Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Glutton for punishment  (Read 11550 times)

JerryReed

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 277
  • jerry@jerryreed.net
    • http://jerryreed.net
Glutton for punishment
« on: April 05, 2007, 07:02:56 am »

I am a giclee maker whose day to day experience is lighting fine art, usually work on canvas, which leads to my question.  Some artists as part of their technique use brush stokes that deposit paint in the minute valleys between the warp and woof of the canvas threads, but remarkably small amounts of the paint on the raised threads where one thread crosses over another.  Examined closely, these lightly painted "points" appear as dots of near canvas white.  Artists who are quite pleased with this effect in the original pieces, fine my representation of this phenomenom in my giclee undesirable.

At this writing, I have worked out a time consuming, but somewhat satisfactory remedy, but no good business basis to deal with the artists who exhibit this contradictory acceptance.  It is as if I am to be responsible for correcting, at my expense, a near perfect rendering of their original work.

Perhaps, Lens Babies instead of Leica Macro lenses (tension releaving humor).  Would any readers have experiences along these lines, or have resources toward which they might be willing to direct me...please?  I am awaiting the market introduction of a Sinar marketed camera, with which I hope to offer my customers even finer work, perhaps I am just a glutton for punishment.

Thanks,

Jerry Reed
Logged

juicy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 254
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #1 on: April 05, 2007, 05:49:52 pm »

Hi
My somewhat limited experience on art reproduction has shown that opinions vary wildly about what's good and bad way of rendering the original. This comes mainly from different expectations on behalf of the client (museum, gallery, artist, collector). Also the endproduct (artbook, catalog, postcard, giclee, conservation report document, etc) has different emphasis on the details and what is shown or not shown in the picture.
 According to my experiences the larger museums want accuracy. This is sometimes difficult to achieve as some pigments for example cannot easily be reproduced in printing press or the sensor (there's a white paper on this topic on the Betterlight website). Also what is accuracy when comparing the mirrorsheen surface of a varnished oil painting and an aquarelle? Traditionally all reflections etc have been avoided (to see the "picture behind the painting") but this does not mediate very much information about certain piece of art as a 3D-object. Conservators on the other hand often need photos made in very harsh sidelight showing both the brushstrokes and any deformations. Anyway in these cases seeing the canvas and if possible the molecular structure of it is of benefit. Someone will eventually ask if it's ok to enlarge the artists signature to a bilboard-size print when the file depicting the whole 5 meter wide painting is 5 MB jpg.  
 Smaller clients and many presshouses want the paintings to look "good" in print. They don't care about contrast or accurate color rendering as long as the printed image is "delicious" enough to lure more visitors to that particular museum or as long as the book sells. This is also difficult but more so on the "moral"-side. What about a collection of aquarelles and lithographic prints that's mostly ruined because of non-archival matting and the paper has gone the color of second flush Darjeeling tea? Should it be reproduced as such or should the PS do the bleaching? Client decides.
 Your referred clients seem to belong to the latter group.  Sometimes you may be able to educate them (for this you will need to be able to compare the reproduction to the original in controlled D50 lighting so that the client is able to see both color and the structure in both) but mostly it's "their way or you are a bad photographer". So the answer to your question is dependent on what kind of clients you mostly deal with, what are the needed reproduction sizes and what's the competition. Paintings have traditionally been photographed on large format film or scanning backs to have enough detail and in that sense you will never have too much information in a file. Some clients will really apreciate the improved quality of your output. Will you be able to charge more or get more clients that way? Hopefully. For the artists who prefer to have their painting technique made invisible you may still have to use PS brush in darken-mode (or some other technique) to wipe the original under your brushstrokes! Or tell them to hire a "good photographer"...  

Regards,
J
Logged

Craig Murphy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 312
    • http://www.murphyphotography.com
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #2 on: April 08, 2007, 12:26:55 pm »

I don't have an answer but do try myself to reproduce with my 9800 a few different artists work on canvas as accurately as I can. Have not been all that succesful.  As of right now I make sure they know ahead of time that its not going to look exactly like the original.

I always thought this was a good link and would love to know how they are accomplishing their repro's.

http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/Success...ailType=fineart
Logged
CMurph

JerryReed

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 277
  • jerry@jerryreed.net
    • http://jerryreed.net
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #3 on: April 08, 2007, 02:21:58 pm »

Thank you both for taking time to answer my questions and to offer suggestions, including how to counsel the client.  I am looking to re-equip my camera room with more color accurate lighting and a new camera back, so during that process I hope to better understand the little gremilins that slip into the workflow and ask them to leave.

