Grey scale, not B&W...

[sometimesmaybe]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, f8low said:

Connecting a bit to what @fenykepesz and @sometimesmaybe  said: Maybe stating the obvious again but with bnw film there's not really a way to get a not-post-processed print in the darkroom.

this topic keeps getting more interesting!

ive just started to shoot film and i have noticed im far less inclined to touch up the images.

dont get me wrong, i still do. but it takes me 75% less time to edit a film image. i suspect the main reason for me is because the monochrom sensor just records too much detail (i dont mean just resolution). i feel the urge to 'fix' things in post with digital images, but i just dont get the same itch with film (i know its digitally scanned). ive started to add grain to all my images to see if this can cure my affliction 😅

8 hours ago, fenykepesz said:

as you say, i guess i should make peace too, like you, with my own circle of inner devils, and just accept that there are many types and flavours of photography - in and outside the field of documentary photography (whatever that terms covers).  having said that, photography is for me an everyday struggle to justify every single picture i take, and weigh it against meaning and content, importance, relevance, against the tooth of time.  how much unworthiness i created over the years, it's meshuggeneh.

i think the decision making process is much easier for me (i.e. i sold out long ago) as most of my models want something for their portfolio which 'looks good'. occasionally get i to shoot something that appeals to me as a portrait photographer - alienation in urban spaces

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[fenykepesz]

vor 5 Stunden schrieb f8low:

Interesting topic. I think my overall impression of what 'bnw images' look like is indeed determined by film photographs of the past century, not digital ones of the last twenty years. I am stating the obvious but bnw film has less latitude than modern sensors. Film from many decades ago even more so. 

I do not have a digital camera but my impression is that there (still) is a particular tonality to high contrast scenes on film that stems from the lower latitude. This can result in a 'punchier' look. I'll attach an example picture (admittedly on Tri-X and exposed a bit more for the shadows). I wonder how scenes like this would look on digital which brings me back to @MaticB original point.

Connecting a bit to what @fenykepesz and @sometimesmaybe  said: Maybe stating the obvious again but with bnw film there's not really a way to get a not-post-processed print in the darkroom. At least you have to choose a paper and that comes with a given contrast (range). In fact, post-processing is often considered an art. Personally, I carry that spirit to the digital negative scanning process and often apply a gradation curve. I'll attach a slightly brighter version which would be my preference here.
My impression is that these days film photography is a bit of a 'safe space' for not-so-super-realistic photographs. People realise it's film and they'll give you a bit of slack, they know it's going to look a bit 'different' and I can choose the direction of that 'different'.


PS bonus question: When dwelling on a film's tonality I often wish that the other signifiers of film (mostly grain, but also film borders, specks of dust) could be removed so that we could look at tonality without confounding factors.
PPS: Not saying you couldn't get 'film tonality' in your digital pictures in post - you surely can..

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

i like the darker version - it's more somber, it fits the melancholic 'mood' in the picture, for me...

i agree with " 'safe space' for not-so-super-realistic photographs" - very true.  and with " 'punchier' look" in film photographs, rather b&w and less so gray, which is the topic here.  i frequently feel with my digital pictures that there is too much space for grayness, smoothness and gradations which may be visually pleasing like nutella or peanut butter, but it may distract and deviate from the intrinsic message a picture could carry, which is a cognitive element, and not a visual one as that's another faculty, located lower in the hierarchy of a brain processing pipeline.  for me it's entirely about the abstract message, the stuff i want to say, i try to embed in a picture or a painting.

i had tons of films to scan, mostly b&w negatives though some are in color or are even slides.  i actually scanned them all which took me only 5 full years of my life !  now i am in the midst of converting them all into positives so i can at some point chose from that pool the best ones - from where i will then finally go to the last 2nd or 3d level selection  round in order to come out with the truly best results - for my eyes at least.

ufffff, off to work now...  ciao !

[f8low]

@sometimesmaybe I have the same experience with editing bnw film photos digitally (though I come more from the street photography side). Very few steps if any, usually just a gradation curve. No masking, no fiddling, no worries.

With color film photos thinks are still a bit tricky for me. The inversion process has many degrees of freedom and if my understanding is correct, that has always held for the darkroom color printing process as well. So I'd often apply global (not local) color corrections to what comes out of Negative Lab Pro. I guess @fenykepesz has plenty of fun inverting, too