Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Copy photography: how to get paper white without losing lightest tones  (Read 14213 times)

RobinFaichney

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 68

I do a fair bit of copy photography and one problem comes up more often than any other, especially with graphite and charcoal drawings: I can get the background close to the tone of the original paper, or I can retain the lightest tones of the drawing, but I can't do both.

I ETTR to the extent that in LR I need to drop exposure by one to two stops to get the mid-tones right. I don't believe there's anything wrong with the gear (Canon 5Dii, 24-105 f4L, LR CC, Epson 4900).

The obvious answer is to use the Tone Curve, and that is how I get the best results, but it's not easy and it seems to me maybe I'm missing some technical trick that would make the whole thing easier.

Going into PS and replacing the background colour generally seems to make things worse.

Maybe I just need more experience with the Tone Curve. Any other ideas?
Logged

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8914

I do a fair bit of copy photography and one problem comes up more often than any other, especially with graphite and charcoal drawings: I can get the background close to the tone of the original paper, or I can retain the lightest tones of the drawing, but I can't do both.

I ETTR to the extent that in LR I need to drop exposure by one to two stops to get the mid-tones right. I don't believe there's anything wrong with the gear (Canon 5Dii, 24-105 f4L, LR CC, Epson 4900).

...

Maybe I just need more experience with the Tone Curve. Any other ideas?

Hi Robin,

LR process 2012 attempts to retain highlights unclipped, and for that it compresses all the life out of highlights, especially with ETTR.

Start by taking the Highlights control to -100 (yes, minus 100). That will give a much better starting point for repros and other subjects with subtle highlight detail.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

RobinFaichney

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 68

Thanks a lot Bart. I've also now found this, which seems extremely useful:

https://luminous-landscape.com/tonal-adjustments-in-the-age-of-lightroom-4/
Logged

Tim Lookingbill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2436

I do a fair bit of copy photography and one problem comes up more often than any other, especially with graphite and charcoal drawings: I can get the background close to the tone of the original paper, or I can retain the lightest tones of the drawing, but I can't do both.

I ETTR to the extent that in LR I need to drop exposure by one to two stops to get the mid-tones right. I don't believe there's anything wrong with the gear (Canon 5Dii, 24-105 f4L, LR CC, Epson 4900).

The obvious answer is to use the Tone Curve, and that is how I get the best results, but it's not easy and it seems to me maybe I'm missing some technical trick that would make the whole thing easier.

LR's Tone Curve has a lot to be desired over ACR's mainly because its point node interface is too small for bringing out small and pastel textures that are in paper highlights. Correct WB vs accurate looking paper color if that's desired can mess things up as well and so there needs to be a back and forth adjusting between Exposure, Highlights and White due to the first two's built in compression.

White slider acts more like the linear behavior of PV2010's Exposure slider with Brightness, Contrast set to zero with Linear point curve.

See the example showing the amount of definition and detail in clouds similar to paper texture highlights indicating the White slider's behavior.
Logged

kirkt

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 604

It may help you target your adjustments if you shoot with a known target in a reference shot.  I made up an example on copy paper (with OBAs, so paper white is bluish) and some various hardness pencils.  I shot with a CCPassport and targeted my black, mid and white levels based on a black of ~L20, mid of ~L50 and a white of ~L96.  See screenshot.  I shot with natural window light and exposed so that the raw file was just below clipping - I used the raw histogram in the Magic Lantern firmware for my 5DIII to set the exposure.  Confirmed this with Raw Digger.

I used ACR 9.1 in PS, PV2012 for this example - the automatic highlight compression process version - and the same controls, etc. apply in LR.  I assumed you are using PV2012.  This example used the AdobeStandard camera profile with all other ACR settings factory defaults, linear tone curve.  I click-white-balanced on the neutral WB patch in the lower half of the CC Passport in the image (the ones with the dimple under them).

The Exposure control moves the midtones around, so I used it to target the mid gray in raw conversion to bring the mid gray patch down to ~L50.  I used the white and black controls to stretch the histogram to the approximate points on the black and white ends of the CCPassport patches - the Contrast control permits you to scale these adjustments inward or outward from the center of the histogram.  Finally, once you get things generally lined up with the CCPassport patch values, you can decompress the highlights using the Highlights slider.  This will restore contrast to the highlights.  You can do the same with the shadows using the Shadows slider.

