|
|
What is it about black and white photography that conjures up so many emotions and loyalty amongst photographers, such that some will only ever shoot seriously with B&W and regard color as merely for snapshots? I thought I knew the attraction to B&W, or at least from a distant cursory perspective, but not one from much experience beyond just dabbling here and there. Never thinking whether or not the moment would be appropriate for B&W, but merely as a matter of course because that was what I had loaded in the camera at the time. B&W photography done well is beautiful to behold, going beyond the technical to the sublime that often relegates color images of the same subject to the category of “documentary”, i.e., merely showing us a depiction of what is there without transcending the image to an art form. Unfortunately, B&W photography done well is not easy to do or achieve. It takes years of patience and trial and error to develop the skills required to become a master printer. Not only is there a time cost and commitment, but so too is there for space to set-up the darkroom and the cost to equip that room. Add running costs in chemicals and paper and all of it amounts to a very pretty penny devoted to this craft, one that fewer and fewer photographers plunge into. For the enthusiast the darkroom represents a place of solace to hone the skills and reflect on the artistry of the photographic medium. A place that requires considerable human touch in order for the magic to occur, a very definite hands on approach to creating art, similar in ways to molding clay on the spinning wheel to create a bowl or vase. The computer darkroom is quite sterile in comparison as the tactile pleasure of working the print is replaced by moving a mouse over the screen instead before sending the image to the inkjet or dye-sub printer. Although there is nothing to stop a photographer from working with color film in the darkroom, B&W processing and printing represents the lion’s share of personal darkroom work. The process is simpler and again, B&W seems more artistic than working with color images. So, what are some of the qualities about B&W that make it so compelling for many photographers? Color – there isn’t any, obviously, and this simplifies the image and helps the viewer isolate the subject to a greater degree without a jumbled and distracting mess of color in the background. I recall a conversation with a local wedding photographer who stated that he hated to shoot with color indoors because of how ugly the photos can look compared to B&W. It was an interesting point because I thought, why wouldn’t people want color images for every shot. There any many people, when wanting photographs to be taken, never even think about B&W as an important part of the package. I see this attitude crop up amongst Asian people more than Caucasians and a recent enquiry about my photographic services reinforced that. I asked if B&W had been thought of and the person making the enquiry asked that I would not shoot a “lot” of B&W, would I, i.e., a few shots would be okay if “I” wanted to, but the majority of images should be color. The photographer making the statement about hating color was making the point that when shooting color film in low light settings, flash has to be used more often than not and this creates a shot of brightly lit subjects in front of either a black background, or intrusive background color that takes away from the subjects. Then there is the colorcast issue that B&W photographers do not have to contend with. Flash with color film creates a disparity between daylight-balanced flash-lit subjects with the background ambient light that can be several hundred or thousand degrees Kelvin off for a warmer look. Conversely, even if having to use flash with B&W, the background is not so offensive and using high-speed B&W films, flash can be dispensed with for a naturally lit look. Using a fast lens with a fast B&W film (ISO 1600 to 3200) and one can take a photograph that is bright and brilliant looking compared to the dowdy looking color shot that maxes out at ISO 800 and requires either a very fast lens and/or rock steady hands for slow shutter speeds. Grain – is anathema with color photos creating an ugly looking image that kills the moment rather than recreating it with good memories. However, grain can work with B&W photographs, enhancing instead of destroying the image. Many appreciate what grain can do if used appropriately and some photographers deliberately create a photograph with grain in mind. Grain can be created by underexposing the negative and then using the development process to compensate, or more easily, by using a high-speed film. The higher the sensitivity of a film, the larger the film grain must be in order to absorb enough light to create the image. Resolution – B&W film are still the highest resolution media available in photography with Kodak TMAX 100 the best of the lot among widely available films. There may be some specialty ISO 25 speed films that will outperform TMAX 100, but the days of ISO 25 films being used regularly have long disappeared and sadly one film that I had a penchant for in the past Agfa APX 25 has recently been discontinued. Carl Zeiss recently published an article in their newsletter about film resolution and the results of their tests? Agfaortho 25 came out on top with the highest resolution with 250 lp/mm resolved and Agfa APX 25 came in at 200 lp/mm. The best color film was Kodak Ektar 25 (Royal Gold 25 at one time) also at 200 lp/mm, but this film is no longer available. The best currently available color film was Fuji Velvia, which was a fair ways back at around 160 lp/mm with Kodak TMAX 100 edging it out with 180 lp/mm. The next best color films came in at 150 lp/mm. Before going further, I should note that these lp/mm figures are astronomical and although Carl Zeiss indicate that they use everyday photographic lenses from their lineup using everyday cameras and regular exposure situations, such as outdoor