Roger Hicks
Mentor
For 'art' (personal work with meaning) I lean towards B+W. For illustration (to hold the words apart in a magazine) I lean towards digital (for magazines, that's what many editors want anyway).
Any further thoughts on what you want vs. what someone else wants?
Cheers,
R.
Any further thoughts on what you want vs. what someone else wants?
Cheers,
R.
tripod
Well-known
Anything is art if it's intended to be, though not all art is "good" , however one chooses to define that.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
True. There's also a spectrum from 'art' (eternal verities) to 'illustration' (pack shots, 'how-to' step-by-steps, etc.), and the best illustrations can be art.
But I think that you (and others) can guess my meaning. Just read the magazines (not only my work...)
Cheers,
R.
bmattock
Mentor
My choice as well. B&W when I feel it important enough and when it is 'for me', and digital other times. Nearly never shoot color film now, except for testing film cameras I've purchased or repaired.
With the exception of medium format. Of course, I shoot only film in that arena. Digital is well out of my price range there.
Kim Coxon
Moderator
Roger,
I might add a different category, that of "recorder" as well as art or illustrator. In reality most of my photography falls ito that area. Either of railways so I can model them later or of how a place looked before developement etc.
However, I do think people tend to think of monochrome as being more suitable for "art". I have many hundreds of photos of railways etc but so far my wife has only allowed one on the wall at home. It is a close up of the valve gear of a steam loco and it works because of the tones and textures as it is a monochrome print. Had it been in colour, it might have been a useful picture for a modeller or historian but it wouldn't have been a nice "picture".
Kim
I might add a different category, that of "recorder" as well as art or illustrator. In reality most of my photography falls ito that area. Either of railways so I can model them later or of how a place looked before developement etc.
However, I do think people tend to think of monochrome as being more suitable for "art". I have many hundreds of photos of railways etc but so far my wife has only allowed one on the wall at home. It is a close up of the valve gear of a steam loco and it works because of the tones and textures as it is a monochrome print. Had it been in colour, it might have been a useful picture for a modeller or historian but it wouldn't have been a nice "picture".
Kim
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Dear Richard,
Yes. This intrigues me. When you consider how many brilliant car photographers there are/were (I assisted some in the 70s), the real puzzle is why so many frankly awful car shots make it into print.
I fully take your point about 'notebooks' but many years ago I heavily modified this concept as there is always the miserable prospect of being faced with a 'real' picture when equipped with a purely 'notebook' camera. Since then. a Leica has been my 'notebook' (sure, any decent RF will do, but I've been using Leicas for about 38 years) and latterly the M8 is my 'notebook' of choice.
Cheers,
R.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Dear Kim,
I'd include 'recording' in 'illustration', with an additional proviso: the best record shots (for reconstruction, aide-memoire, etc.) are often, though far from always, the least artistic.
Cheers,
R.
Ben Z
Mentor
Like most people who became amateur shutterbugs back in the mid-20th century I started with b&w and then abandoned it for a long time, and shot everything in color. Only in the last year or two I've gotten back into b&w, as a way to still use my film cameras but without shipping film off for developing.
bmattock
Mentor
Perhaps the audience is less critical of the photograph and more interested in that which it depicts in those cases.
There is presumably well-done pornography. Many viewers are not terribly interested in skin tones and clever lighting.
Charlie Lemay
Well-known
Some of my art is done as digital collage from scanned color and black & white film. Some people see it as illustrative because it has a narrative element, but these images exist appart from words unless I put words in them. I started putting words in the images after 9/11. I thought the least I could do was to own my own feelings and to state them publicaly. You can see this more of this work at my web site. I also Black & White art that is more about seeing what is really there and not preconceptions. I hope to put this work on the web site this summer.
Attachments
Kim Coxon
Moderator
That's what surprised me about the photo I mentioned. 
However, I do think that it is easier to "cross the line" in monochrome than it is in colour.
Kim
However, I do think that it is easier to "cross the line" in monochrome than it is in colour.
Kim
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Dear Bill,
No doubt so.
But the question remains, why hire an incompentent pornographer when you can get a good one for much the same money?
Cheers,
R.
bmattock
Mentor
Because it doesn't make a difference to the producer, so they take the first name in the phone book? Just a guess.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Dear Charlie,
Thanks for some really interesting pictures -- and I'm not using 'interesting' as a euphemism for 'my god, I can't stand this rubbish, how can I say something nice.' I really liked both of them: they are the kind of stuff (insofar as one can tell from a tiny web pic) that I like to have on my walls.
Cheers,
R.
Charlie Lemay
Well-known
Thanks Roger.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Dear Richard,
Thirty years ago, I lived in Cambridge. At that time I learned the value of wearing a camera as 'protective coloration' in order to look like a tourist.
In most of the world, after all, tourists are treated as harmless idiots. Then you talk to a local and show you aren't a mindless tourist, and make friends.
For me, an openly carried camera is more use than a discreet bag; unless, of course, tourists/visitors/outsiders are unwelcome for some reason.
Cheers,
R.
BillP
Rangefinder General
I think it depends what I am doing and where I am. I always carry a camera of some sort, even if I am just popping out to post a letter. For years my "weapon of choice" was an M6/M7, but these days I usually carry my IID. If I think about it the common factor (apart from the manufacturer) is my preference for collapsible lenses - an Elmar-M and a 3.5cm Elmar. This makes the camera truly pocketable/"pouchable"; particularly in the case of the IID. When working (in a suit) my camera is in my briefcase (in a Hadley insert - I bought a briefcase appropriately sized on purpose) When wandering about at the weekend it's either in a belt pouch, a pocket or a shoulder-bag, depending on the weather and what I am doing.
Regards,
Bill
bmattock
Mentor
I always carry a camera as well. If not going out for the purpose of taking photographs, I have a Kodak C530 with me. Fixed non-zoom lens, 5mp, optical viewfinder, lens quality acceptable. The Olympus XA2 of digicams. Fits right in the shirt pocket.
Then I'm ready whenever the opportunity presents itself. That goes to the oft-repeated comment that the best camera in the world is the one you have with you.
Then I'm ready whenever the opportunity presents itself. That goes to the oft-repeated comment that the best camera in the world is the one you have with you.
furcafe
Mentor
So true. Especially when you can pass for the stereotypically photo-obsessed (East) Asian tourist. The fact that I often fit the stereotype is just gravy.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
And/or as cash cows, which creates its own problems. What works in Cambridge does not work in a lot of places.
Philipp