Reading mode: Light Dark

What do you think about shooting only B&W ?

Go to last post
I recommend you to try using color filters in B&W. They are super useful and young photographers without a background in B&W might not know this. I've learned a lot about color theory by thinking on what color filters might do to a B&W image.

The only thing I do not like about B&W is that many people tend to think that when they can't get a decent photo they can always turn it into B&W and have something. That's of course BS. They have to be shot with your mind set to B%W mode, if you know what I mean.

Experimenting, being honest and having fun is the most important.

Good luck!
 
KAAMBIC said:
Just a thought that crossed my mind tonight. I shoot mostly portraits and color has become a priority, in both lens/camera selection but also in-camera settings and even PP. Portraitry isn't the only genre where color matters of course, it's just my main avenue.

Now and then i will stumble on a thought, what if i only shot B&W? There's definitely good and bad points to be had, just curious what some here think. Do you shoot only color, or only B&W? What do you think you would be missing out on by refusing one or the other?

Im not sure i could commit to such a choice, as it is i shoot probly 70% color and 30% B&W. I like both for very different reasons but the question still stands and there is merit in either decision. How do you guys feel about it? I don't think i can shoot just B&W but i'll say the portraits i have that wowed me the most, they were usually B&W, for whatever that's worth.

B&W- For me, B&W offers a simplicity, just shading, no color to worry about, no need to worry about matching or clashing. I also think B&W gives a timeless feeling, nostalgic maybe, it feels less likely to be out of style in 25 years. Plus one less attribute to worry about in processing and settings.

Color- The obvious one is color gives us color which B&W can't. Amazing hues of a sunset, or a flower, or a rare color of somebody's eyes. One can also add more to a shot than just lines and shading, by using color, from making a subject blend with the BG of similar hues, or making it stand out with opposing colors.
Click to expand...
It would be very UN-WISE or juat plainly -- Dumb
 
quadrox said:
57even said:
quadrox said:
57even said:
I think the style, colour palate etc. should depend on the individual image.

Personally, I like to mix up the colour palate a bit when I get bored, but there are some shots where colour is not prominent, and black and white adds a more dramatic contrast. In fact, I frequently process images with several approaches and see which I like best after some time to reflect.

But I would never constrain myself artificially. What's the point in creative freedom if you don't explore it?
Click to expand...
Doing so can help you explore possibilities that you would normally not consider, simply because what you would normally do is not possible (or not "allowed").

I know it is easy to think that you don't need something like this to be creative, but I believe it is a generally accepted view that constraints encourage creativity. I would like to encourage you to try it sometimes, maybe not with B/W and color, but you can try to constrain yourself to only a specific focal length, only specific colors, only shallow DOF, or something else entirely. With a bit of luck you will experience a small revelation (it does require some patience though).
Click to expand...
I have been doing this for 43 years. I lived with the constraints of film for 20 of them, and have no plans to go back. Digital provides a whole world of creative possibilities, so it seems like a shame not to explore them whenever I can.
Click to expand...
That seems fair, with so many years of experience I am sure you have tried a bit of everything already.

Still, I primarily meant to explain why someone might consider doing something like this, so I hope you understand my point🙂
Click to expand...
I think if you are starting out, it's easy to get in a rut, or become overwhelmed by the gear. I certainly think that starting simple and getting to know your equipment and what it can do is important.

But I don't think it's a mantra as some people suggest. More, it's a way to unburden yourself and focus on essentials.

I still have a simple 1 zoom or 2 prime kit most of the time, but that's dictated by the subject matter I like to photograph. I just don't need that much.

I will grant you that it took a while to settle on that kit, but it was more about finding a style and subject that interested me, and acquiring the appropriate tools, in that order. I think where most people go wrong at the start is by thinking they have to shoot everything. No-one I know is good at everything.

Once I discovered my primary genre, I learned more by looking at other peoples work and trying to unravel how they did it than just random trial and error. In the end you will progress faster if you know what's possible and have something to aspire to.

Fortunately, there's always someone better than you, so inspiration is endless ;-)
 
JimH123 said:
Donald B said:
Donald B said:
JimH123 said:
Donald B said:
JimH123 said:
Donald B said:
JimH123 said:
yardcoyote said:
This has always been at the back of my mind. How did you do about doing it?
Click to expand...
I had also been dreaming of doing it. And after finding the web site monochromeimaging.com, and having a Sony A6300 that wasn't being used much since I already had newer cameras, decided to go for it.

This site charged $900 to make the conversion. This cost is less than the cost of many new lenses and I thought about it and thought about it. And finally did it in June of last year. Very glad that I did.

This site specializes in mirrorless Sony cameras. There is another site, maxmax.com that does many more cameras, but charges about twice as much.