Once I made the conversion into PS, I made a slight curves adjustment to the highlight end to remove the blue cast from the paper white (the OBA effect).  I also added some local contrast to the low contrast content of the scene (the very light tones next to paper white) with Topaz Clarity, low contrast boost.  The artist may or may not desire these kinds of changes, but they may add to the photographic representation of the work.

If you shoot under controlled lighting, this may work as a preset after you have experimented with enough similar pieces, paper types and media.  The amount of stretch you apply to the histogram may be used to to blow out or preserve paper white and paper texture, and tweaks to the individual color channels to set the paper color (in the highlights) can be made as well. Because these are Curves operations, you can do them in LR.  I tend to think in terms of LAB color, even if I am working in RGB, so I set up my conversion space in ACR to be LAB so I could get the LAB histogram and color sampler readouts. The direction of the lighting and the contrast control during image acquisition between paper texture and medium (like ink or charcoal or pastel) can probably be modulated somewhat by the directional aspect of the lighting, if that is an issue or you want to emphasize one aspect more or less for a particular piece. I shot with uncontrolled window light for this example, so it is by no means a controlled process with uniform, well-characterized lighting.

Just another approach, maybe it might be more intuitive or a viable alternative to the LR Tone Curve that some mentioned might not have enough precision.  Any way you do it, shooting with a known reference target is very helpful - you can target and alter the highlight and shadow compression against known values instead of trying to eyeball it.  Because the dynamic range of the subject is not very wide, you can uncompress the highlights and shadows with the sliders to re-establish contrast in the subject, once you establish the midtone and black and white points.

Kirk

Image 1 - ACR settings
Image 2 - After raw conversion
Image 3 - With PS tweaks to highlight color and low contrast boost
« Last Edit: July 22, 2015, 04:39:08 pm by kirkt »
Logged

RobinFaichney

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 68

Thanks a lot guys, especially Kirk. I have been using a reference target but not in such a systematic way -- far from it. There's a lot there for me to digest but I'm sure this will help enormously. Thanks again.

Robin
Logged

kirkt

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 604

You're welcome.  I'm sure there are plenty of different ways to do what you want, my demonstration was one way that may work for you.

kirk
Logged

David Sutton

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1345
    • David Sutton Photography

Hi Robin,

LR process 2012 attempts to retain highlights unclipped, and for that it compresses all the life out of highlights, especially with ETTR.

Start by taking the Highlights control to -100 (yes, minus 100). That will give a much better starting point for repros and other subjects with subtle highlight detail.

Cheers,
Bart
For any image with important highlight detail I use PV 2010 now. Otherwise if I'm using highlight recovery, it's on a file that has already had an unknown amount of highlight recovery applied to it. In this area I don't think PV2012 was a step forward.
David
Logged

RobinFaichney

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 68

Thanks David, I might try PV2010, though I have no experience of it and I'm not too keen on starting from scratch to learn a new model.
Logged

Tim Lookingbill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2436

Thanks David, I might try PV2010, though I have no experience of it and I'm not too keen on starting from scratch to learn a new model.

I was the same way and still like to use PV2010 in CS5. I bought LR4 just to see if PV2012 was an improvement and re-edited copies of Raws I worked on in CS5's PV2010. That cloud image I posted was one of the first but I had trouble getting the same definition in cloud detail in LR PV2012 as I did in PV2010 until I fully understood the behavior differences of Exposure/Highlight sliders vs White slider with a little help of point curves.

