[All the above images were shot on Kodak's Tmax 100 B&W print film, high contrast copy film 5069 or Polapan instant B&W slide film]

Another long term benefit was that the process was a real process. I learned a lot about photography quickly and it had such a strong impact on my photographic style that it still affects it today. I had to take every step carefully and purposefully to be rewarded with a good range of tones in my negatives. If I screwed up the exposure or the development time, my image quality suffered. It was very exciting when everything turned out just right.

I also had to handle the wet negatives carefully so they would not get scratched or full of dust. I had a special dust proof hanging bag in my apartment where I could be sure the rolls of film would be left undisturbed until they were ready to be cut down and sleeved.

When I photograph in B&W I see my images in B&W. When I frame something in the camera I am only looking at the range of tones, specific design elements and the composition. If the scene is flat as in an overcast day, I know I want to underexpose and over develop my entire roll of film to boost the contrast a bit in all the frames. Many of these types of technical details are taken into consideration before the image is even made.

I also decide which film to use depending on the amount of grain I want in my photographs to help with exposure times and tell the story better. Most of the time I use Tmax 100 or Tri-X 125 but sometimes I love using Tmax 3200.

However, even though I can make adjustments before I make my image in the camera, I know that the vision of that scene I have in my mind can be enhanced in post production as well. Ansel Adams made most of his iconic images this way. He knew how he wanted the final image to look in print and would make even more adjustments in the darkroom by dodging and burning specific areas of the image. But he could not do this effectively unless he created the perfect negative first.

Since the inception of digital photography one can now literally shoot one frame in color and the next in B&W, adjust color temperature or contrast range from frame to frame and never worry about scratches or dust! It still blows my mind when I think about it and even though I love digital photography and the challenge of making a magnificent image is still the same, my heart longs for the substance of film.

However, when I am considering image processing for my current clients whom I shoot all digital for (it’s more cost effective for business), I always think through my conversions to B&W.

—I don’t convert all the color proofs from a session and show both color and B&W for images. Each image is specifically selected to be converted to B&W for a reason. You are the photographer and you should make the choice.

—I do convert an image to B&W if the colors are distracting to the eye or are insignificant to the final message.

—I don’t convert an image to B&W if the colors in the photograph are symbolic, powerful or are an important part of the story.

—I do convert an image to B&W if the design elements and the subject stand out better making the image stronger in B&W.

—I do convert an image to B&W if the session I did speaks to nostalgia or is photo-journalistic in nature.

—I use careful consideration in using the new “B&W film” type presets that are so popular now. They are fun to play with but I carefully select them for only certain clients and projects.

The following images were converted to B&W for similar reasons. I feel they are both much stronger as B&W images. The original colors tend to distract the eye, disrupt the mood and distract from the composition. In both images, I felt the color was not important and did not contribute to the story I wanted to convey.

The important elements (the heart being carved in the dirt and beam of light on the ground and the pool of water with boy and his shadow) are emphasized in the B&W versions of each. The elements that pop out to the viewer are white. White jumps out to the viewer while black falls away so the contrast makes the image more readable. This is how our eyes and mind read photographs.

There is so much more to consider when converting your images to B&W. I will be discussing this with other important style, story telling and visioning thoughts in my LOUPE Photography Workshop this May. Join me and other photographers interested in realizing their vision to find out more.

Back in October I made an image that I didn’t take. It was a photograph I had in my mind. A vision of a feeling and an emotional moment brought to fruition. I picked the location, I picked the lighting and time of day, I picked the aperture and the shutter speed, I picked the models (although I did have to settle for one style element that was not as I had wanted it. I had just emerged from the Pacific Ocean after a wonderful swim and felt it was the opportunity I was looking for to make this image so I had to forgo drying my hair), I picked the wardrobe, I handed my husband the camera and said start shooting. Then I did the processing and selected the final image.

But, I did not take the image. I did not click the shutter.