If I were to do it again, I would opt to have bought a used Sony A7ii and gone to full frame. The main reason being that the A6300 uses lossy RAW compression and the A7ii has the option for non-compressed RAW. Considering the improvement in detail that comes from not doing demosaicing, starting with a better RAW would be better.

I am attaching an example image. I have found also that I really like using legacy manual focus lenses. This one was done using an old Minolta Rokkor 28mm f2.5 lens that is likely 40-50 years old.

264fd66af1f941848abcc6a493d084d4.jpg
Click to expand...
that looks great. have you got any comparison shots of the same scene ? with the 2 different sensors.

Don
Click to expand...
If you mean color,
Click to expand...
a processed colour to B&W ? what does the B&W sensor highlight the most ?
JimH123 said:
I have and it wasn't very interesting to look at. Only the B&W version keeps my attention. This one is also difficult to duplicate since the sun was just at the right location to backlight the palm fronds. I also did not have the UV-IR Cut filter installed, so there is significant IR light influencing the image too. I think I used a 630nm filter, but I didn't write it down. I'm remembering to do this now, but this was taken within a week of getting back the modified camera and I hadn't quite figured out what I wanted to keep track of.

I have been thinking about printing this one as it came out so good.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I found a color image of the palm tree and converted it to B&W. But, the picture wasn't taken during that golden hour that backlit the palm tree, and the B&W was a complete dud.

And often when I convert to B&W, the results look harsh compared to the smooth gray scale variations I get with the mono sensor.

Here it is. Viewing angle slightly different. Lighting is way different. Focal length not quite the same. It is a year later and the palm tree is greatly in need of a trimming. And I just don't like it. I used Lightroom to convert it to B&W and simulated a red filter. But I can't simulate the back lighting and I can't simulate the IR influence that was in the mono sensor image. Basically, the mono sensor image seems delicate and the converted color image seems harsh. There is nothing about this image that draws my eyes toward it.

87a22043736b4cc68e1ffa6b37dcf30c.jpg

With that said, here is another image taken in another day and this time without the back lit conditions. Again, the mono image is delicate again. This image has had no post processing. After converting the RAW to DNG, I used Lightroom to create a JPEG. Nothing else. And note the gray scale is smooth, and there is nothing harsh.

b1c45ab84e874f6a8d305f3f0849029e.jpg
Click to expand...
thanks for these images, the greys are beautiful and so smooth by comparison. im going to have a play with some camera settings tomorrow to try and mimic (as close to) your last image.

Don
Click to expand...
Just had a quick play with your images. and it wasnt to hard to match them up, i went the complex PP in camera raw first. and then just pushed the contrast and added sharpness in photoshop second. funny thing is the 2nd attempt in PS was quicker and gave a much smoother result :-) so should be able to get it close in camera :-)

Don
Click to expand...
I played some more with the color conversion to B&W and found that if I reduce the contrast setting (a lot) that the harshness can be reduced. Don't need to do this with the monochrome camera generated images. It looks better than it had been, but still isn't as pleasing to look at at the monochrome generated images.

68eb1fe540604f3c9e9d76917592d345.jpg
Click to expand...
they mono chrome sensor defiantly has a nice feel to it . out of camera shooting is much more fun than sitting on a computer PP thats for sure. i shoot live to large monitors for clients and try to get as close as posable to the end result. its what has made my studio the success its been.

Don

--
Sony A7r2 , A6300
past toys. k100d, k10d,k7,fz5,fz150,500uz,canon G9, Olympus xz1 em5mk1, em5mk2, em1mk2.
 
I shoot RAW. But processing B&W on occasion.



If you really want to change it up, shoot infrared (IR). At least half of the light is IR, so why limit yourself.
 
Donald B said:
the mono chrome sensor defiantly has a nice feel to it . out of camera shooting is much more fun than sitting on a computer PP thats for sure. i shoot live to large monitors for clients and try to get as close as posable to the end result. its what has made my studio the success its been.

Don
Click to expand...
Your comment made me think that the application that converts the RAW to DNG ought to have an option to have it monitor a directory and when it sees a new RAW image arrive, it should immediately convert it to mono DNG. And then it should also have the option to launch a user specified viewer/editor.

I use software that immediately places the last image onto a host computer. And this would be a useful step. And I decided to submit this suggestion to the writers of Monochrome2DNG. And by the way, this application is by the same company that gives us RawDigger and FastRawViewer.

And to reiterate - these mono images require very little tweaking. They can look good right from the camera after conversion to DNG, which is actually quite fast, perhaps 1 to 2 sec per image.

Things I might do with one of these mono images include:

- Move my black point and white point to the edges of the histogram if the histogram doesn't cover the entire range.

