There's a lot of converstation going on between your ears, John, that didn't come out of my mouth. I shoot color. If I were disparaging anyone I would have to include myself as one who needed to be disparaged. But that's not what I'm doing. Occasionally I find an image that I think would look better in B&W and I'm generally pleased with the results and often prefer it to the color version.
My point was that Ansel Adam's B&W imagery made him an icon. He chose the same subject matter for his color work. Is there really anyone among us who look at those color images of his and think they are head and shoulders above anything you have seen elsewhere? Or that he would have become an icon if he had only his color work to show? There is a reason that the colorizing of black and white films bothers people. A lot of people. It is because there is a different aesthetic at work in black and white. Ansel himself refers to it as an interpretation of reality (whereas color photography is mostly just reality). Sometimes reality is impressive enough - one reason that cliches like sunrises/sunsets are so enjoyable to us. Few would claim that a sunset in black & white is going to have more impact than the color version. It has nothing to do with being inferior. Take any of those color images of Ansel Adams and convert it to B&W (applying Adam's Zone System for best dynamic range) and ask 100 people which image has more gravitas and I guarantee you that the majority of those who understand the meaning of the word will choose the B&W. That's all I'm saying, and you are free to disagree or to get any degree of frostburn they would like by extrapolating from my comments, rather than just taking them at face value. On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 2:06 PM, John Francis <jo...@panix.com> wrote: > > I disagree, too. > > But what really frosts me about the statement is the implicit > arrogance that assumes anyone who generally prefers colour to > B&W images is just plain wrong, and an inferior being incapable > of appreciating the true value of the work. > > If you like B&W images, fine. But it should be possible for > you to enjoy them without disparaging those who don't. > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 02:54:45PM -0400, Bruce Walker wrote: >> Two words: Afghan Girl. >> >> IOW, I disagree. :-) >> >> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Darren Addy <pixelsmi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Ansel's color images are nice enough but they illustrate, in a way >> > that few other things can, how color images can never have the >> > gravitas of a good B&W image. >> > >> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Zos Xavius <zosxav...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1932762,00.html >> >> >> >> worth a look! >> >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 11:41 AM, George Sinos <gsi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> A few years ago there was an exhibit of various photographers work at >> >>> the local museum. Several 8x10 color transparencies were on display >> >>> (Kodachrome, if I remember correctly.) They were on a large light >> >>> table, back lit, of course. >> >>> >> >>> I was surprised to see that were Adam's work. gs >> >>> George Sinos >> >>> -------------------- >> >>> www.GeorgesPhotos.net >> >>> www.GeorgeSinos.com >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 10:37 AM, <eactiv...@aol.com> wrote: >> >>>> I had the same thought. But since he preferred B&W, he probably would >> >>>> have >> >>>> found the first digital cameras disappointing for B&W. Although he did >> >>>> shoot some in color too. >> >>>> >> >>>> Marnie aka Doe I really got a lot ouf of the interview. >> >>>> >> >>>> In a message dated 4/15/2013 4:38:00 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >> >>>> distudio.p...@gmail.com writes: >> >>>> He could see the potential in digital image capture even at that early >> >>>> stage, one wonders what amazing work he could have produced with the >> >>>> new medium. >> >>>> >> >>>> -- >> >>>> Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) >> >>>> Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours >> >>>> Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> -- >> >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> >>>> PDML@pdml.net >> >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> >>>> follow the directions. >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> >>> PDML@pdml.net >> >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> >>> follow the directions. >> >> >> >> -- >> >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> >> PDML@pdml.net >> >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> >> follow the directions. >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > "Photography is a Bastard left by Science on the Doorstep of Art" - >> > Peter Galassi >> > >> > -- >> > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> > PDML@pdml.net >> > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> > follow the directions. >> >> >> >> -- >> -bmw >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- "Photography is a Bastard left by Science on the Doorstep of Art" - Peter Galassi -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