Happy Easter,

Jerry
Logged

Craig Murphy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 312
    • http://www.murphyphotography.com
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #4 on: April 09, 2007, 10:18:06 am »

How are you shooting the art?  I am using my Fuji S3 with two parabolics with polarizing filters on them and then also one on the lens.  I find that even including a Macbeth color checker in the scene is not enough to acurately reproduce colors.  I have also done a custom shot with the Chromaholic camera profiler.  Have you seen that?
http://www.fors.net/chromoholics/download/    Can't say for sure if it helped all that much.
Logged
CMurph

JerryReed

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 277
  • jerry@jerryreed.net
    • http://jerryreed.net
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #5 on: April 09, 2007, 04:49:35 pm »

Craig:

Thanks for your reference, I had seen it in the new lightroom book from Matt Kloskowski at NAPP.  I had not looked up the reference yet.  I do use the GT Camera profiler with the GT MB color checker SG, I cannot say that color is improved over current techniques.  I place a color checker eye dropper in each of the gray squares, then white balance on the gray square next to the white square.  Oh, I forgot to say that first I create a one inch by 9.5 inch crop of just the gray squares of the GT chart.  Then I bring the mid-point up to 128 percents RGB.  Next I examine each of the gray squares to make them equal RGB values or as near as I can.

That is my technique.  I just received today new lights from BRON, and will see if that provides more reliable color.

Good luck,


Jerry
Logged

rainer_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1194
    • http://www.tangential.de
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #6 on: April 09, 2007, 06:29:23 pm »

i would strongly recommend a multi shot back as the sinar 54h, which is quite affortable also.
the differemnce to 1 shot backs is for that kind of work incredible big.
Logged
rainer viertlböck
architecture photograp

fpoole

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 57
    • http://www.frankpoole.com
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #7 on: April 09, 2007, 11:21:58 pm »

Jerry,

Rainier is 100% correct about a multishot back like the Sinar 54H. You will see a huge difference. For what you are trying to achieve there is nothing as good except maybe a scan back.  Captureshop software makes the back very easy to profile.
You absolutely need to demo any back.  I don't know where you are located but the sinar reps in the U.S. are pretty good about demos.  

As far as your original question I think you need to build into your fee the extra time you spend "retouching".  

One thought I just had - "lightly painted "points" appear as dots of near canvas white".  This painterly effect may be exaggerated by the kind and amount of sharpening you are doing - just enough local contrast boost to be objectionable to the artist.  I don't know what kind of camera you are using but if it's a dslr , it's the wrong tool.

Best,
Frank Poole

JerryReed

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 277
  • jerry@jerryreed.net
    • http://jerryreed.net
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #8 on: April 10, 2007, 03:06:53 am »

I was at my Connecticut Sinar Dealer yesterday, where he demonstrated both the eMotion and eVolution backs.  With the eMotion 75 I did not see any difference between that and the 54H, which is a smaller sensor.  I have some time yet to decide.  I am aiming toward making the upgrade from the Canon 1 Ds Mark II when the Hy6 is available, expected this year.  By that point in time, I should have shaken out some of the wrinkles in my workflow and business practices.

I agree the canvas smoothing, Photoshop work will need to be extra charge.  I think that I am also going to suggest that the artist add additional gesso before painting to create a smoother surface if that is truely what is desired.  Most of my artists buy prestretched canvas, that has been lightly gessoed and made ready for painting.

Thank you for your excellent advice,

Jerry Reed
Logged

rainer_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1194
    • http://www.tangential.de
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #9 on: April 10, 2007, 07:11:42 am »

the 54h reaches in 4shot mode similar resolution than the e75 ( although just 22mp contra 33, but no bayer algorythm result in increased sharpness impression ), further far less moirees and cleaner colors, if you shoot very fine structures or textils.
in 16shot mode the 54h surpass resolutionwise everything i ever saw.
very good 2.hand offers of the 54h are at the sinar forum at the moment.
Logged
rainer viertlböck
architecture photograp

JerryReed

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 277
  • jerry@jerryreed.net
    • http://jerryreed.net
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #10 on: April 10, 2007, 07:16:43 am »

Rainer:

Where is the SINAR forum please?  I am also considering the 54, but I was hoping to use the medium format camera out of doors where having an LCD screen would be hard to live without.  I am looking to buy a medium format body to use until the Hy6 is available, and am looking at the Mamiya 645 AFD, what do you advise, remembering that it needs to be re-sold when the Hy6 becomes reality.

Jerry
Logged

BJNY

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1112
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #11 on: April 10, 2007, 07:54:16 am »

Quote
I was at my Connecticut Sinar Dealer yesterday, where he demonstrated both the eMotion and eVolution backs.

I didn't realize the eVolution75 is available already.  What is your impression of it?
Logged
Guillermo

rainer_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1194
    • http://www.tangential.de
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #12 on: April 10, 2007, 07:57:35 am »

the forum is here:
http://www.sinar.ch/site/index__gast-e-147...s-rand-836.html

you have to register to receive your login data, than appears theforum, where also is offered 2.hand gear.

i just bought several months ago a contax system, which works very good together with the emotion backs, and also with the 54h.
the contax mirror needs some additional damping for 16shot mode,- but its easily done ).  it cannot remain open for 4 or 16 shots, as on a hassy. dont know if  the mamiya knows to do that.
so far the contax and its lenses are just perfect...... and it can be sold very good, although i hardly doubt that you would sell it after you have used it a while....

your website  is great...
Logged
rainer viertlböck
architecture photograp

fpoole

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 57
    • http://www.frankpoole.com
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #13 on: April 10, 2007, 09:51:16 am »

Jerry,

I didn't know you were in CT.  Michael Ulsaker is one of the most Sinar - knowledgeable people around and a good guy.  Listen to his recommendations.