- Maybe provide some sharpening or noise removal - I like Topaz, but I do have to change the image from Grayscale to RGB for Topaz to use the image. Lightroom does this automatically. But sharpening and noise tend to be better than a RGB cameras.

- Maybe tweak the highlights and shadows

And that is about all that is needed
 
JimH123 said:
Donald B said:
the mono chrome sensor defiantly has a nice feel to it . out of camera shooting is much more fun than sitting on a computer PP thats for sure. i shoot live to large monitors for clients and try to get as close as posable to the end result. its what has made my studio the success its been.

Don
Click to expand...
Your comment made me think that the application that converts the RAW to DNG ought to have an option to have it monitor a directory and when it sees a new RAW image arrive, it should immediately convert it to mono DNG. And then it should also have the option to launch a user specified viewer/editor.

I use software that immediately places the last image onto a host computer. And this would be a useful step. And I decided to submit this suggestion to the writers of Monochrome2DNG. And by the way, this application is by the same company that gives us RawDigger and FastRawViewer.

And to reiterate - these mono images require very little tweaking. They can look good right from the camera after conversion to DNG, which is actually quite fast, perhaps 1 to 2 sec per image.

Things I might do with one of these mono images include:

- Move my black point and white point to the edges of the histogram if the histogram doesn't cover the entire range.

- Maybe provide some sharpening or noise removal - I like Topaz, but I do have to change the image from Grayscale to RGB for Topaz to use the image. Lightroom does this automatically. But sharpening and noise tend to be better than a RGB cameras.

- Maybe tweak the highlights and shadows

And that is about all that is needed
Click to expand...
Less than two hours after making the request to monochome2DNG, I got a reply and was told they are going to look into doing what I just described.
 
I like The Defiant Ones. The original one with Sydney Poitier and Tony Curtis. Touch of Evil with Orson Welles and Chuck Heston is another. So many. Yes, black and white can be stunning.
 
mcshan said:
I like The Defiant Ones. The original one with Sydney Poitier and Tony Curtis. Touch of Evil with Orson Welles and Chuck Heston is another. So many. Yes, black and white can be stunning.
Click to expand...
Watch some Bergman films. Nearly every frame of film is a finely-composed black and white image. Hitchcock, Kirosawa, Orson Welles, Fritz Lang... all masters of storytelling before the age of color.

And while I'm a huge fan of the classics, don't overlook modern b&w films: Stranger Than Paradise, Dead Man, Fog and Shadows, and even Night of the Living Dead. All filmed after color was commonplace.
 
JimH123 said:
JimH123 said:
Donald B said:
the mono chrome sensor defiantly has a nice feel to it . out of camera shooting is much more fun than sitting on a computer PP thats for sure. i shoot live to large monitors for clients and try to get as close as posable to the end result. its what has made my studio the success its been.

Don
Click to expand...
Your comment made me think that the application that converts the RAW to DNG ought to have an option to have it monitor a directory and when it sees a new RAW image arrive, it should immediately convert it to mono DNG. And then it should also have the option to launch a user specified viewer/editor.

I use software that immediately places the last image onto a host computer. And this would be a useful step. And I decided to submit this suggestion to the writers of Monochrome2DNG. And by the way, this application is by the same company that gives us RawDigger and FastRawViewer.

And to reiterate - these mono images require very little tweaking. They can look good right from the camera after conversion to DNG, which is actually quite fast, perhaps 1 to 2 sec per image.

Things I might do with one of these mono images include:

- Move my black point and white point to the edges of the histogram if the histogram doesn't cover the entire range.

- Maybe provide some sharpening or noise removal - I like Topaz, but I do have to change the image from Grayscale to RGB for Topaz to use the image. Lightroom does this automatically. But sharpening and noise tend to be better than a RGB cameras.

- Maybe tweak the highlights and shadows

And that is about all that is needed
Click to expand...
Less than two hours after making the request to monochome2DNG, I got a reply and was told they are going to look into doing what I just described.
Click to expand...
thats cool, look forward to seeing your results when available.

Don
 
Yes, I'm familiar with them all. We have traveled the same world of film. Color can be great but black and white films have meant the most to my generation. I have posted out here before that Setsuko Hara (Ozu films) is my favorite actress. They don't make them like that anymore or I'm getting too old.

I enjoyed your post!

--
"Soylent Green is people!"
 
Last edited:
Travis Nicky Bombastus said:
LeicaEye said:
Travis Nicky Bombastus said:
quadrox said:
57even said:
I think the style, colour palate etc. should depend on the individual image.

Personally, I like to mix up the colour palate a bit when I get bored, but there are some shots where colour is not prominent, and black and white adds a more dramatic contrast. In fact, I frequently process images with several approaches and see which I like best after some time to reflect.

