[lit-ideas] Re: Photography black & white vs. color
- From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 09:58:17 -0400 (EDT)
In a message dated 8/29/2011 9:27:59 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
jejunejesuit.geary2@xxxxxxxxx writes:
I believe that color photography is fascistic : ) It demands that you
see the world as it presents it.
----
Good points. Of course, Grice in The Causal Theory of Perception ... just
joking!
But surely we need McEvoy to comment on the physics of perception.
We say black and white are VALUES, not colours. That's implicatural. To me,
black and white ARE colours.
I think it is possible CONVENTIONAL (or human) that we distinguish:
black-white -- vs. other colours in the spectrum.
Cfr. Dalton.
Dogs, too, would, should they take photographs, diverge from humans.
------ There's colour photography (e.g. a nude -- fascistic bordering on
pornographic), black and white (e.g. a nude -- artsy) and, my favourite,
sketching. I think Edward Lucie-Smith, in his work on the nude makes the point.
And so on.
Vis a vis Grice, there's an intention behind it. If I want to portray, say,
Firenze, as it looks to me, or Paris, on a sombre day, I can use colour
photography.
It is true that black-and-white photography 'asks for interpretation' --
but then why is it that PAINTERS (e.g. Monet) avoided black and white like
the plague? One would think that painters are the LEAST to be disinterested
in interpretation -- or something.
A black ant is best photographed in black and white (unlike a _red_ ant).
And so on.
Cheers.
Speranza
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