sunlight, there are some who question how Zeiss and only Zeiss can produce these figures. One of these enquirers is noted Leica expert Erwin Puts, who attempted to reconcile Zeiss’ tests with those of his own, which indicate far lower resolution figures of around 40 lp/mm using the finest readily available 35mm lenses. However, Mr. Puts also indicates that Kodak TMAX 100 is the highest resolution film amongst those easily obtainable by photographers. Archival qualities – B&W films are also the longest lasting films with an archival life span that measures in the hundred-year plus range compared to decades for color film. Less risk of fading and damage than the E-6 slides packed away in your cabinet. The color film champ for archival quality is Kodachrome; however, this long life quality is thanks to Kodachrome actually being a B&W film instead of a true color film. The color is added in during the processing stage, which is complex and apparently toxic for its byproduct. I always did think the Kodachrome colors were a bit off, with skin tones always having a bit of a muddy tone to them, but then noted National Geographic photographer Steve McCurry (of Afghan refugee girl photo fame) prefers Kodachrome for his work due to its color palette and archival benefits and certainly his images do not suffer. Artistry – Color has been around for so long and is so dominant amongst the consumer public that anything different can stand out. B&W film use to be the only medium in photography, but those days of Leave it to Beaver dominance are long gone. So, when we see a good B&W photo, we often see it as something more than just a photograph and perhaps even as art. Simplification – B&W simplifies the scene and clutter that can surround your subject. I’ve already discussed this earlier, but the origin of that idea is from a discussion in a Luminous Landscape Video Journal by John Brownlow and Michael Reichmann about street photography. They of course, discussed equipment and the choice of film appropriate for street or documentary photography, but Mr. Brownlow made a very salient comment that I had never thought of or ever heard espoused as a reason why so much of street and documentary photography is done with B&W films, simplicity. No gaudy colors to distract the viewer’s attention away from the subject and less noticeable clutter. Latitude – as a negative film, B&W films generally have generous latitude and will help to mask exposure errors that can be made in quick photographic situations. Some B&W films though have latitude that is a bit misleading, especially with the high-speed types. Many users of Kodak TMAX 3200 and Ilford Delta 3200 regard these films as “true” ISO 1600 films and religiously down rate 3200 films by one-stop or even a bit more. After finishing the roll of film, they drop it off at the lab or develop the film themselves as if the roll had been exposed at ISO 3200. This makes for a denser negative that promotes greater shadow detail. Since I’m not much of a B&W photographer and my experience with good B&W development and printing is limited, I usually do the plus ½ stop compensation that I normally do with color negative films.
These slower CN films, such as Ilford XP2 can also benefit from being down rated. A friend of mine uses XP2 regularly, but not at its nominal ISO 400 speed, preferring ISO 250 or even ISO 200 instead. So, there are a few reasons why B&W is popular and making itself known once again. B&W photography seems to come and go every decade, where it is forgotten for a while and then resurfaces as the “new” thing to do – jump on the bandwagon and learn how to shoot B&W, as many photo mags seem to shout out on their covers regularly. While some see B&W as a perfect match for rangefinders (Tri-X in a Leica M camera), you can enjoy its qualities with any camera able to load a roll of film. Although I’ve tried my hand at using my cheapo compact Konica rangefinder for street shooting, I prefer using my auto-focus Nikon F100 instead. People may question why the need for shooting B&W film anymore with the ease that digital imaging has for converting a color image to B&W. Shoot everything in color first and then dabble in Photoshop and see what works better for you, but for some, this is not a part of the traditional craft itself and they want to think about the exposure a la the Zone system and work that enlarger to expose the paper and so on and so on. And sometimes it’s just fun to load a roll of film and take photos for no particular reason and then let someone else sweat the development and printing instead of doing everything yourself in front of the computer. B&W can be about simplifying the photographic process, but it also harkens back to a time when life did seem simpler (never really the case though, just romantic recollections of selected memories). Flipping through the albums or photos of my parents’ generation when they were my age reveals an era that exudes cool and chic (early 1960s before the counter culture revolution). When the men were dapper in their suits and the women were proper in their Jackie Kennedy-like dresses. And all of it was captured on what else…black and white film. |
|
Correspondence & About this website Copyright © 1998-2008 Edwin Leong |
|
  |
|
Edwin's
Vignettes - Black
and White Photography Attraction 
I
also don’t shoot much in the way of true B&W films with Agfa
Scala and Ilford Delta 3200 probably being the last real B&W
films I’ve shot. Nowadays, the cheapskate in me would use Kodak
Portra B&W 400CN. Inexpensive at about $5 a roll for 36 exposures
and processing is the same cheap rates for color negative film thanks
to it being a chromogenic type. This allows the film to be developed
in regular C-41 chemicals and printed on color paper, although depending
on the paper type you may receive a colorcast that mimics cool blue
or a sepia tone to the image. However, you can receive neutral prints
by requesting real B&W paper be used, but then that negates
the cost advantage of using a CN film.