Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down

Author Topic: Entrance Only  (Read 2030 times)

Ivo_B

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 872
    • www.ivophoto.be
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #40 on: June 13, 2019, 11:53:57 am »

My problem with all this discussion on post-processing is that in street, what matters is what’s in the image, not how technically perfect the image is. I’ll grant you that if you’re doing landscape, or nature, or wabi sabi, or the kind of urban work Slobodan does, having a technically perfect image matters. In street, what matters is whether or not the picture conveys something significant about (to use a cliché) the human condition.

There was a time when I could use Photoshop to do all sorts of things. I’m now 89. My eyes aren’t as good as they once were, and I’ve forgotten a lot that I once knew about post-processing. But I still can tell the difference between a decent street shot and one pretending to be street, even if the pretender has been post-processed to perfection.

I agree with those who’ve pointed out that the condition of the picture ought to be at least somewhat consistent with the scene it presents. If I have a picture of a gritty scene it’s not unreasonable to preserve “features” like noise, which reflect grittiness and that the picture was shot quickly and in passing. Remember that HCB’s wonderful book, which pretty much defines the street photography genre, originally was titled “Images à la Sauvette,” which translates roughly as “images on the run.” Doesn’t hurt to let the picture make clear that it was shot on the run.

Agree Russ,

Did you had the chance to visit the HCB house in Paris? You will not find one improper printed image. I consider the problem in the shadows in your image as an improper finish of the image. It has nothing to see with grain, or character of film / sensor or whatever. it is noise that become visible due to improper finish. And I agree it is a difficult trade off, making the choice what to sacrifice in finishing a difficult negative or RAW.
As you see, I kept the noise in the not shadows and black parts, because I agree it is the character of your picture. And I'm sure it is possible to do the trick on the RAW and keep some texture in the black shirt.
And please, I respect you choice, at least, it is a choice, but I wanted to flag there is another choice possible, and as you said, it enhanced the image significant.
So, I don't understand why some guys stumble over each other to defend a technical unnecessary flaw and try to sell it as a feature.
There is a difference in taking a picture à la sauvette and finishing one à la sauvette.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2019, 11:57:09 am by Ivo_B »
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15289
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #41 on: June 13, 2019, 12:27:34 pm »

... There is a difference in taking a picture à la sauvette and finishing one à la sauvette.

Well played, Ivo.

petermfiore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2325
    • Peter Fiore Fine Art
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #42 on: June 13, 2019, 12:46:36 pm »

Agree Russ,
 I respect you choice, at least, it is a choice, but I wanted to flag there is another choice possible, and as you said, it enhanced the image significant.
So, I don't understand why some guys stumble over each other to defend a technical unnecessary flaw and try to sell it as a feature.

I'm not saying that Russ's image was the best possible version...But, I feel that your version was tad over cooked for me. One man's enhancement, is another man's MEH.

Peter

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15289
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #43 on: June 13, 2019, 12:54:16 pm »

Note to self: add noise to your images to generate three pages of debate ;)

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1002
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #44 on: June 13, 2019, 01:00:24 pm »


Did you had the chance to visit the HCB house in Paris? You will not find one improper printed image. I consider the problem in the shadows in your image as an improper finish of the image. It has nothing to see with grain, or character of film / sensor or whatever. it is noise that become visible due to improper finish. And I agree it is a difficult trade off, making the choice what to sacrifice in finishing a difficult negative or RAW.


I also don't see the point in comparing technical perfection in say, Landscape Photography with Candid or Street Photography.
I also don't know HCB for being a "great" printer but a great "decisive-instantler".

A HCB image in a book is still a great image. This is not the case with a - say -  Adams landscape, where the print counts much more.

I'm no expert but I could imagine that HCB printed some of his pics, let others print under his supervision and perhaps other printed them without supervision or even posthumously. You more knowledgeable people surely know better.

But I doubt if it matters much.

Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15289
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #45 on: June 13, 2019, 01:02:32 pm »

... I also don't know HCB for being a "great" printer...

No he wasn't. But he had a Serb to be his great printer ;)

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1842
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #46 on: June 13, 2019, 01:03:51 pm »

Russ has captured an interesting scene but in doing so has also captured the essence of poor digital processing and highlighted one of the weaknesses and limitations of digital capture. Oscar has made a valiant attempt - I wouldn't expect anything else from someone with his background and experience - to rescue the shot but why bother: best start from a position of strength, not weakness. My wife would call it simulated stimulated dralon.

As an aside I've never understood this simulation thing, valuing the properties of film and attempting to simulate those properties using digital capture. If film is up there on that pedestal then for God's sake shoot film rather than attempt a simulation using another medium. Play to the strength of the medium, whatever the medium.

   
« Last Edit: June 13, 2019, 01:07:25 pm by KLaban »
Logged

Ivo_B

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 872
    • www.ivophoto.be
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #47 on: June 13, 2019, 01:05:35 pm »

I also don't see the point in comparing technical perfection in say, Landscape Photography with Candid or Street Photography.
I also don't know HCB for being a "great" printer but a great "decisive-instantler".

A HCB image in a book is still a great image. This is not the case with a - say -  Adams landscape, where the print counts much more.

I'm no expert but I could imagine that HCB printed some of his pics, let others print under his supervision and perhaps other printed them without supervision or even posthumously. You more knowledgeable people surely know better.

But I doubt if it matters much.

I garantee you that there is no self respecting photographer of any name who is sloppy in getting his work finished on the wall or in a book.
(Ok there are exceptions)
Logged

Ivo_B

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 872
    • www.ivophoto.be
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #48 on: June 13, 2019, 01:07:31 pm »

Russ has captured an interesting scene but in doing so has also captured the essence of poor digital processing and highlighted one of the weaknesses and limitations of digital capture. Oscar has made a valiant attempt - I wouldn't expect anything else from someone with his background and experience - to rescue the shot but why bother: best start from a position of strength, not weakness.

As an aside I've never understood this simulation thing, valuing the properties of film and attempting to simulate those properties using digital capture. If film is up there on that pedestal then for God's sake shoot film rather than attempt a simulation using another medium. Play to the strength of the medium, whatever the medium.

My wife would call it simulated stimulated dralon.   
:)

Yes Oscar, Who else but you would do this silly attempt.

 8)
Logged

petermfiore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2325
    • Peter Fiore Fine Art
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #49 on: June 13, 2019, 01:08:39 pm »

No he wasn't. But he had a Serb to be his great printer ;)

Somewhere, I saw a clip of HCB talking about not printing his work...

Peter

Ivo_B

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 872
    • www.ivophoto.be
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #50 on: June 13, 2019, 01:10:07 pm »

I'm not saying that Russ's image was the best possible version...But, I feel that your version was tad over cooked for me. One man's enhancement, is another man's MEH.

Peter

Peter, It is practically impossible to do a decent PP job on a Jpeg from the net. I just wanted to show what was possible.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22742
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #51 on: June 13, 2019, 01:10:24 pm »

I also don't see the point in comparing technical perfection in say, Landscape Photography with Candid or Street Photography.
I also don't know HCB for being a "great" printer but a great "decisive-instantler".

A HCB image in a book is still a great image. This is not the case with a - say -  Adams landscape, where the print counts much more.

I'm no expert but I could imagine that HCB printed some of his pics, let others print under his supervision and perhaps other printed them without supervision or even posthumously. You more knowledgeable people surely know better.

But I doubt if it matters much.

As I understand it, HC-B almost never printed his own work.

Also, you must bear in mind that back then at least, as in my own days, prints were made a little flat because they were copied later on - even resized - in order to make it into the printing presses, and it is all too easy to increase contrast at that stage than to dial it back.

