I love tones. I sometimes convert pictures to B&W just for fun, as a way of relaxing, like other people play "Angry Birds."
Contemplating Henry Wessel recently, I was mulling over the change in B&W printing styles in my lifetime.
It's impossible for us to see, now, how radical Ansel Adams was when he reached his mature style. It was like he'd slid the "Structure" slider to 11. His contemporaries could barely believe it.
Now, he looks normal or on the mild side of normal.
Tones of gray, I think, are analogous to tones experienced in sound reproduction equipment. It's well known that in deconstructing audiophile tastes in sound quality, some people prefer the middle tones and some people gravitate to the extremes. "Soot and chalk," is how Adams denigrated excessive contrast. "Boom and sizzle" is the direct audiophile equivalent, a phrase that denigrates loudspeakers that push all the musical tones to the extremes of bass and treble.
Not every B&W photograph has to have "black blacks and white whites." (The English term "monochrome" might be useful here, because it doesn't have the idea of including the extremes built into the name. Although it might err in the opposite direction if you conflate the word (which means "one color") with "monotone" (which means "a sound unchanging in pitch and without intonation").
Here's a picture of Butters that doesn't contain any white tones:
(You've probably been a B&W printer if you looked at this and immediately thought, "except for the highlights in the eyes.")
I'm a midtones guy myself. I don't just like B&W, I like grays. Specific tones of gray and how they relate to other tones near them are what make B&W prints "sing."
(It's why the print is the true medium for B&W photographs. The tonal placement in prints can be precise, although they can look different under incorrect lighting.)
I don't think I got this conversion quite right. I'll look at it a few times today and then try again.
Mike
P.S. Is it just me, or do Fuji X-trans files convert to B&W particularly well? Has anyone else noticed that? (The two photos above weren't taken with a Fuji, though, they were taken with the E-M1.)
Original contents copyright 2014 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
Eric Fredine: "I agree that Adams looks tame today—not just in tones but in the restraint of his interpretations of the score. Digital tools allow an unprecedented level of control. When you combine this with the short attention of the Internet, people end up making photographs that provide instant gratification by having a graphic subject pop out of the frame. But the loss of subtlety robs the photograph of its ability to support sustained and repeated viewing."
