Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer  (Read 2695 times)

brianrybolt

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 550
Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« on: February 02, 2018, 06:11:14 AM »

I keep learning more with each section of your videos with Charles.  I used to think I was a good printer and knew how to finesse my images to make really fine prints but watching these vids will help me tremendously in my printing.

BTW, I love your 'Flower King' shot Kevin.  Makes me smile every time I see it.

Cheers,

Brian
Logged

Chris Sanderson

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2600
Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #1 on: February 02, 2018, 01:11:57 PM »

Shooting With The Masters – Charles Cramer Part 5

This is the heart of our series with Charlie Cramer in which we are taken through Charles' exacting process of getting the best print possible.

There will be a several sets of 'printing' videos coming up in the next few weeks.

You can watch the videos here or within the Videos section of the site
« Last Edit: February 02, 2018, 01:25:43 PM by Chris Sanderson »
Logged
Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape

pearlstreet

  • Guest
Re: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #2 on: February 02, 2018, 01:19:36 PM »

Thanks - can't wait to see more!
Logged

jackpinoh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
Re: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #3 on: February 02, 2018, 02:42:14 PM »

I find this type of video--highlighting the artistic process--to be extremely valuable. Far superior to videos that focus on a specific workflow for all images or show "Lightroom/Photoshop tips." More please.
Logged

RoyH

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 32
    • Reflective Photo
Re: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #4 on: February 03, 2018, 12:40:06 PM »

This has been a great series! I don't recall from any of the earlier videos, but what paper was being used for the prints?

Thanks,

Roy
Logged

Chris Sanderson

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2600
Re: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #5 on: February 03, 2018, 12:55:26 PM »

I am uncertain of the exact paper and will let Charlie answer that. It may be a few days.

I know it is cut-sheet fed through the Canon Pro4000 on which we will also have a short video.
Logged
Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape

adias

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 332
Re: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #6 on: February 03, 2018, 01:48:21 PM »

Video question: Why is it that when filmed at a distance the display looks B&W (desaturated)?
Logged

Chris Sanderson

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2600
Re: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #7 on: February 03, 2018, 02:21:38 PM »

Video question: Why is it that when filmed at a distance the display looks B&W (desaturated)?
Couple of reasons: The screen was over-exposed by about 2 stops and most of the prints shown thus far are quite low saturation.
Logged
Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape

adias

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 332
Re: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #8 on: February 03, 2018, 06:16:27 PM »

Couple of reasons: The screen was over-exposed by about 2 stops and most of the prints shown thus far are quite low saturation.

Interesting! Does that mean that your camera automatically compresses the over-exposed screen, instead of just leaving blown highlights (a nice trick)?
Logged

Chris Sanderson

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2600
Re: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #9 on: February 03, 2018, 10:33:47 PM »

Interesting! Does that mean that your camera automatically compresses the over-exposed screen, instead of just leaving blown highlights (a nice trick)?

Nope - not even the GH5 is that savvy! Corrected as best I can (compromise) in post grading where skin tones trump screen detail
Logged
Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape

adias

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 332
Re: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #10 on: February 04, 2018, 02:19:34 AM »

Nope - not even the GH5 is that savvy! Corrected as best I can (compromise) in post grading where skin tones trump screen detail

Nice work!
Logged

DaveClark

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6
Re: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #11 on: February 04, 2018, 07:32:54 PM »

Another excellent video.

I notice Cramer does not use luminosity masks.  Some of what he is doing seems well suited for them, for example increasing the brightness of the waterfall.  I am curious about his opinion on the use of luminosity masks. 

Dave
Logged

Charles Cramer

  • Contributor
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19
    • http://www.charlescramer.com
Re: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #12 on: February 05, 2018, 02:25:50 AM »

I use two main types of paper.  A cheaper one for making lots of proofs, which would be Moab Lasal Exhibition Lustre.  And for my final prints, Canson (or Epson) Platine Fibre Rag.  The Platine has a very neutral paper base, which matches white mount boards nicely.  That's because it has a real paper base.  The cheaper Lasal (made of plastic)  has a bluish tint.  If I'm printing a scene with lots of white tones (like a snowscene), then I'll start with the platine, as the more whiter the tones, the more the color of the paper base shows through.
I'd love to fine a cheap paper that has a neutral paper base...
Logged

RoyH

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 32
    • Reflective Photo
Re: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #13 on: February 05, 2018, 09:58:39 AM »

I use two main types of paper.  A cheaper one for making lots of proofs, which would be Moab Lasal Exhibition Lustre.  And for my final prints, Canson (or Epson) Platine Fibre Rag.  The Platine has a very neutral paper base, which matches white mount boards nicely.  That's because it has a real paper base.  The cheaper Lasal (made of plastic)  has a bluish tint.  If I'm printing a scene with lots of white tones (like a snowscene), then I'll start with the platine, as the more whiter the tones, the more the color of the paper base shows through.
I'd love to fine a cheap paper that has a neutral paper base...