Again I agree 100% with  Ranier about the Contax 645 system.  It is a great platform for Sinarback.
However if you are shooting mostly flat artwork I would recommend a Sinar P3 and Sinar digital lenses. And then get an adapter for Contax or Mamiya.  Interchangable adapters is a strong reason to go with Sinar.  But...choose the tool for the kind of work you do.
For the work you are doing the 54H in multishot mode is the best you can get right now. I am surprised you couldn't see the difference compared to single shot back.  

Best,
Frank Poole

ynp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 339
    • http://
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #14 on: April 10, 2007, 11:57:23 am »

Quote
Craig:

 I do use the GT Camera profiler with the GT MB color checker SG, I cannot say that color is improved over current techniques.  I place a color checker eye dropper in each of the gray squares, then white balance on the gray square next to the white square.  Oh, I forgot to say that first I create a one inch by 9.5 inch crop of just the gray squares of the GT chart.  Then I bring the mid-point up to 128 percents RGB.  Next I examine each of the gray squares to make them equal RGB values or as near as I can.

Jerry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111553\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Jerry,

Thank you for your very solid advice. I am no pro, but I shoot flat artwork on a regular basis with my Alpa and the Digitars. I use Brumbaer Tools for DNG conversion for my eMotion 22. The software includs a profiling Module ( to shoot a Gretag 24 ColorChecker). I find the colors good enough for my purposes. So my question: Will a specialized Camera Profiler add something to the quality of my files?
Thank you,
Yevgeny
Logged

Cfranson

  • Guest
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #15 on: April 10, 2007, 04:21:39 pm »

Quote
I didn't realize the eVolution75 is available already.
It isn't. Jerry saw the eMotion and the Sinarback 54H. We are still awaiting the eVolution 75.
Logged

JerryReed

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 277
  • jerry@jerryreed.net
    • http://jerryreed.net
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #16 on: April 10, 2007, 05:48:33 pm »

Yevgeny :

Honestly, I cannot say that I have made any observable difference using the camera profiles.

Jerry
Logged

rainer_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1194
    • http://www.tangential.de
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #17 on: April 10, 2007, 07:51:25 pm »

Yevgeny:
if you make in the brumbaer dng konverter with the emotion backs your own profiles with the gretag tables ( i prefere the 24 ) you will see huge differences between them, a.e. if you take two profiles in shadow for 6500k and in sun for 5500 k.
the kelvin setting in the brumbaer tool is than very important for the right interpretation in lightroom or acr.
which profiles you will like more will depend on your taste, but the differences are big.
Logged
rainer viertlböck
architecture photograp

thsinar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2066
    • http://www.sinarcameras.com
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #18 on: April 11, 2007, 10:19:39 am »

Dear Bill,

the eVolution 75 H hasn't start shipping yet!

Jerry has probably been demonstrated the eMotion 75 (single shot with 33 MPx), or then the SB 54 H.

The eMotion 75 with its 33 MPx sensor is of course generating beautiful files, but as Rainer has mentioned it: nothing surpasses a multishot (4 or 16) for certain subjects like the one described by Jerry. Even the 54 H with its 22 MPx sensor (with the right digital lenses) will surpass the quality of the 33 MPx single shot when used in 4-shot mode: a multishot simply generates true-color files, without any interpolation. And believe me, in some cases an interpolation algorythm is still a guess work.
When you go to the 16-shot mode you will be blown away by the details, the tonalities, the shades and the accuracy of the color shades: your 22 MPx sensor becomes a sensor with 88 MPx resolution.

I would definitively recommend a 22 MPx multishot over any single shot in this case.

Best regards,
Thierry



Quote
I didn't realize the eVolution75 is available already.  What is your impression of it?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111680\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Thierry Hagenauer
thasia_cn@yahoo.com

rainer_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1194
    • http://www.tangential.de
Glutton for punishment
« Reply #19 on: April 11, 2007, 11:02:36 am »

i just shot a huge work with the 54h in 16 shot mode, using hassy 100 and contax 80 and 120mm lenses together with my 645 body. have been 90 quilts, every reproduced with one shot of the entire quilt and also detatis as signatures and backsides.
100% exact color and tonalty reproduction was demanded, the proofs have been compared side by side with the originals, the computer pp work was done directly in the studio having the original quilts available.
client is excited by the final quality in print.
the 16 shot back was doing an amazingly good job... ( maybe together with me i hope ).

even in website size the colors have so good quality..... ......
( click on the images to enlarge them )
http://www.tangential.de/tangential-de/_ht...uilts/index.htm

http://www.die-neue-sammlung.de/z/muenchen..._07/hj00_en.htm
« Last Edit: April 11, 2007, 11:05:15 am by rehnniar »
Logged
rainer viertlböck
architecture photograp
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up