This week I returned to Saguaro National Park to rephotographed one of the cooler looking saguaro I had photographed last month. Here's a select from this recent shoot. I nearly always publish color images, but after looking at the color image on my home computer I thought the white flower and the cool lines of the saguaro ribs might have more punch if I converted it to Black and White in Photoshop.
But I am in a quandary here because I didn't originally shoot this image in Black and White and when I shot the image I was intent on a shooting a color image. So the question I ask myself is shouldn't this image remain in the original color?
I've often written and promoted the idea that in wildlife, landscape and news photography the photos should be kept as true to the original moment as possible. This means no excessive photoshop or editing to remove items other than dust from the photo. This concept is really just for images whose intention is to depict a real scene. Of course for creative sake an image can be manipulated to the extreme if the intention is to create an art work. I guess that's the threshold I crossed when converting this color image to Black and White. What do you think, did the Black and White alteration I made change the original intent of this photo? My answer is probably not by much, but it is a very different photo from the original.
That got me to thinking that most news photographers publishing black and white images are usually shooting in color with digital cameras then converting the image to Black and White for publication. This is the case with many landscape and wildlife photographers as well. The reason many still produce images in Black and White is not only a style choice, but the fact that a photo in Black and White will often depict a subject with more power and emotion than a color image. Is this kind of radical alteration to a color image true to the moment? It is if the intent when the photo was shot was to make a B&W image. The difference between what I did in altering my saguaro photo and what the B&W publishing photojournalist and wildlife photographer is doing, is their original intention is seeing the final photo as Black and White.
Interesting question. I think it all depends on what the point of the photograph is. It also goes to the idea that the same photograph can fill different purposes. One use might be a strict documentation of the saguaro flower, but an artistic presentation might (did) present itself.
I think we get to choose and since we (I'm assuming you, too) work almost exclusively in the digital world, all interpretations are possible. After all, our camera actually records in a format we can't see, so the data can be manipulated in any way we would like. I find it tremendously liberating.
In August I went to Cathedral Ledge in NH to be part of a memorial for my climbing partner Brian Delaney, who had tragically dies in July. As we were hiking to the top of the ledge I saw some boulders in the trees near the north end slabs. I catalogued the spot and returned after the ceremony to photograph them. I saw this image in black and white, but when I processed it later that evening I went back to a color version because it worked better and conveyed the sense of place and purpose I was looking for.
I think we are in exciting times for photography!
Cheers!
Posted by: Lizz Bartlett | December 23, 2014 at 05:10 PM