Thanks Charlie!

Looks like I'm in good company, I also use Moab Exhibition Lustre for proofs and other non-critical prints. I recently started using what I believe is a similar but different paper to the Platine Fibre Rag, the Moab Juniper Baryta Rag. I have somewhat standardized on Moab papers as they are easily available locally for me and I'm getting great results from them with my Epson P800.

Again thanks for the information and the education series of videos, they have been very useful!

Roy
Logged

Charles Cramer

  • Contributor
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19
    • http://www.charlescramer.com
Re: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #14 on: February 05, 2018, 04:40:26 PM »

I have never used luminosity masks, because I've never felt the need. Let me explain.

My usual selection method is to do basically what Ansel Adams did in the darkroom.  I loosely select an area and feather it.  And then capture that selection in a curve.  This seems to work 80% of the time.  If I need to restrict the tones involved,  I can lock down a part of the curve.  If I want to dark tones to stay put, I put a point on the curve in that area.  You don't want too many points, as you can inadvertently create a flat spot on the curve, which can look terrible.

My worry with luminosity masks is of what I call tonal "constipation",  which is basically what a flat spot on a curve does. It crushes tones together.   Let's say you're trying to lighten midtones in some rocks.  If you do a strong lightening, then any brighter parts of the rocks that weren't in the luminosity mask won't get lighter.  But the midtones you worked on will.  And the demarcation between the selected and unselected parts my cause some crushing of tones.

I can see luminosity masks working, though, with subtle adjustments, not anything too extreme.
Logged

AndersDamsgaard

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
    • Personal webpage
Re: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #15 on: February 05, 2018, 09:50:15 PM »

Thank you Charles, Kevin, and Chris for this fantastic series. The pace is wonderful and the videos have a friendly atmosphere to them. I'm learning a lot and am having a great time putting the new concepts and insights to good use.
Logged

Peter McLennan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2537
Re: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #16 on: February 06, 2018, 11:08:36 AM »

What is so instructive about this series, Charlie, is what you do to the images, not necessarily how you do it.  There are many ways to achieve the same effect in Photoshop and you’ve shown us some new techniques. But for me, its your sensitivity to what can be done to the images that makes these videos so useful and inspiring.  Thank you!  8)
Logged

Rajan Parrikar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2060
    • Rajan Parrikar
Re: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #17 on: February 06, 2018, 12:04:36 PM »

I have never used luminosity masks, because I've never felt the need. Let me explain.

My usual selection method is to do basically what Ansel Adams did in the darkroom.  I loosely select an area and feather it.  And then capture that selection in a curve.  This seems to work 80% of the time.  If I need to restrict the tones involved,  I can lock down a part of the curve.  If I want to dark tones to stay put, I put a point on the curve in that area.  You don't want too many points, as you can inadvertently create a flat spot on the curve, which can look terrible.

My worry with luminosity masks is of what I call tonal "constipation",  which is basically what a flat spot on a curve does. It crushes tones together.   Let's say you're trying to lighten midtones in some rocks.  If you do a strong lightening, then any brighter parts of the rocks that weren't in the luminosity mask won't get lighter.  But the midtones you worked on will.  And the demarcation between the selected and unselected parts my cause some crushing of tones.

I can see luminosity masks working, though, with subtle adjustments, not anything too extreme.


Tony Kuyper's v5 panel on Luminosity Masks (and much more) is extraordinarily powerful and permits a fine degree of control and manipulation in short order (once you have gotten the hang of it). As always, with such 'power' comes responsibility. Tonal constipation is not an issue if you supply enough tonal fibre.




PatrickEhlen

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
Re: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #18 on: February 06, 2018, 01:44:44 PM »

Mr. Cramer mentioned, that people often say his prints are too dark. Maybe he should change his background in Photoshop from white to grey. Just thinking.
Logged

BrianWJH

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 204
Re: Just Published - Part 5 of Charles Cramer
« Reply #19 on: February 06, 2018, 02:36:09 PM »

Well, I understood that statement to be that a common complaint is that prints often appear to be too dark as a general statement often made in these forums, not that his own prints are too dark.

Brian.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up