Why do so many contemporary photographers insist on converting digital street photos to black and white? Do they think it looks better that way? Do they imagine themselves as a modern day Winogrand? Does it really look better and I'm completely out of touch?
I guess my feeling comes from my own definition of street photography. I feel street photography in it's purist form is an accurate, natural reflection of reality.
In my opinion, there is nothing accurate or natural about removing color from a photograph when we humans see everything in color. Why create such a false reality when we don't have to?
In my opinion, there is nothing accurate or natural about removing color from a photograph when we humans see everything in color. Why create such a false reality when we don't have to?Many of the classic street photos that we have come to know and love over the years have been made on black and white film. This is a direct result of economics, artistic norms, and technical issues of the time they were made. For the most part, up until the days of Joel Meyerowitz, the famous color street photographer of the 1970s, black and white film was faster, cheaper, and considered more artistic than color film. So in light of those factors, most photographers chose black and white film.
Sure there is a gritty, raw, quality to a Garry Winogrand or Cartier-Bresson street photo but I more often than not find myself thinking; Damn, I wish that was in color!
