Skip to comments.Light And Dark: The Racial Biases That Remain In Photography
Posted on 04/16/2014 9:44:01 PM PDT by KneelBeforeZod
A lot of [the design of film and motion technology] was conceived with the idea of the best representation of white people. And I don't mean to say that it was a deliberate and exclusionary practice, but [it was] much more of a willful obliviousness, if you will. So color film in its early stages pretty much developed around trying to measure the image against white skin. ...
(Excerpt) Read more at npr.org ...
If there’s racial bias in photography, then why isn’t it called “White and Black Film”? The star always gets the lead billing.
Clearly photography needs to be limited to two levels of illumination.
When I was a kid, there was a black family down the street that was so racist that they sold their black & white tv and bought a colored one...
So, do they today have a TV of color?
Well, sure. That's the best explanation for pretty much everything. Do you know why the telephone company calls their residential phone book the "White Pages"? To make white people feel superior!
And do you know why Teddy Roosevelt's navy was called the "Great White Fleet"? To make white people feel superior!
I could go on and on. It's so easy to use silly garbage to make Americans hate each other.
This is crazy.
Cameras have a white balance because daylight is inherently “white”.
The white balance allows adjustments for proper color rendition under different light sources/temperatures, such as incandescent, fluorescent, etc.
This has to be the worst looking-for-offense scheme I’ve ever seen.
Blame Newton and Goethe!
On and off?
H0lder will have to give up on the Nuance Thing.
Honestly I don’t have an axe to grind on this subject.. I take lots of pictures of my friends.. It is mostly hobby based for a local club. I am just a hobbyist with a 10 gig $100 camera. But no matter what it is nearly impossible to get good pictures of My black friends. The lighting has to be just right, and if they are wearing a hat in the sun its impossible. It is hard to believe this camera can take so many good pictures with no skill needed, and yet fail at this one thing so badly.
You must have bought it from Ku Klux Kamera in Alabama.
I knew it! Ansel Adams was a Wascist!
I had a photography book years ago, probably published by Kodak, that dealt with photographing black people. And what it said was: There is nothing special you need to know about photographing black people. It is exactly the same as photographing white people.
This is why I do IR.
Nobody sees the color until I say they can see the color....;D
Try fill flash which might be called something like “portrait fill” or “outside portrait mode” on your camera.
It might even be a setting for ‘portrait shade’.
It’s on there somewhere, though.
If I can get good pix of coal blue-black Dobes, you can get good pix of your buds.
Well, they’re dark! It’s photography!
What else are they gonna say?
There was so much stupid in that article that it makes my head hurt.
You talkin' 'bout Black Labs?
There is one of those in the fam and she is just about impossible to capture digitally unless you set the camera to capture low level light reflection and let everything else go. I swear her fur is about the most light absorptive material I've ever seen, though she has a fur sheen in strong sunlight that people remark about..