Depends on what you mean by "harder". Harder to produce a really "Fine" photograph? IMO, NO. It is equally difficult ... and probably, obtaining the essence of that which makes it "fine" is equally difficult among ALL media.
I've worked with charcoals, pencils ... many more. To me, obtaining "a good one" is easiest in photography, but I really think that is solely because I am most familiar with photography.
To "bang out" an image -- somewhat resembling the subject (Picture Phone type) -- with little regard for quality ... by all means - use a Picture Phone.
Ed Sukach, FFP.
Is it harder to make a successful color landscape photograph?......Hmmmmmm. No. I think it depends on which you practice at more. I also think people feel color is more difficult than BW because they do not understand it. To me they are about the same in difficulty. In color you have to think about the color relationships in the scene. In BW you have to worry about the tonal relationships. I think there are the same number of factors to consider they just take a different mindset.
Plus, people like making what they do sound more complicated than other things, so they sound like they are working harder.
Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy. Pope Paul VI
So, I think the "greats" were true to their visions, once their visions no longer sucked. Ralph Barker 12/2004
There you have it in a nutshell folks.
Originally Posted by BradS
Color for the beer crowd..........
Black & white for the more genteel, the souls more sensitive to enjoying the finer things, the Cabernet Sauvignon of photographers.
Actually, the more the computers haave become superb at seperating out the mysteries of color better than any human ever could, the farther I move away and become dis-interested in it.
Black & White OTOH has become a bottomless pit of possibilities.
Hmmm... Where does that leave us bourbon drinkers? Pauses to relight pipe...
Seriously though, I agree that they're both equal in difficulty but require quite different approaches.
I doubt we could ever agree on what is a "great photograph" in the first place.
Originally Posted by roteague
Color carries with it the ability to create impact due to the ....well, color. Our senses can be bombarded with color. That seems easy. But it can be like herding cats to get the colors coordinated and balanced.
Black and white on the other hand is surreal to begin with and has the ablility to be grey and boring or perhaps contrasty and impactful. It must also rely on the skillful gradation of tones to create impact.
Bottom line for me as with others here. They are just different with different challenges.
Last edited by blansky; 01-31-2006 at 01:11 PM. Click to view previous post history.
I couldn't think of anything witty to say so I left this blank.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
It's easier to get an impressive photograph in color. That is, one that will impress the average person. It's not easy to impress someone with black and white because the average person has been brought up on a diet of visual color. Most people are disappointed that a picture doesn't have color.
For a great photograph? Making one at all, no matter what the media. That's what's hard.
The bourbon drinker appreciates both the subtlety and the smoothness of the beverage as well as its nature to slap you in the back of the head! While I appreciated more of the headslap in my younger days, I'm now trying to develop a taste for the subtlety and detail...
Originally Posted by BruceN
Unless you're colorblind, I think (jmho) that color is a little easier to see, but just as difficult to compose and create a good image. I find it easy to fall in to the trap of forgetting about things like texture, when your faced with very vibrant colors...
...ahh, looking forward to a trip to Tennessee this summer...but then, that's for another thread.
Colour is physically easier, but deeper to the power of 3 over B/W.
I think it necessary to differentiate between colour reversal and negative. Whilst both require good compositional skills, reversal work demands greater accuracy with exposure control since you are probably missing out on the opportunity to correct at the printing stage. With negative work, or reversal printing, one has to cope with colour fidelity; which I find a bit of a drag. The distraction of colour is obviously removed from monochrome printing, which allows free rein to our creativity; but then I'm biased.
I started the thread without stating what I felt, because I didn't want the thread to come across as an argument one way or another. I should point out that David Ward is an accomplished landscape photographer from the UK.
However, I believe as John does, color is physically easier, but more demanding. Why? We are bombarded with images all day long, almost exclusively color images, it takes a special or unique image to capture and hold our attention for any length of time. For example, is John's image of the Toronto subway; I've seen lots of images of subways before, but the way he uses color in it makes me stop and linger. B&W, by its very lack of color, captures our attention right away.