away, once the rider had fallen. But the high school rodeos just used young Herefords, which ran away once the rider was bucked off. It was a wonderful life growing up, but I didn't even have a camera until my older brother gave me a Pentax H1 as a graduation present. And yes, I have plenty of prints with cattle or bulls somewhere in them, but from large format film.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Here's the difference between using a smartphone viewfinder app that can display in black and white and using a Wratten 90.

First, the viewfinder app in B&W mode (with frame lines for a 90mm lens on a 6x7 camera):

Now the same view with the Wratten 90 viewing filter:

Which do you prefer? I prefer the first one.

The problem with this is that the second one is much closer to what the film sees than the first one. That's because the phone camera works nothing like a film camera. The phone camera has an AI which analyses the image way before your eyes actually see it. On an iPhone, the camera actually takes not one, but 8 different photos, analyses them and merges the best pixels of each of the 8 images onto the final image.

A black an white image on an iPhone, regardless of the app used, is just not the black and white image that your film will give you, because it corrects every problem, or potential problem, beforehand. So if the OP just wants to view a scene in black and white, sure, a phone app will do; if he wants to learn to see how a black and white film sees, he's better off with the filter, used in the manner I described above.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hello, I'm a long time lurker, and I have a question about what I think is the stuff of science fiction. I recall seeing in some magazine (PDN, American Photo, Outdoor Photographer, etc.) sometime back that there was an eyeglass, rather like a loupe in appearance that allowed you to look at a scene and see what the tones and light would look like exposed in black and white. I assume it's not totally black and white, but some kind of color filter which renders it close enough to imagine total grayscale. Did I imagine this device or does it really exist? If it is real, is it worth the trouble for me? I am experienced enough with color films and color exposing, but very new to black and white.

I own these glasses from several different vendors and they are all of limited use. They all neutralize the colors by covering them up with a color tint of some sort but none produce a true B&W image. With a little experience, You can do the same or better with visualization. A digital camera in B&W mode, on the other hand, produces a much better B&W rendering and preview.

 

[DREW WILEY]

But a full set of actual colored contrast filters, also suitable for more realistic viewing, takes up a lot less space than a digital camera. And I have no use for digis in the field anyway. They're the last "accessory" I'd have in mind.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Here's the difference between using a smartphone viewfinder app that can display in black and white and using a Wratten 90.

First, the viewfinder app in B&W mode (with frame lines for a 90mm lens on a 6x7 camera):

Now the same view with the Wratten 90 viewing filter:

Which do you prefer? I prefer the first one.

Well second one isn't that bad at all, it's already Viradon toned!

But that's a strange colour, mine, a Zone VI (which a hardly use), is completely different, somewhat more bluish/purple and less coloured.

The Zone VI, and alike, is lighter, doesn't eat electricity and is easy to use, and if you forget it, your wife can still call you when dinner is ready...

 

[RalphLambrecht]

There was an old joke which I won't repeat, but it's about bulls and matadors, ending with ..." Sometimes ze Boool wins!"

Yes, I remember that joke!

 

[SodaAnt]

Well second one isn't that bad at all, it's already Viradon toned!

But that's a strange colour, mine, a Zone VI (which a hardly use), is completely different, somewhat more bluish/purple and less coloured.

The second photo was taken with a digital camera through a Tiffen #1 black and white viewing filter.

This one:

 

[Sirius Glass]

The sport itself is evolving. Rather than kill or injure the bull, some modern forms of bull "fighting" has the matador performing acrobatic maneuvers around the bull, such as doing a backflip over the charging bull. The bull is never touched, unless it's the bull doing the touching, and that's bad news only for the matador.

So now instead of gruesomely mauling the bull outright, wound it, then torment it, and then gruesomely maul the bull, then watch it exsanguinate. Such a pleasant way that civilized people have found to spend the day.

 

[ic-racer]

Bos taurus has S and L cone opsins that have been determined by electroretinogram flicker photometry to have peak sensitivities of 450 nm and 553 nm respectively. Nothing in the red range.


THE DISTRIBUTION AND NATURE OF COLOUR VISION AMONG THE MAMMALS
GERALD H. JACOBS; 1993

 

[Steve@f8]

Haven’t read every reply here so apologies if I’m repeating something already mentioned. I use an EM5 Mk 1 set in Jpeg B&W mode. The EVF and rear screen display in B&W. Something like the EM5 is as cheap as chips and also work as a light meter.

