drab black and white film concern.

[shootinglulu]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I want to give film a go..i LOVE the look of photo's made by 'Riccis'..'Rolo'..

'Noah' and many others i've seen, including this chap lately..Flickr: Torsten Wolf's Photostream.

Sometimes however i look through flickr and even the leica master shots film photo's and i an underwhelmed by the drabness and greyness of most of the pictures,,,

Is it a matter of film choice, developer choice?

Thankyou:o

[andym911]

in a word yes...also how the image is prepared for the web in digital post processing.

 

there are so many variables...and that is the fun of it

 

best regards

 

andy

[budrichard]

You need to view analog prints of someone of a class as HCB in person to get an idea of what a B&W print can actually look like and the range of shades from pure white to intense black to calibrate yourself. Online digital displays of B&W cannot do justice to the medium.-Dick

[Xmas]

Hi Lu

 

In many ways Dick is correct, HCB used specialist dark room monkeys, he may have rejected prints scribbelled all over them and watched the AgBr in the soup with the monkey as the image appeared.

 

The fine art printers could work magic even on a flat or underexposed negative.

 

With a good negative they would select a paper grade (see next for multi grade) just too tight (too contrasty) for the negative and stop the highlights burning or the shadows having no detail with their hands, or bits of wire with blobs at end, between the lens and the easel, of the enlarger.

 

With multigrade paper they would do two exposures, dodgeing and burning differentially, if the negative warranted and the pj wanted.

 

Photo shop and plug ins is easier, but the bubble jet or whatever printer cannot match the enlargers lens for the grain signature.

 

hard work...

 

Noel

[erl]

Yes, there are many variable in photography, particularly B&W film photography. I have spent, let's say 50 years, indulging in it and still learning. However, to focus on your observation, I would suggest that probably 'lighting' is the key to your particular desire. Look at some of the early B&W movies and note how they (mostly) sparkle. All due to expert lighting. With the advent of colour, which is more forgiving, it allowed 'sloppy' lighting to avoid so much criticism. This definitely applies to still photography as well. Go back and view those B&W images you like and note the lighting. I bet it is above average, along with other factors of course.

 

Without (good) light, the rest of your efforts will be in vain and I don't care how good you are. So develop a keen eye for light and you are off to a good start, to a long and enjoyable journey.

 

To progress from there, I recommend taking control of as much as possible of the process as you can manage. Eliminate external sources of mediocrity, such as developing and scanning. I'll probably get flamed for that last bit, but so what.

[andybarton]

On the computer, you also have the scanner and post-processing skills of the photographer to take into consideration, as well as the quality and calibration of the screen

[stunsworth]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'd say it's mainly down to how people have prepared the images for web display. It's very easy when adjusting an image to see shadow detail decrease as you adjust the black point or contrast and stop because you think you're losing information. The same thing happens with the highlights. The result is a grey photograph with no real blacks and no real whites.

 

I fell into this trap myself when I first started developing and scanning b&w film just over a decade ago.

[pico]

Some scenes are not particularly susceptible to stunning B&W rendition. Remember, B&W is color without hue. Film does not respond to colors as the human eye does; this was more significant many years ago before the more sophisticated emulsions were invented. And, of course, light is critical as Erl mentioned. Filtration at the lens might interest you.

 

I lived in rural France (Chambley) in the Sixties when I took up photography under the tutelage of a master photographer. In a few areas you could be certain that there were no stunning colors at all. Workers wore drab blue uniforms, the rest of us wore unbespokens of low-fi colors, the buildings were relatively uniform stone. Every scene was far more likely to accomodate B&W, and have that certain look that yielded rather well with graded papers.

[Sailronin]

IMO one of the greatest B&W printers was Paul Strand. Aperture published a book on him in their photographer series and even in an expensive book his work is stunning.

If you have a chance to see original prints by Edward or Brett Weston, Ansel Adams, Paul Strand you will be totally in love with B&W. HCB did not print his work and it's not in the same class as the large format photographers above.

 

Andy and the others are correct in the number of variables in taking a B&W negative to digital output leaves so many places for image degradation that you really need to look to prints to appreciate the depth and emotion possible with B&W.

 

Enjoy film!

Dave

[Xmas]

People give me enlargers for free.