It was an image made the way many commercial images are made. Many advertising images are produced by the photographer (by telling assistants, stylists and producers what they want in the shot, where to put the lights etc) in collaboration with an Art Director, the shutter is released by an assistant and the final image selected by the photographer. I spent most of my formative years as a commercial photographer finally deciding that I didn’t want to just technically manifest the images of other people’s visions. It took me many more years to finally decide that I needed to be making my own images in my own way and not just be a mentor to other photographers.

So, the discussion has been: who made this image? Did my husband make the image or did I make the image. My husband took the photograph and I made the photograph I guess you could say. Does merely clicking the shutter make you the photographer?

I feel that photographs, just as paintings and illustrations, are made not taken. Images come from a vision, an idea, a conscious choice. If a photograph is merely taken, this is simply taking a snapshot. If you make a CONSCIOUS choice for the type of film, the camera, the lens, the shutter speed, the aperture, the ISO, the compositional elements, the subject, the background, the props, the light, you are making an image.

So the question I ponder from there is what if you aren’t making those conscious choices? What if you are using auto on your camera? What if you aren’t using the lens you wish you owned? What if you are not making a choice for compositional elements of line, rhythm, balance, depth of field then are you actually making an image or are you taking a snapshot? I learned early on in my studies that a snapshot is a photograph with no regard for exposure, composition and subject.

What do you think?

Leave me a comment here on my blog then go to Facebook and *Like* my Loupe Photography Workshop page and I will send you the LR/ACR preset I personally developed for all my North Shore photographs (including this one). My entire set of presets will be one of the goodies given to all attendees of the Loupe Photography Workshop!

A fun opportunity to play came about at a recent portrait session. I always love to take risks and try new things but sometimes it’s just with the light and clients never even know. I colored outside the box this time and asked the clients if they would like to try something that I had in my mind. They got comfortable and I did the rest.

Not sure how I feel about the idea but I’m glad I did it. Always have to try what’s in your head to see what might happen. It’s all part of the process. Curious what you think and what ideas you have rattling around in your head!

I came across this article while researching the existence and possibility of printing on one of my favorite bromide photographic printing papers, Luminos Pastel Antique Ivory. I have a few prints left that I made in my darkroom and I cherish them as the last analog work I did. I also used this paper to hand print 150+ little prints from my travels that I signed and then gave as wedding favors on our wedding day. This paper has inspired my photographic vision to this day. It’s wonderful feeling matte finish and antique ivory base impressed me the first time I saw an image develop in the tray and felt the photograph in my hands when it was dry.

The image above is a straight scan of my neg on the left and my darkroom interpretation on the right. In my mind, it’s the way my image was meant to be seen and the way I saw the image the day I photographed the scene. I am so grateful for the insight that traditional photographic (and sensitometry-I’ll talk about that in another post) practices have given my vision to this day.

One thing that most photographers today miss out on is that ‘magic’ of watching an image come to life from a blank piece of paper right in front of them and then the feeling of the paper itself. It is something not to be forgotten. I think too many of today’s digital photographers only get as far as that instant gratification on screen and then never get to the printing part which is so critical to the craft. Seeing a photographic print was one of the main reasons I was pulled into photography in the first place. I still have all my darkroom equipment and think about setting it up again one day. I also have a 24×36″ contact printer I built that I would love to start using for alternative process photographic prints.

For now, I am such an advocate of printing my work. I am still able to choose beautiful papers for printing and this is an important part of my creative process. One of my favorite giclee or digital pigment ink papers is Hahnamuhle Bamboo Fine Art paper. I also continue to shoot film. Not as much as I would like. The new films are incredible and the technology has advanced so much that they produce some of the most amazing color depth and feeling that digital cannot reproduce. When I see a highly sharpened image (obviously made digitally) compared to a film image it reminds me of the difference between watching a soap opera vs watching a movie like Lawrence of Arabia. I think this is why I tend to “break down” my digitally captured photographs today which gives my work such a unique look.

Many of my favorite artists today, including Joni Sternbach, Vivian Maier and Jonathan Canlas used or are still using chemically processed photographic techniques. There is no digital substitute for the process you engage in while creating images in the traditional way.