 

[SodaAnt]

So now instead of gruesomely mauling the bull outright, wound it, then torment it, and then gruesomely maul the bull, then watch it exsanguinate. Such a pleasant way that civilized people have found to spend the day.

I think you missed the point of my post. In the form of bull "fighting" I mentioned, the bull is not killed or injured in any way. Only the matadors are at risk of getting gored or stomped on by the bull.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I think you missed the point of my post. In the form of bull "fighting" I mentioned, the bull is not killed or injured in any way. Only the matadors are at risk of getting gored or stomped on by the bull.

Ok, but it is still harassment.

 

[250swb]

Isn't having a 'minds eye' a thing any more? When I was taught photography it was taken as read that I could imagine, and of course we imagined both in colour and B&W because there were no LCD screens for checking into reality with. Perhaps it was watching B&W TV that helped? In the UK colour TV came much later than the USA, so hiding behind the sofa watching scary Dr Who I had my toy Dalek that had colours on it, but on TV it was in B&W, cunningly I must have made the intellectual link between the two states of reality. So forgive me but I think it's laughable that aids to 'seeing' in B&W are needed, whether an app, or setting a camera to B&W, it's all about demanding proof rather than trusting to the knowledge it won't come out any other way, because you loaded B&W film didn't you?

 

[Ian David]

So forgive me but I think it's laughable that aids to 'seeing' in B&W are needed, whether an app, or setting a camera to B&W, it's all about demanding proof rather than trusting to the knowledge it won't come out any other way, because you loaded B&W film didn't you?

The OP said he is very new to B&W film. Presumably he wants to speed up the process of working out how different scenes will render in black and white. Shooting lots of B&W film will eventually teach this. But looking through filters can potentially help along the way. So can looking at a digital mono version of the scene if you happen to have a device with you. Your mockery of the very idea, on the other hand, is probably less useful...

 

[250swb]

The OP said he is very new to B&W film. Presumably he wants to speed up the process of working out how different scenes will render in black and white. Shooting lots of B&W film will eventually teach this. But looking through filters can potentially help along the way. So can looking at a digital mono version of the scene if you happen to have a device with you. Your mockery of the very idea, on the other hand, is probably less useful...

Everybody is new to B&W photography at some point, and it's not mockery it's common sense. What is the OP going to learn by looking through a preview filter if he is a newbie and doesn't know what to do with that knowledge? It tells him next to nothing, not which film to use, not how to make the best exposure of the scene, or how to interpret the scene. Far better than looking through pointless filters or at apps the OP could instead be encouraged to cut to the chase and develop an opinion, to be able to point at another photograph and ask 'I like that, how do I make an image like that?' because that is the exact thing a preview filter won't answer, it just leaves newbies in a void.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Everybody is new to B&W photography at some point, and it's not mockery it's common sense. What is the OP going to learn by looking through a preview filter if he is a newbie and doesn't know what to do with that knowledge? It tells him next to nothing, not which film to use, not how to make the best exposure of the scene, or how to interpret the scene. Far better than looking through pointless filters or at apps the OP could instead be encouraged to cut to the chase and develop an opinion, to be able to point at another photograph and ask 'I like that, how do I make an image like that?' because that is the exact thing a preview filter won't answer, it just leaves newbies in a void.

Nobody said it's needed, some, like me, are just saying its another tool in your arsenal, one that, in certain circumstances, can be useful and practical. I have one, I use it at times in certain situations in which I'm not quite sure if my eyes—which don't see the same way a film does—aren't deceiving me. And I've been doing black and white photography for 20 years, I have learned to develop an opinion (actually, to develop ideas, I find opinions pointless) and seen countless other photographs.

The filters are 60 bucks. Not a fortune for a tool that may end up being useful. So, not knowing in advance whether or not it will help him, why not just let OP get one if he wishes?

 

[MTGseattle]

to the OP. There's a thread on here called "show us your landscape photos." Run through that thread. I think there is a scene or three that almost any of us can relate to regardless of present geographic location. As you look at the images members have graciously posted, think about why they are effective (or why you may not think so), and what they may have looked like in color. There are some nice color images scattered among the thread, but the majority are b&w.
It's easy to get bogged down in which film/developer will give you that "special look." Don't be too concerned with all of that yet. If there's a scene out there that you like and you feel like the colors are a bit muted, it might be really nice in b&w.

I'm actually having the opposite problem right now, in that I hardly ever shoot color, and evaluating which scenes would benefit from color film (result in a more effective image than b&w) is not yet intuitive for me.

