# Some advice and a photo



## SoulfulRecover (Jan 9, 2014)

Ive heard from a few of the teachers at my school that a black and white image has to have true white and true black within the photo other wise it is considered "muddy". Is this a true stead fast rule or one of those things that people just nit pick. I dont shoot black and white all that often but did a little mini session last night that got me thinking about that rule. 




Untitled by Shutter_Inc., on Flickr


----------



## Designer (Jan 9, 2014)

While getting blacks and whites is laudable for many photographs, I think the main point they are trying to make is the photo should have a good range of tone.


----------



## ronlane (Jan 9, 2014)

what editing software to you use? I use LR4 and with it you can hold down the Alt key and use the slider for white or black to see if there are any spots on your photo that are showing black or white. (No detail in them.) Some of the videos that I have watched suggest to do this and pull the slider to where there are specks.


----------



## amolitor (Jan 9, 2014)

The black blacks and white whites is straight out of Ansel Adams. It's pure dogma and hasn't got anything to do with anything but one man's taste, ultimately.

It's part of a pretty specific look, one which is quite popular, mainly because Ansel Adams is popular. Amusingly, it's rather fashionable to dislike Adams, but frequently his detractors nonetheless buy into his aesthetic lock, stock, and barrel.


----------



## SoulfulRecover (Jan 9, 2014)

thank you both for the replies! I use LR4 as well and I had no idea about that feature and Ill be sure to use it in the future. The broad range of tonalities makes perfect sense and I probably just took what was said way too literal. I will eventually be enrolled in a black and white specific class and Im sure we will go over a lot of this but I am always eager to learn a head of time


----------



## Designer (Jan 9, 2014)

I wonder what the teachers would say about a high-key or low-key photograph?  Probably give you low marks on them.


----------



## SoulfulRecover (Jan 9, 2014)

Designer said:


> I wonder what the teachers would say about a high-key or low-key photograph?  Probably give you low marks on them.



I think it depends on the class and the assignment. Ive done both when it was appropriate and havent had any issues as long as you meet their specific requirements. Even for the drawing class I had, I did my final with a series of fashion photos and got a 99 on it.


----------



## D-B-J (Jan 9, 2014)

In my opinion, it's about the photo.  Some photos yearn for strong contrast with deep blacks and bright whites, while others look good with less tonal range.  The first image below would suck without deep blacks and bright whites, and the second would suck WITH deep blacks and bright whites.  It really just depends on what style best benefits the photo--some may have deep blacks and no bright whites, some may have bright whites and no deep blacks, etc.  Typically when editing I can figure out what looks best (in my opinion), and then I settle with that.  And it also depends on your subject--with a woman I'm not sure I'd use strong contrast, but with a man, I may.  




Crashing Slowly by f_one_eight, on Flickr








Warped Reality by f_one_eight, on Flickr





Best,
Jake


----------



## gsgary (Jan 9, 2014)

And you could always try shooting some B+W film (Agfa APX100)


----------



## timor (Jan 9, 2014)

amolitor said:


> The black blacks and white whites is straight out of Ansel Adams. It's pure dogma and hasn't got anything to do with anything but one man's taste, ultimately.


^^^^ :thumbup:
AA sometimes is too judgemental. But then everyone can have own philisophy. Important is, if people like the picture. 
I like this portrait, is quite engaging, the only thing is maybe the shadow from the nose and under the chin.


----------



## SoulfulRecover (Jan 9, 2014)

gsgary said:


> And you could always try shooting some B+W film (Agfa APX100)



funny, I just sent off my 69 e-type to get some work done (5 speed trans, weber side draft carbs, new radiator)




timor said:


> amolitor said:
> 
> 
> > The black blacks and white whites is straight out of Ansel Adams. It's pure dogma and hasn't got anything to do with anything but one man's taste, ultimately.
> ...



I didnt even notice the shadow under the nose! thank you for the critique!


----------



## apaflo (Jan 9, 2014)

SoulfulRecover said:


> Ive heard from a few of the teachers at my school that a black and white image has to have true white and true black within the photo other wise it is considered "muddy". Is this a true stead fast rule or one of those things that people just nit pick. I dont shoot black and white all that often but did a little mini session last night that got me thinking about that rule.



