August 2004
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31        
Jul   Sep

Previous / Next


E-MAIL


 3/3/05
 3/3/05
 3/3/05
 3/2/05
 3/2/05
 3/1/05
 3/1/05
 3/1/05
 3/1/05
 2/28/05
 2/28/05
 2/28/05
 2/28/05
 2/27/05
 2/27/05
 2/27/05
 2/27/05
 2/26/05
 2/26/05
 2/25/05
 2/25/05


Black and White Photography, New York: Tuesday, August 17, 2004


Motorcycle

One other discovery with the D300: Shooting with the parameter set to Adobe RGB gives me colors and histograms that need very little tweaking. Colors are more subdued and much closer to what I saw.

- - -

On the matting front, I spent a lot of time trying to figure out the best size for a 7 x 10.5 print, which is about the largest I can do on the 7960 right now.  11 x 14 is too small; 16 x 20 a touch too large, though a close call.  Anything in-between is not really a standard sized frame.  You'd be surprised how big a difference the presentation makes.  I've been printing the Chrysler Building shot (my first serious masking to darken up the sky) - at various sizes - and I still don't know where this is going to end up.  Looking back over the past six weeks - I think I've produced an amazing amount of good stuff.  I can't expect to continue at that pace - but I'll ride with it while it lasts.

- - -

Everything is set now for a nice big printing adventure.  I've decided on 7 x 10.5 on 16 x 20 mat.  Looks good.  Now, how much to charge.  My inclination is to do them in small editions of 50 each.  In other words, pretty damned limited.  So, if I do that, how much to charge?  Since the people who have bought my prints in the past seem to be about half-collector, half- just regular civilians - I'm not sure.  Suggestions for pricing are welcome since this is new territory for me.  They can't be too expensive if they are to sell on the web.  Why make them limited at all?  Not sure.  Well, I've been through this internal debate a million times already.  I notice that the limited editions (at least in the darkroom world) sell better than the "open" editions.  That's just an empirical observation.

5:40:14 PM    

I'm spending most of the day refining my Photoshop skills - esp. with masking, which I've used, but neve delved into very deeply.  Masking with color prints, especially with slide-based film - is nothing new; but it is one of those somewhat arcane and labor-intensive skills from the old days.  There are a number of color prints where I want more control over the tone or the saturation in some part of the print - hence the interest.   The book: Adobe Photoshop for Photographers (Martin Evening) has been very helpful.

Certainly, there is a misconception that a digital photograph is just: press a button and churn the thing out.  Maybe, towards the end of the process.  But actually, the digital process is not that different from darkroom printing.  There are lots of experiments; lots of tests; lots of wasted paper and wasted ink.  In fact, the cost of producing that first print that you are happy, or at least content with - is greater for a digital print than for a darkroom print, because of the cost of ink.

And you know what - even when you arrive at a print that you are satisfied with - your skills and your ideas change over time, so you may look at a digital print a year later and realize that you could have done such and such to improve it.  And so you do.  The biggest difference, for me, is the type of labor involved.  Darkroom printing is simply more physical and although you may take careful notes about what you did - it is harder to reproduce a darkroom print, especially if there's been some manipulation.

But as I say, even if you are happy one day with your digital print, the next day you may decide to make some improvements, which as anyone knows may make the print better, or may make it worse.

11:42:46 AM    


Click here to visit the Radio UserLand website. © Copyright 2005 Dave Beckerman.
Last update: 3/3/2005; 12:45:41 PM. Click to see xml version of photo blog