But I would never constrain myself artificially. What's the point in creative freedom if you don't explore it?
Click to expand...
Doing so can help you explore possibilities that you would normally not consider, simply because what you would normally do is not possible (or not "allowed").

I know it is easy to think that you don't need something like this to be creative, but I believe it is a generally accepted view that constraints encourage creativity. I would like to encourage you to try it sometimes, maybe not with B/W and color, but you can try to constrain yourself to only a specific focal length, only specific colors, only shallow DOF, or something else entirely. With a bit of luck you will experience a small revelation (it does require some patience though).
Click to expand...
That makes perfect sense. To make a shot successful in B&W might require a particular time of day and a particular perspective (e.g., ground-level, distance). The constraint "forces" one to do the extra legwork.

I'm surprised that some needed it to be explained (what might this say about their creativity (or lack thereof)?).
Click to expand...
B&W is not the only available creativity.. It certainly does focus the mind, but other avenues also require focus and dedication.. Just look at the many excellent images posted.. How would a regular digital using the Mono setting react to color filters? L
Click to expand...
Nobody said B&W is the only available creativity, did they? Their point is that constraints can force one to develop muscles they didn't have before, thereby becoming a stronger B&W photographer, rather than following following a path of least resistance.
Click to expand...
I don't get the logic of this at all.

If black and white is creatively important, and for some images it can convey a completely different mood, then it is worth mastering. Where is the constraint? Pick a challenge and learn how to do it.

If one is only using black and white because it's easier to master, and believe me it is, then that's not a constraint, it's an avoidance strategy.
Member said:
In many other domains, this paradox--that constraints can improve creativity/innovation--has received ample support the literature. I don't know of any study that has specifically evaluated such an approach in photography, but see no reason why such findings wouldn't be generalizable.
Click to expand...
This 'paradox' in not about constraint as much as it's about breaking habitual behaviours. Unlearning bad habits is difficult until one is forced to do it, but one can also unlearn good habits by choosing the wrong constraints.

There is no point in developing muscle memory that's ultimately counter productive. It's more about identifying what skills you need and acquiring them.

When I started playing squash, my tennis game went to pieces.
 
JimH123 said:
yardcoyote said:
I wouldn't want to do it full time, but I often do it for a day or a week. I would really like to own a monochrome camera, not as an only camera, but to keep me honest on black and white days.
Click to expand...
Having had a camera modified to be B&W only, I find it so much fun that I shoot far more B&W than I ever did before.
Click to expand...
There is probably some advantages to doing that in terms of pure IQ... I know that there certainly is for the Leicas that are made for Monochrome. Nonetheless, I feel like I can get great results with my regular old camera, and it's even a smaller format one (an m43). I don't feel like having a dedicated B&W camera would inspire me to shoot more B&W or think any differently about it either. I shoot a lot of B&W anyway and I don't even bother with using a B&W JPEG setting, which would allow me to have a B&W preview in my EVF. I've trained myself to be able to pre-visualize shots in B&W and I like doing he conversion with software rather than in-camera because it gives me more options. More often than not, I know whether I'm going to process the image as B&W or color at the time that I'm shooting it and if it's B&W, I have a good idea of how it's going to translate to that...
 
MaxMax is quite simply a scam company. Been waiting for a year to resolve issues and get my camera back. Just stay away from this company.
 
[No message]
 
 
The operative word for me is “shooting” in B&W.

When I want to do B&W I set my Pen F to Mono so that I only see the monochrome in the EVF. To me this is an entirely different creative experience than trying to imagine a color view in black and white, and an experience that I thoroughly enjoy.

I do shoot raw + jpeg on the very rare occasion that I want to consider the color raw.
 
Last edited:
For myself, and myself only, I'm finding that if I want to tell a story, I tend to lean towards a B&W image, such as this photo:

I hope that the C-4 is a zoning reference, but in my town, you just never know.

38d3fcfe8c444358a58285524c1313e2.jpg

Also, if color would not anything appreciable to an image.

I call this a portal to another dimension:

8172effbf7dd47bfa7658119a57e64df.jpg

Steve Thomas
 
gary0319 said:
The operative word for me is “shooting” in B&W.

When I want to do B&W I set my Pen F to Mono so that I only see the monochrome in the EVF. To me this is an entirely different creative experience than trying to imagine a color view in black and white, and an experience that I thoroughly enjoy.
Click to expand...
Yes, we don't need to imagine in B&W; the camera helps us with this. This is one way in which digital B&W is better than film.
gary0319 said:
I do shoot raw + jpeg on the very rare occasion that I want to consider the color raw.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top