 

Lemmings jump over cliffs.

 

wheeeeeee...

 

Noel

[holmes]

RE: Drab B&W? Have you ever looked at photos from the US civil war. Drab, I don't think so. Most were shot using prepared glass backs, prepared by the photographer. They are a true part of history of the US.

Spotted, yes, but drab no. Around the turn of the century we began to see a small number of photographers. Shooting B&W. The Flat Iron building in NYC, a winter snow storm. And it continued until a little camera came out of Germany called Leica. No big plates, no 11"14 or 16"20". That little Leica revolutionized photography. Some of the great masters stuck to the large format and all it involved. Ansel loved his large format. During the '30s Dorothy Dix and 16 other photographers were commissioned by the government to record the "dust bowl". Drab, They depict a way of life, hardly drab. But that was the stark reality of life for thousands. The scenes and settings may be drab, but that's that the way things were. Nothing to do with film.

[farnz]

Lucy,

 

I agree with sentiments expressed above but I think the choice of film stock has a lot to do with it. I suggest getting hold of some Tri-X for a start and see how it comes out - I doubt that you'll find it drab - and work from there. If you find Tri-X a little contrasty then try a 'tamer' film stock like Neopan 400 or TMax.

 

Also, what you've called drabness may be a look that appeals to the photographer who's tried very hard to preserve a wide range mid-tone greys for example. I think I've seen the type of drabness you've mentioned from a very well respected forum member and, while it doesn't appeal to me at all, it clearly does to him and to some others. To each their own.

 

Pete.

[shootinglulu]

I shouldn't have used the word drab, sorry, and i am refering only to SOME film photography, obviously not all.

I am very grateful for the advice.

[StS]

In my experience, the use of filters make a major difference as well. Currently, I'm using yellow, yellow-green and yellow-orange filters. An image processing programme can be very helpful to try these effects out - Lightroom 3, for example, has black-and-white filter presets.

 

Stefan

[redbaron]

Holmes, I think you mean Dorothea Lange, not Dix.

[stunsworth]

RE: Drab B&W? Have you ever looked at photos from the US civil war. Drab, I don't think so.

 

I assumed the OP was referring to flat images lacking in contrast. Not sure how the American Civil War fits into the discussion.

[StS]

Please find some examples about the effect of different filters here:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/other/143003-sushi-demonstrate-effect-b-w-filters.html#post1462895

 

As a rule of thumb for portraits, I have the feeling yellow-green works best for the ladies and yellow best for men. Not every time, but fairly often.

 

Stefan

[budrichard]

It ain't lighting, it ain't filters and it ain't monkeys!

It is the tonal range that a correctly exposed B&W negative can record transferred correctly to an analog medium with a gloss surface for the highest possible tonal range which gives the final print a luster, sparkle and range of tones that can only be experienced by direct viewing.

I was taught by a Master who ran the Department, as photographers, we made our own prints. Before I hired on, I thought I was a very good printer but I wasn't until shown what a good print could be like. I wasn't a 'monkey' and we never referred to the darkroom people as 'Monkeys' in my previous position where we didn't do our developing or make prints.

I spent a lot of time in darkrooms and never developed a love for the darkroom but it was a necessity. Today, its easy to digitally change a scan and then print or view on a monitor, but its like two different mediums. If you have no analog experience, then you simply can't comment on what an analog B&W print can show.

I once saw an exhibit of Gordan Parks work with analog prints. Spectacular photos of African Americans. I don't think a digital print could convey the tonal ranges that an analog print did. At least i haven't viewed any.-Dick

[shootinglulu]

I'm a photography exhibition junkie!..There is nothing like seeing good photography printed beautifully, in a well lit space, it's like heaven to me, and especially viewing analogue prints, i think.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[chrism]

I'm a photography exhibition junkie!..There is nothing like seeing good photography printed beautifully, in a well lit space, it's like heaven to me, and especially viewing analogue prints, i think.

 

Then you have nothing to worry about. With something to aspire to you will have a reason to stick with it even when it doesn't turn out perfect every time (it won't!) And if a thing ain't hard, it ain't any fun, right? At the end of it all I think the only person you have to satisfy is yourself, and as long as you do that, and enjoy the process and feel some pride in what you make, it will be worthwhile.

 

Chris