• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Perfect composition, auto exposure and print! What's wrong with that?

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Today's cameras are made so well, with great creative choices for exposure that perfect shots can be achieved and then printed by a modern inkjet or by a good photo lab to make a wonderful print.

But is that sufficient? Can the camera actually delver a file to the printer that's really just right for printing? What are your thoughts? How often can one carefully plan a picture, shoot and then print without global or local alterations.

Do you have examples where this works or where your changes were so important to make the picture successful?

Asher
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Hi, Asher,

Today's cameras are made so well, with great creative choices for exposure that perfect shots can be achieved and then printed by a modern inkjet or by a good photo lab to make a wonderful print.

But is that sufficient? Can the camera actually delver a file to the printer that's really just right for printing? What are your thoughts? How often can one carefully plan a picture, shoot and then print without global or local alterations.

Do you have examples where this works or where your changes were so important to make the picture successful?

I commend you for erecting this very important inquiry.

I'm not yet ready to post my own response, but I plan to do so shortly.

Best regards,

Doug
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Hi, Asher,

We have heard from a moderately-accomplished photographer here that people here might not be interested in the practices of a snapshooter, such as moi. But, in any case...

I normally shoot with metered exposure (often in P mode, as a matter of fact) with my Canon EOS 40D. I normally use a picture style with "all zeros" - that is, minimum sharpening in-camera, standard contrast and saturation. I normally use evaluative metering (with the center AF point preselected), usually with 0 exposure compensation. I normally take the JPEG output.

I usually find that the resulting image is too dark and has too little contrast for my liking.

Almost always, I lighten the image midtones by applying a (convex-upward) power curve (equivalent to applying a gamma precompensation curve on top of the existing one), often with a gamma of about 1.15. (That takes an input of R/G/B 128 and pushes it to 139.) I then almost always increase the contrast with a Z-curve (an S-curve with a long linear central section), often with slope (RGB basis) in the range from about 1.1 to 1.2.

Often then I will apply unsharp mask sharpening with a strength of 100% and a radius of 2 pixels.

I often use a macro that does all this (with my most popular parameters) as a routine matter.

If I generate a derivative image to be, for example, posted on Carla's blog, I will increase the mid tone lightness further (another piled-on gamma curve) and apply an even steeper Z-curve.

When I print, I usually do it on an Epson Stylus Photo R1900, through Qimage Studio. I use the latest manufacturer's printer profile for the medium involved. In most cases, I use a "print filter" that lightens the image slightly (and I must admit, I have no idea what curve it uses).

Best regards,

Doug
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Thanks Doug for your approach. It's possible that some of what you do might be done in camera, but still, all these changes are global. The question I have is how does one assign different strengths of importance or rank to the various separate elements of the composition?

Or is that you have settled all these with your choices of framing, lighting and its fall off and DOF?

Asher
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Hi, Asher,

Thanks Doug for your approach. It's possible that some of what you do might be done in camera, but still, all these changes are global.
Indeed. I hesitate, for example, to set a universal exposure compensation for fear of loss of highlights in some shots.

The question I have is how does one assign different strengths of importance or rank to the various separate elements of the composition?

Or is that you have settled all these with your choices of framing, lighting and its fall off and DOF?
I'm afraid that rarely does my shot planning deal in a thoughtful way with those considerations!

Best regards,

Doug
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Well, next time you take a picture of the steers near you in a meadow by a tree, think of that and you will surprise yourself how you can plan better with this idea of "rank" in your mind.

It might be that all you do is open up the aperture and shoot AV and then your key subject becomes so much more significant. Then in post processing you might blur or darken something else! Just a thought!

Asher
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Hi, Asher,

Well, next time you take a picture of the steers near you in a meadow by a tree, think of that and you will surprise yourself how you can plan better with this idea of "rank" in your mind.

It might be that all you do is open up the aperture and shoot AV and then your key subject becomes so much more significant. Then in post processing you might blur or darken something else! Just a thought!
Good approach.

Thanks.

Best regards,

Doug
 

Jerome Marot

Well-known member
Can the camera actually deliver a file to the printer that's really just right for printing?


Well... yes. If your subject is in the database that was considered by the camera makers.

The reason why cameras have become better at exposure is because they use more and more complex computers for doing so. But a computer can only do what it is told. Hence my answer.
 
Today's cameras are made so well, with great creative choices for exposure that perfect shots can be achieved and then printed by a modern inkjet or by a good photo lab to make a wonderful print.

