Hi, Karen! (We gotta stop meetin' like this!)
KW> You were expecting questions, so I'm sure you will excuse this one :)
 BD> By keeping contrast slightly flat, and using even weak filters
 BD> to "separate" areas prone to merge in B&W, the result is great.
KW> As a newspaper photographer, I have learned to ensure that there
KW> is enough contrast to make the picture work in b&w.
 I spent a decade doing news photography, too..  
KW> But as a photographer of artists works, I have always worked
KW> in color so I instantly saw the problem you [mentioned]..
KW> and what may show up beautifully in colour may not show up at
KW> all in b&w so this idea of filters intrigues me.  I know little
KW> of filters so tell me exactly what kind of weak filter you are
KW> refering too, please.
 My reference to filters included the gamut available, including
 all of the various colors and strengths, and not to any one in
 particular.
 As you know, filters pass light of their own color and retard
 the rest.  The effect achieved is to darken or lighten some hues
 in a scene to a greater or lesser degree than other colors also
 present.  This provides a tone distinction, in black and white.
 One common example is so-called "cloud" filters, usually yellow
 or yellow-orange which make blue darker than it would otherwise
 be rendered on panchromatic films.  A polarizing filter appears
 essentially clear, but performs the same service in darkening a
 blue sky when when using color film.
 To go into this in depth would take some time and lots of band
 width so I'll just say that using filters is a logical method
 at our disposal to create an obvious distinction between colors
 which otherwise tend to photograph about the same, or merge, in
 black and white reproductions.  
... Love is the triumph of imagination over intelligence.
 * Q-Blue 2.3 *
--- WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12 
---------------