My previous post, and this one as well, were based on a post of Ming Thein’s, as well as current discussions on the web about B&W vs. color.
Discussions about why some prefer monochrome vs. color are always non conclusive in that it depends upon the subject and the background, age, etc. of the photographer. In my opinion, those that prefer monochrome images are usually (not all of the time) the older photographers who were brought up in an age when all of the great photographs were monochrome since color pictures were too expensive, or too difficult to make. This is a subject that could be debated all night without arriving at a conclusive, definitive answer, but I have other thoughts and questions.
Why do many (not all, not exclusively), regardless of age, seem to revert to monochrome when making images of quotidian subjects? In my opinion it is because they are trying to show them differently, trying to make them at least appear to be like “works of art” even though they are images of everyday, common things around them.
But, that just brings up other issues like: what are works of art, how do you define “art”? Can photographs be considered art even when they are infinitely reproducible?
In my final thoughts on the subjects, I always revert to whatever process I think works best at the time for whatever I’m trying to show. In the above image I like a very subdued color best, but either works. It is a very common view when it isn’t foggy, but in this case the fog helps a lot for the image of Plum Creek flowing from under Plum Tree Lane from which I recorded a raw view in August of 2017.