- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 14,126
- Format
- 8x10 Format
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.
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.
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.
There was an old joke which I won't repeat, but it's about bulls and matadors, ending with ..." Sometimes ze Boool wins!"
The second photo was taken with a digital camera through a Tiffen #1 black and white viewing filter.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 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.
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.
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...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...
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?