The issue of shadows from the nose and on the neck is well understood.  You have what is called "broad lighting" because the subject has her face angled to make the side from which the light comes broadside to the lens, and the opposite side becomes smaller.  The style used is "Rembrandt Lighting", which typically would be a light at 45 degrees above the subject and 45 to the side, with the effect that the nose casts a shadow onto the check.

  All pretty standard stuff!  In this case the contrast is fairly high (to be dramatic?), but is handled very well. The subject, and particularly her hair, is differentiated from the background very nicely.  It's less differentiated in the lower 1/3rd of the image, which causes attention to remain on the subjects face and prevents her clothing from being a distraction.

I do think the glare on her face is very slightly too bright.  There are pixels with values from 246 to 255, which will be virtually washed out on almost any display or print.  If they were slightly less it would retain texture.  Other than edges after sharpening, there should be nothing higher than a value of 246 that would have detail.

A very nicely done image!

 As to needing full black and full white, that had nothing to do with Ansel Adams.  He merely developed and taught a very mechanical system to decide what should be white or black (or any other tone).  He didn't claim all images needed both, only that the style of photography that he most enjoyed did.

In fact it is just another one of those Rules Of Thumb used to teach beginners.  It's something that a beginner can follow religiously in order to produce nice photographs.  As soon as the beginner  understands why it produces nice photographs, they are free to (and at least sometimes should) break the rule. For an experienced photographer it's just another parameter of every image, much the same as how much DOF, how tightly framed, or how much motion blur is allowed, or not.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 9, 2014)

What's needed in a B&W photo depends on the subject matter, and the photographer's intent. Many beginning shooters do have a tendency toward muddy images, so instructors probably remind students about black point and white point and so on pretty frequently, as a way to frequently remind their pupils that many times, a dull,muddy image is not all that exciting.


----------



## amolitor (Jan 9, 2014)

apaflo said:


> As to needing full black and full white, that had nothing to do with Ansel Adams.  He merely developed and taught a very mechanical system to decide what should be white or black (or any other tone).  He didn't claim all images needed both, only that the style of photography that he most enjoyed did.



Ah yes. Hi Floyd. The powerful need not only to be right, but for other people to be wrong. The pompous tut-tutting. I remember it all.

Merely nothing. Adams dictated taste for a generation or two of photographers, and that taste included a full range of tonal values. Of course he wasn't the first person to print blacks and whites. Of course he wasn't the only person to think that was a nice look. But _as dogma_ it comes from Adams and his teachings. It is, basically, the influence of Adams that results in the widespread and wrong view that every black and white photograph must have the full range.

And I'm out, because I know this guy, and he's just going to keep on coming back with longer and longer posts with more and more attitude, complaining about being attacked and so on.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 9, 2014)

SoulfulRecover said:


> Ive heard from a few of the teachers at my school that a black and white image has to have true white and true black within the photo other wise it is considered "muddy". Is this a true stead fast rule or one of those things that people just nit pick. I dont shoot black and white all that often but did a little mini session last night that got me thinking about that rule.
> 
> 
> Untitled by Shutter_Inc., on Flickr



The only "steadfast" rule of photography is that like any other artform, there are no rules.  There are a lot of good ideas that will generally make your images more appealing to a wider audience, but in the final analysis all that really matters is if you like the image.  Just my 2 cents worth of course, YMMV


----------



## jenko (Jan 10, 2014)

It's a very well done, imo. It has depth of character. She looks intelligent and intense. I do wish she filled up a bit more of the frame. There is just a tad too much space above her head. Easily fixed with a crop.


----------



## SoulfulRecover (Jan 10, 2014)

jenko said:


> It's a very well done, imo. It has depth of character. She looks intelligent and intense. I do wish she filled up a bit more of the frame. There is just a tad too much space above her head. Easily fixed with a crop.



I was thinking about cropping in with a 6x7 aspect ratio. I think that would look nice and get rid of some of the dead space like you said. I just need to fire up the ol editing computer again


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jan 10, 2014)

I learned that too in a grad level course in B&W darkroom work; the instructor taught us to have a 'black' black and a 'white' white somewhere in the photo (could be a very small area but should be there). Once when I slid a piece of paper in the developer and it instantly went coal black she said, save that, it's your black black. lol I'd forgotten to turn off the light on the enlarger before I got out my paper. Anyway I use it as a starting point to adjust contrast and then go from there. 

