Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/04/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Beautifully balanced composition and tones - it sings! In between Fred Astair and a crossbreed of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uopjMuYY3F8 and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JS4JMY0JWM Rain sometimes helps a photog, in that respect I should feel a happy camper ;-) Great great photo Nathan Amiti?s Philippe Le 15 avr. 11 ? 09:02, Nathan Wajsman a ?crit : > > Hi Ted, > > I wonder if you are thinking about this one, from Seville in 2003 or > 2004? > > http://www.frozenlight.eu/fotosevilla/night/content/L2004_14_12_large.html > > That was one of my most-commented-upon pictures ever. > > Cheers, > Nathan > > Nathan Wajsman > Alicante, Spain > http://www.frozenlight.eu > http://www.greatpix.eu > http://www.nathanfoto.com > PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws > Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog > > YNWA > > > > > > > > On Apr 15, 2011, at 8:43 AM, <tedgrant at shaw.ca> <tedgrant at shaw.ca> > wrote: > >> Lawrence Zeitlin offered >> Subject: Re: [Leica] Barcelona in color >> >> >>> Nathan, >>> Not trolling at all. I was just curious. Many of the pictures that >>> you post >>> in and around Alicante are about people too, yet you usually shoot >>> in color.<<<, >> >> >> Hi Larry, >> That may be true, however some of Nathan's more spectacular >> photographs over the years have been people in B&W! There is one I >> recall from several years ago at night with a few people on the >> street. I believe Madrid? Barcelona? Or some other location prior >> to his moving to Alicante? It was most eye catching simply because >> it was in B&W! >> >>> I reject Dr. Ted's pat aphorism that when you photograph people in >>> color, >>> you photograph their clothes but when you shoot B&W you photograph >>> their >>> soul. <<< >> >> Be my guest and reject all you like my friend. :-) However let me >> give an example.:-) True incident in the UK several years ago. >> >> Two photographers with a portrait studio decided they'd only shoot >> B&W portraits. They completely renovated the studio front windows, >> re-opening as a B&W portraits only! In the front exhibit space they >> placed beautiful B&W portrait prints and advertised they only did >> their portraits in B&W. >> >> Clients who insisted on colour were offered B&W or the doorway! One >> would think them a bit looney given this was the beginning of a new >> operation and one would surely want every dollar possible. >> >> However? Given it being a very fine portrait studio originally with >> a great number of clients prior to the change over. Within the >> first three months they tripled the gross income shooting only B&W! >> Whatever it is about B&W drew a wonderful new clientele. >> >> Actually the difference is the "content" creates which is greater >> in many cases. >> >> Disasters generally look worse in B&W simply because the content is >> usually violent and death! Of course not in every case. What is the >> B&W photograph that comes to mind from Vietnam? I have two without >> question. Eddie Adams photo of the police officer shooting the VC >> through the head and the young girl running away from the Napalm >> with her clothes and body burnt. Vivid B&W both! And colour >> wouldn't have added anything! >> >>>> Imagine Matthew Brady's problem trying to photograph the US Civil >>>> war in color using the wet collodion process.<< >> >> I doubt they'd be any better! As most are "classic content" images >> to start with, so I doubt colour would've improved them at all. >> Regardless of the technical situation. Along those lines if we >> compare the dramatic B&W movies of the past, quite often these days >> we see with "colour added." Quite frankly they look quite horrid as >> the colour adds absolutely nothing, but almost destroys the >> craftsmanship of the lighting people and camera angles . >> >> Colour can in many cases, be a complete distraction from the >> content. As I understand photography, it's the content that is the >> most important part of the photograph. That is unless one is >> dabbling strictly in colour for colour sake. >> >> So Larry mon ami it's basically "to each his own." I shoot colour >> when the assignment is to be shot in colour and B&W when the >> assignment is for B&W re-production. I would offer, of the 100,000 >> images in the National Gallery of Canada collection they are all >> B&W documentary images. The 280,000 images in the National Archives >> of Canada collection? It's probably 75% B&W, 25% colour. Again >> simply because of the assignment and whether magazine assignments, >> travel or tourism or whether the client asked specifically to shoot >> in whatever medium. >> >> I suppose if you owned one of my published medical books, "This is >> Our Work. The Legacy of Sir William Osler" "Doctor's Work" or >> "Women in Medicine. A celebration of their Work." You might have a >> better understanding what I mean: "When you photograph people in >> colour, you photograph their clothes. But when you photograph >> people in B&W, you photograph their souls!" >> >> And as far as digital? Quite often I use my Digilux 2 set to shoot >> B&W and I get some very interesting B&W images. Actually the really >> cool thing is, looking through the viewfinder at a B&W world and >> "Click!" A B&W image right out of the camera! :-) >> >> cheers, >> Dr. ted :-) >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >