behhl Posted October 18, 2009 Share #41 Posted October 18, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Ok, I stand corrected... it was just a guess... what was the reason>? [ From what I read - I'm no professed expert - one of the reasons was that colour films of that time were slow compared to B&W as well, developing colour film was time consuming and expensive compared B&W and guess the colours were not very natural as the technology for the dyes were still in its infancy. Probably another aspect (i'm guessing?) were that most of the print media featured B&W and that was the commercial market? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 18, 2009 Posted October 18, 2009 Hi behhl, Take a look here Why most Leica-ers like to shoot B&W?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
kenneth Posted October 18, 2009 Share #42 Posted October 18, 2009 OK, but what of the OP's question, do you have an opinion? You agree that Leica optics are only good for B&W?Can you take colour photographs with Leica? I never realised you could - joke Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenneth Posted October 18, 2009 Share #43 Posted October 18, 2009 Joking apart. The original poster raises an interesting point. I have been interested in photography for 46 years, the first, say 6 years were solely taken up making B&W images. For the next 38 years I concentrated on mountain photography 35mm using mainly Kodachrome II 25 asa and Agfa CT15 50 asa through various Nikon F SLRs. When I decided to go back to a rangefider system there was no thought of using anything other than B&W. It almost didn't seem right to put colour reversal through a Leica M6, which I appreciate is silly and please don't take this comment literally . But my change of system fortunately coincided with the demise of Kodachrome so it never entered my head to use anything other. But a really thought provoking post, thank you for posting it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted October 18, 2009 Share #44 Posted October 18, 2009 No, HCB chose B&W because he didn't want to use the IR filters on his M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephan_Chandler Posted October 31, 2009 Share #45 Posted October 31, 2009 I got my M6 several years ago and have shot nothing but monochrome since. Why? I just never got around to color yet... so enthralling were the images I got, I just continued on as before. But I DO feel confident that when I start to shoot color (sometime soon, I guess), the results I'll get will be just as remarkable as the monochrome. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomasw_ Posted October 31, 2009 Share #46 Posted October 31, 2009 I kinda stopped reading at the "Leica-ERS" part. What is this thread about? This post by Ned gets my vote for the funniest post this year. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted November 4, 2009 Share #47 Posted November 4, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) People like the control B&W gives them and the fact they can much more easily print the negs at home compared to color. Scanning now makes digital manipulation possible and home inkjet printing viable without a darkroom. B&W is photography brought down to the very basics. There is no color to distract from the image. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted November 4, 2009 Share #48 Posted November 4, 2009 There is no color to distract from the image. I've never understood this point of view. I see in color (literally, not creatively) and not in black & white...so B&W always seems more distracting to me than color could be. Color seems natural (since our eyes see in color), while B&W is a phenomenon originating in photography and cinematography, not in reality. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.