People collect these old prints from wherever they find them, and get strange ideas about what was a standard good print for display, and one for repro purposes.

What gets into a gallery is often a new, reprinted and reworked picture that is not that similar to the ones used back when the images were shot.

Rob

Ivo_B

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 872
    • www.ivophoto.be
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #52 on: June 13, 2019, 01:16:28 pm »

+1

I often add noise to get rid of the too clean, sterile look of much of digital imaging. Shucks, I often remove colour, too, because I feel it complicates a simple idea and often hides it, in fact.

;-)

And sometimes just deleting the image is the only cure.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22742
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #53 on: June 13, 2019, 01:17:56 pm »

Russ has captured an interesting scene but in doing so has also captured the essence of poor digital processing and highlighted one of the weaknesses and limitations of digital capture. Oscar has made a valiant attempt - I wouldn't expect anything else from someone with his background and experience - to rescue the shot but why bother: best start from a position of strength, not weakness. My wife would call it simulated stimulated dralon.

As an aside I've never understood this simulation thing, valuing the properties of film and attempting to simulate those properties using digital capture. If film is up there on that pedestal then for God's sake shoot film rather than attempt a simulation using another medium. Play to the strength of the medium, whatever the medium.

   


The reason is pretty sImple, Keith: film costs money (a lot, today) and using it for fun, casual stuff, makes little sense. That should not be taken to imply that old ideals and preferences of look need be abandoned, though.

Rob

Ivo_B

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 872
    • www.ivophoto.be
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #54 on: June 13, 2019, 01:24:52 pm »


The reason is pretty sImple, Keith: film costs money (a lot, today) and using it for fun, casual stuff, makes little sense. That should not be taken to imply that old ideals and preferences of look need be abandoned, though.

Rob

About old ideals. Why did you botter to print a test strip and got the negative in the 5 stops latitude of the paper and select the correct gradation in the darkroom, when the film base grain in the shadows is only a feature that enhance the image...
« Last Edit: June 13, 2019, 02:10:06 pm by Ivo_B »
Logged

Ivo_B

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 872
    • www.ivophoto.be
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #55 on: June 13, 2019, 02:05:58 pm »

Yes, I think your original suggestion of using a luminosity mask to selectively apply NR is probably the best solution. Attached is an example. It is simply NR applied thru a luminosity mask. Nothing fancy. Notice that there is a lot of information available in the t-shirt which we don't want to miss. Plus, by keeping some noise present, it remains "in character".

Whether someone wants additional contrast etc applied is a matter of taste. At least it is not unrecoverable a la Nikon Raw.

Good work. Agreed.
Logged

petermfiore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2325
    • Peter Fiore Fine Art
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #56 on: June 13, 2019, 02:07:27 pm »

B&W speaks a little different...

Peter
« Last Edit: June 13, 2019, 02:15:27 pm by petermfiore »
Logged

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1002
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #57 on: June 13, 2019, 02:13:13 pm »

I garantee you that there is no self respecting photographer of any name who is sloppy in getting his work finished on the wall or in a book.
(Ok there are exceptions)
I'm sure you are right.
But you don't get the same results on baryta  as in plain paper.
Even if you're not sloppy.
It's the medium
Logged

Ivo_B

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 872
    • www.ivophoto.be
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #58 on: June 13, 2019, 02:18:09 pm »

I'm sure you are right.
But you don't get the same results on baryta  as in plain paper.
Even if you're not sloppy.
It's the medium

What kind of a shift do you try to introduce in this discussion?

Hahahaha.
Logged

32BT

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3095
    • Pictures
Re: Entrance Only
« Reply #59 on: June 13, 2019, 02:35:15 pm »

B&W speaks a little different...

Peter

But then you lose the pop-cult look, and that sickening fluorescent tube light that's so befitting of the place.
Logged
Regards,
~ O ~
If you can stomach it: pictures
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up