Now the finished LR PV2012 version looks even better than the PV2010, but it took me quite a long while to get it. I almost decided not use LR to do cloud images. I still don't like using LR just because of its interface design and catalog system.
Logged

RobinFaichney

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 68

Thanks Tim. I took some cloud shots myself this afternoon. I didn't mean to expose for the sky -- clouds I mean not clear sky -- but it happened anyway on a couple of shots. When I got them into LR I tried doing nothing but boosting white on these ones (PV2012) and I was surprised how good that looked. The clouds that is -- other stuff mostly needed a considerable boost to shadows. But I've decided, for high key copy shots at least, to try the same thing, forgetting ETTR and even going slightly in the opposite direction then opening it up using the white slider. Kind of a simple-minded approach, relatively speaking, but I think it might be a good basis, along with systematic use of reference targets and standardized lighting.
Logged

Tim Lookingbill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2436

I've worked reproduction of artwork (mainly line art) using a graphics camera with (4) 500 watt halogen lamps so I'm a bit apprehensive about you having to use ETTR in your situation considering uneven illumination can't be readily seen at the time of capture along with risking proper white balance capture which can be severely distorted pushing the non-linear electronics of a digital sensor close to full saturation. Lighting hardware as well as natural sunlight can fluctuate in both illumination and color temp and pushing exposure to a sensor's max is not something I'ld advise. Also different papers exhibit spectral qualities that exacerbate these issues.

See below my attempts of photographing my own artwork using my DSLR and ETTR. I thought it was evenly illuminated but it wasn't as you can see by the top version which is a screenshot of ACR 6.7, PV2010 with all sliders set to zero and Linear point curve. Clicking for white on the tea bag introduces color distortion at the blown portion.

As you can see it's recoverable using software but it compressed all that paper texture detail leaving a bleached out appearance (lack of color detail) while leaving portions of the paper in its original off white in the opposite corner.

I can easily re-shoot the artwork. But I now see that a digital camera can pick up light impurities that can't be readily seen with the eyes.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2015, 12:55:36 pm by Tim Lookingbill »
Logged

RobinFaichney

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 68

Thanks Tim. I do come up against the same thing, uneven lighting made obvious by processing, and right now I'm looking into shading correction techniques. I know this can be done using a shot of a white sheet identically lit and layers in PS, I'm wondering whether anyone here would recommend any other methods?
Logged

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8914

Thanks Tim. I do come up against the same thing, uneven lighting made obvious by processing, and right now I'm looking into shading correction techniques. I know this can be done using a shot of a white sheet identically lit and layers in PS, I'm wondering whether anyone here would recommend any other methods?

Hi Robin,

In Capture One as Raw converter it's a simple procedure that's almost automatic. It's a procedure called Lens Cast Correction, and it is originally intended to calibrate for slight color and brightness deviations caused by the way/angle the imaging rays strike the sensor, and for calibration of stitched sensors. But it also is very easy to use for vignetting or uneven lighting correction. It even takes care of sensor dustspots automatically. Here is the official help page for the LCC feature.

Cheers,
Bart
« Last Edit: July 27, 2015, 01:02:50 pm by BartvanderWolf »
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

RobinFaichney

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 68

Thanks Bart but as an LR+PS user and CC subscriber that seems like quite a hefty spend just for this one feature.
Logged

leuallen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 453

There is a free plug in for Lightroom for this. It is called DNG Flat Field. There is a video on LuLa that covers this.

Larry
Logged

RobinFaichney

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 68

Thanks Larry, that's a much better price! Can't find that video though.

Both the C1 feature and this plug-in seem focussed mainly on lens issues (also RawTherapee), saying the reference image should be done using translucent plastic in place of the lens cap. Is there anything in particular I need to look out for when using such software to correct for uneven lighting, apart from the different nature of the reference image? Or, ideally, has anybody found clear instructions for this sort of use?
Logged

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8914

Thanks Larry, that's a much better price! Can't find that video though.

Both the C1 feature and this plug-in seem focussed mainly on lens issues (also RawTherapee), saying the reference image should be done using translucent plastic in place of the lens cap. Is there anything in particular I need to look out for when using such software to correct for uneven lighting, apart from the different nature of the reference image? Or, ideally, has anybody found clear instructions for this sort of use?

It works exactly the same, but instead of the translucent plate one shoots a featureless white surface instead of the copy work, with the same lighting setup and aperture, maybe slightly defocused to avoid any residual surface structure of the white surface. I usually shoot the reference surface, then place the artwork to be copied and shoot it. The lighting unevenness will be totally neutralized.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

RobinFaichney

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 68

Thanks Bart!
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up