Help alleviate marital stress due to successful printing

[David Eckels]

So, the wife, having discovered my new found printing abilities is tired of having bare walls in the house She wants pictures everywhere. My excuse has been that the lighting is too bright or too dim here and there, which is usually exactly where she want to put them. The brightly lit spots are really no problem, but for the low light or shadowed areas, is there a rule of thumb or a profile modification that would compensate for dimness in the places the prints are hung? In addition to window light, we have LED and incandescent lighting that ranges from cool to daylight temps.

Please help!

[dgberg]

Get them hung my good man. You have a long way to go.
Presently I have 69 hung in the house and 127 in the studio and workshops.

[rdonson]

My wife has her prints and mine hanging everywhere.  I chose to standardize on LED lighting with 4000-4200K.  I couldn't wait to get rid of all incandescents in the house.  My studio upstairs has long been 4200K lighting, first halogens then LEDs.  (got tired of burning my hands on the halogens).

My adopted motto:  happy wife, happy life 

[David Eckels]

Thanks, Dan and Ron! I knew any advice I received would be premised with, "Happy wife, happy life!"
But do you make any luminosity adjustments depending upon where the Queen dictates they shall be displayed?

[budjames]

So, the wife, having discovered my new found printing abilities is tired of having bare walls in the house She wants pictures everywhere. My excuse has been that the lighting is too bright or too dim here and there, which is usually exactly where she want to put them. The brightly lit spots are really no problem, but for the low light or shadowed areas, is there a rule of thumb or a profile modification that would compensate for dimness in the places the prints are hung? In addition to window light, we have LED and incandescent lighting that ranges from cool to daylight temps.

Please help!

Just hang up prints of you. That will kill her enthusiasm to decorate the house.

But seriously, our home is decorated with prints from our various trips around the globe. I print all of my own work on a 5 year old Epson P800. 11"x14" print size is my usual go to.

Printing your own work is actually pretty economical once you have the printer. The cost of framing can be really expensive.

Here is a photo of our "wall of fame" in our great room.

Regards,
Bud James

Please check out my fine art and travel photography at www.budjames.photography or on Instagram at www.instagram.com/budjamesphoto.

[David Eckels]

Thanks, Bud. I am starting to capitulate

[Rand47]

So, the wife, having discovered my new found printing abilities is tired of having bare walls in the house She wants pictures everywhere. My excuse has been that the lighting is too bright or too dim here and there, which is usually exactly where she want to put them. The brightly lit spots are really no problem, but for the low light or shadowed areas, is there a rule of thumb or a profile modification that would compensate for dimness in the places the prints are hung? In addition to window light, we have LED and incandescent lighting that ranges from cool to daylight temps.

Please help!

Well, all kidding aside (and thanks for the morning chuckle), for dim areas I’d try testing.  And for the tests, try an overall lighter print BUT leave the end points alone and put a big “pooch” right in the middle of the curve.  :-)

Rand

[David Eckels]

Thanks Rand. Didn't occur to me, but your point about not moving the end points may be the key. I will give it a whack, chuckles aside.

[David Eckels]

That turned out to be a pretty good idea. In LR, using Tone Curve, set a point smack in the middle and moved horizontally 1/2 a square to the left. Lost a little saturation, but I should be able to compensate easily and make a pre-set. Must say I am surprised it was that easy. Most importantly, She-Who-Must-Be-Obeyed gave approval!

[Rand47]

That turned out to be a pretty good idea. In LR, using Tone Curve, set a point smack in the middle and moved horizontally 1/2 a square to the left. Lost a little saturation, but I should be able to compensate easily and make a pre-set. Must say I am surprised it was that easy. Most importantly, She-Who-Must-Be-Obeyed gave approval!

Glad it worked for you . . .   and re saturation, if you did it in Photoshop on a layer you could use luminosity mode for that layer and it would not impact saturation.

Rand

[David Eckels]

Glad it worked for you . . .   and re saturation, if you did it in Photoshop on a layer you could use luminosity mode for that layer and it would not impact saturation.

But then I'd have to learn how to print in PS 

[Rand47]

But then I'd have to learn how to print in PS 

David,

NEVER!  Perish the thought.  After printing out of Lightroom, I’d rather have a root canal that print from Photoshop!  But I do have as part of my work flow the fine tuning of my images in PS (thank you Charlie Cramer!) and then back to Lightroom for soft proof and printing.

Rand

[edt]

David,
I'm not sure what others would recommend but I would typically make the best print possible with little regard for the "dimness" of light where it is to be hung. Just let the human eye of the viewer make the adjustment when viewing the print on the wall. You might want to move it in a different location later....

[David Eckels]

David,
I'm not sure what others would recommend but I would typically make the best print possible with little regard for the "dimness" of light where it is to be hung. Just let the human eye of the viewer make the adjustment when viewing the print on the wall. You might want to move it in a different location later....

Lots of merit in that suggestion, edt, thanks. Meanwhile I've been watching every relevant YouTube video from Andrew and have picked up a bunch of nice tidbits like staying at 16-bit within the ProPhoto color space; part of your recommendation to "make the best print possible."

[rdonson]

David,
I'm not sure what others would recommend but I would typically make the best print possible with little regard for the "dimness" of light where it is to be hung. Just let the human eye of the viewer make the adjustment when viewing the print on the wall. You might want to move it in a different location later....

For the home I would do this as well.  Make the best print possible.  At some point the dim lights may be swapped out for something else and who wants to print it again.

Obviously if its going for a gallery you would know what lighting they have and print appropriately. 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... is there a rule of thumb... that would compensate for dimness in the places the prints are hung? ..

Yes, there is. It is called eyes. They will adapt to the lighting condition.

[David Eckels]

Ron, thanks for seconding advice from edt as well as "future proofing" prints under better lighting.
Slobodan, not so sure, however, I have missed your sarcastic wit! 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Slobodan, not so sure, however, I have missed your sarcastic wit! 

I once visited a HCB exhibition in a Barcelona gallery. The light was so dim that I had to stay longer until my eyes adjusted. They did it on purpose, to preserve the prints' longevity. They surely didn't print his prints with any profile specifically developed for such a dim environment.

And btw, I wasn't sarcastic in my previous post. Eyes do adapt.

[rdonson]

I've had similar experiences to Slobodan.  I've gone to more than one exhibition of Ansel Adam prints (made by him) and the lighting was so dim it was difficult to make out all the detail I knew was there.  No amount of adaption to the poor lighting made the exhibitions worth looking at.  My books and online images did a much better job of showing his works.  I have one Ansel Adam print (not made by him) to look at as a comparison at home. 

[David Eckels]

You know, this is a really enlightening discussion for me Pun intended. Slobodan, I always appreciate your humor, sarcastic or not, and I always take your comments seriously in either case. I can certainly understand that eyes adapt and, perhaps as photographers we are more willing to allow for that compensation, but not all understand or are willing to be patient. In an exhibition of work by HCB or AA, a certain patience is called for. "She-Who-Must-Be-Obeyed" along with the royal retinue of ladies in waiting seem unwilling to invest time for adaptation. Woe!, woe! is me!    Maybe easier just to bump exposure by a half stop and throw a little saturation in for good measure in somewhat dim display areas. OTOH, making the best print possible seems equally attractive, allows for future adaptation of the viewing conditions, and seems less arbitrary. If her royal court doesn't get it, what me worry? More wine! Anyway, appreciate the comments.