This seems a little light gray (very light) and black rather than white. At least I've found to not adjust for the the 'white' white in reflections or highlights (such as in her eyes), if I use a highlight as my 'white' the whole thing seems to be too dark and I found it works better for me anyway to find a white white somewhere else in the image. 

I've always liked B&W photography, I learned in general from reading/studying photographers incl. Ansel Adams (who was one of my first favorite photographers although not doing landscapes I later got interested in other photographers' work). Some of the old B&W movie still photos are pretty cool, there are quite a lot on Turner Classic Movies website. Usually if I'm going to shoot B&W I think about the subject or scene and if I think it will work well in black and white, if it has some nice dark and light to it. 

Lovely portrait by the way. And an E type?!! I don't know much about cars but I know that one, what a beauty of a car.


----------



## SoulfulRecover (Jan 11, 2014)

its a 1969 series 2 e-type 4.2l. My dad bought it in 71 as his first car for 3 grand and in the mid to late 90s we had a complete restoration. every nut and bolt. we took it to show after that and won 2nd in nation in our class the first year (lost by 1/1000 of a point for too much tire shine on the spare) and 1st in nation in our class the second year. after that she sat in storage and fell into disrepair from lack of use. my dad left it to me as it was the only thing him and I really ever did together and the guy who rebuilt the motor (it wasnt a true factory restore, we stroked the motor out to ~5.0 with other odds and ends but the physical appearance is completely original. its the only one of its type to be the off white color from the factory due to a error from the factory) is finally back in town and will be doing the motor work. Then there are a few dents that we will have the body guy take care of.


----------



## gsgary (Jan 11, 2014)

My dad bought a brand new 4.2 in the late 60's earley 70's then he had a V12

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2


----------



## hirejn (Jan 11, 2014)

Print judges would tell you that they need to see detail in the highlights and shadows. That's classical portraiture. Therefore, highlights can't be blown out and shadows can't be lost. There may be some leeway depending on circumstances or overall merits of the image, but I've heard judges say that.


----------



## limr (Jan 11, 2014)

SoulfulRecover said:


> its a 1969 series 2 e-type 4.2l. My dad bought it in 71 as his first car for 3 grand and in the mid to late 90s we had a complete restoration. every nut and bolt. we took it to show after that and won 2nd in nation in our class the first year (lost by 1/1000 of a point for too much tire shine on the spare) and 1st in nation in our class the second year. after that she sat in storage and fell into disrepair from lack of use. my dad left it to me as it was the only thing him and I really ever did together and the guy who rebuilt the motor (it wasnt a true factory restore, we stroked the motor out to ~5.0 with other odds and ends but the physical appearance is completely original. its the only one of its type to be the off white color from the factory due to a error from the factory) is finally back in town and will be doing the motor work. Then there are a few dents that we will have the body guy take care of.



That is a painfully beautiful car.


----------



## gsgary (Jan 11, 2014)

limr said:


> SoulfulRecover said:
> 
> 
> > its a 1969 series 2 e-type 4.2l. My dad bought it in 71 as his first car for 3 grand and in the mid to late 90s we had a complete restoration. every nut and bolt. we took it to show after that and won 2nd in nation in our class the first year (lost by 1/1000 of a point for too much tire shine on the spare) and 1st in nation in our class the second year. after that she sat in storage and fell into disrepair from lack of use. my dad left it to me as it was the only thing him and I really ever did together and the guy who rebuilt the motor (it wasnt a true factory restore, we stroked the motor out to ~5.0 with other odds and ends but the physical appearance is completely original. its the only one of its type to be the off white color from the factory due to a error from the factory) is finally back in town and will be doing the motor work. Then there are a few dents that we will have the body guy take care of.
> ...



What do you expect it was built in Britain

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2


----------



## limr (Jan 11, 2014)

gsgary said:


> What do you expect it was built in Britain
> 
> Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2



So it's pretty but often on the towtruck hook for electronical problems


----------



## SoulfulRecover (Jan 11, 2014)

oil leaks and electrical gremlins haha. has yet to leak oil since the rebuild however the wiper blades always acted up and the electric radiator fans never worked


----------