 

[SodaAnt]

Keep in mind that B&W, by its very nature, is not representative of what we see with our eyes, so it’s perfectly okay to manipulate the final print to look anyway you want.

Anyone who has ever seen a straight print of Adams’ Moonrise, Hernandez New Mexico alongside the usual rendition will know what I’m talking about.

 

[faberryman]

Keep in mind that B&W, by its very nature, is not representative of what we see with our eyes, so it’s perfectly okay to manipulate the final print to look anyway you want.

Whew! That was a close one. Thanks.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

to the OP. There's a thread on here called "show us your landscape photos." Run through that thread. I think there is a scene or three that almost any of us can relate to regardless of present geographic location. As you look at the images members have graciously posted, think about why they are effective (or why you may not think so), and what they may have looked like in color. There are some nice color images scattered among the thread, but the majority are b&w.
It's easy to get bogged down in which film/developer will give you that "special look." Don't be too concerned with all of that yet. If there's a scene out there that you like and you feel like the colors are a bit muted, it might be really nice in b&w.

I'm actually having the opposite problem right now, in that I hardly ever shoot color, and evaluating which scenes would benefit from color film (result in a more effective image than b&w) is not yet intuitive for me.

Shoot color film and then convert to BW and compare. Or do that with digital. One advantage of converting is you can change the intensity of the lighting for each color, something you cannot really do with BW film other than sing filters to less effect.

 

[SodaAnt]

Shoot color film and then convert to BW and compare. Or do that with digital. One advantage of converting is you can change the intensity of the lighting for each color, something you cannot really do with BW film other than sing filters to less effect.

Yep. Want that black sky effect? Just pull down the slider on the blue channel to 0 and you get the equivalent of a deep red filter. Mask the sky so you don't affect anything else.

This kind of thing is one of the advantages of a hybrid workflow.

 

[250swb]

And I've been doing black and white photography for 20 years, I have learned to develop an opinion (actually, to develop ideas, I find opinions pointless) and seen countless other photographs.

If we are playing the schoolyard game of who can piss higher up the wall I've been doing B&W photography since 1973, and after that I then went on to Degree level and I've had one-to-one tutorials with many well known photographers as part of my education. After that a career in photographic gallery admin and commissioning, after that a career in theatre photography, and after that a career in Press photography, so I feel I am immune to the 20 year threat that you challenge me with.

Sorry, I should have said I've also been a teacher of photography, but I guess that's an understatement which doesn't stand out as a pin point so much as something that comes from doing it over a period of time, as in running workshops etc.

 

[Sirius Glass]

If we are playing the schoolyard game of who can piss higher up the wall I've been doing B&W photography since 1973, and after that I then went on to Degree level and I've had one-to-one tutorials with many well known photographers as part of my education. After that a career in photographic gallery admin and commissioning, after that a career in theatre photography, and after that a career in Press photography, so I feel I am immune to the 20 year threat that you challenge me with.

Sorry, I should have said I've also been a teacher of photography, but I guess that's an understatement which doesn't stand out as a pin point so much as something that comes from doing it over a period of time, as in running workshops etc.

Peeing yet higher on the wall, I started in 1958.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Viewing filters (I have kodak #90 gel) are a great way to not only see things in monotones, but can aid in determining which colour filter to use. The trick when using them is to look at the scene, place filter quickly in front of your eye, but only for a few seconds. Keep doing this. I used one quite a bit when I was first starting out in B/W photography. I could see in my mind everything in grey tones already, from all my years drawing... but it sure helped determine which filter to use, or if one was even necessary!

 

[Alex Benjamin]

If we are playing the schoolyard game of who can piss higher up the wall I've been doing B&W photography since 1973, and after that I then went on to Degree level and I've had one-to-one tutorials with many well known photographers as part of my education. After that a career in photographic gallery admin and commissioning, after that a career in theatre photography, and after that a career in Press photography, so I feel I am immune to the 20 year threat that you challenge me with.

Sorry, I should have said I've also been a teacher of photography, but I guess that's an understatement which doesn't stand out as a pin point so much as something that comes from doing it over a period of time, as in running workshops etc.

I was just quoting you. Don't see why you made this personal. My point was you have your experience, I have mine. It's not a competition, nor is it a challenge - I just ain't that macho. Just that your experience doesn't make your opinions absolute, nor does mine. We're both old. And as such we both know that there are old imbeciles as much as old wisemen, no matter what or how much they've done in life.