But is that sufficient? Can the camera actually delver a file to the printer that's really just right for printing? What are your thoughts? How often can one carefully plan a picture, shoot and then print without global or local alterations.

Do you have examples where this works or where your changes were so important to make the picture successful?

Asher

Asher, it is possible to make reasonable photographs with none of the above; no automation, no printing, no files, no labs, and no alterations either global or local. The ultimate form is one that is very rarely seen: camera-original material. The following picture is a simple scan of the actual thing that lay in the back of the camera and absorbed the light that was a moment before part of the subject.

5910612888_551d2c5513_b.jpg

Old-time Photographer

Gelatin-silver photograph on Harman Direct Positive Paper 8x10 exposed in a Tachihara 810HD triple extension field view camera fitted with a Fujinon-W 300mm f5.6 lens.
The Harman Direct positive Paper was pre-flashed to reduce contrast and then given a camera exposure of 3 seconds at f5.6. Development was in Dektol 1+2, fix was in Hypam 1+4, and a 30 minute archival wash followed.
Lighting was from a skylight in a traditionally arranged photographic studio without electricity.
This photograph like all direct positive reflective images (Daguerreotypes, Ambrotypes, Tintypes for example) is mirror reversed with respect to the subject.
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Hi, Maris,

An excellent point and a lovely example.

How might the exposure time have been determined?

Izzat yourself?

Best regards,

Doug
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Wonderful Direct to Print Photography!

Asher, it is possible to make reasonable photographs with none of the above; no automation, no printing, no files, no labs, and no alterations either global or local. The ultimate form is one that is very rarely seen: camera-original material. The following picture is a simple scan of the actual thing that lay in the back of the camera and absorbed the light that was a moment before part of the subject.

5910612888_551d2c5513_b.jpg

Old-time Photographer

Gelatin-silver photograph on Harman Direct Positive Paper 8x10 exposed in a Tachihara 810HD triple extension field view camera fitted with a Fujinon-W 300mm f5.6 lens.
The Harman Direct positive Paper was pre-flashed to reduce contrast and then given a camera exposure of 3 seconds at f5.6. Development was in Dektol 1+2, fix was in Hypam 1+4, and a 30 minute archival wash followed.
Lighting was from a skylight in a traditionally arranged photographic studio without electricity.
This photograph like all direct positive reflective images (Daguerreotypes, Ambrotypes, Tintypes for example) is mirror reversed with respect to the subject.

This s wonderful and just what I wanted to see! If t's not gong to be this good, it needs local work in the darkroom, real or digital. Your picture here, Maris, is far more important to me than you might imagine!

I've been studying the work of Susana Kraus with her walk in both of a camera that looks like some 10,000 leagues under the sea, Jules Verne contraption!


Screen shot Susana Kraus.jpg


Susana Kraus: Original Life-Size Portraits on Harman Direct Print Paper
From the Photographer's website, used for Editorial Purposes, © Susana Kraus



So now I can ask you, instead of Susana, about the paper and more!

  1. The Harman Direct Positive Paper I've been planning to use but thought it had too much contrast as used by Susana Kraus for her fantastic Imago walk in camera. I'm so impressed by her work but was concerned that the contrast was too high and there's no detail in the blacks.


  2. The pre-flashng technique I saw first with my late father in law, a fine photographer. He simply pre-exposed the paper or film under and enlarger! Per Ellström, a carbon transfer, platinum and silver gelatin B&W photographer does it, (to reduce the high contrast of a landscape scene), using a big grey card in front of the lens. So what exactly do you do?


  3. I'd like to have a prism to switch the mage left to right as it's noticeable for pictures of a violinist as they get to play on the wrong side! Have you tried that? Can the prism be put n front of the lens or should t really go between the front and rear elements where one would have the shutter?
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Hi, Asher,

I'd like to have a prism to switch the mage left to right as it's noticeable for pictures of a violinist as they get to play on the wrong side! Have you tried that? Can the prism be put n front of the lens or should t really go between the front and rear elements where one would have the shutter?

Shooting by way of a small mirror in front of the lens should be just fine.

There's no optical nor geometric reason to think in terms of between-the-lens.

It would have to be a Dove prism or some such to go inside the lens and that would almost certainly be too long to fit.

Best regards,

Doug
 
Hi, Maris,

An excellent point and a lovely example.

How might the exposure time have been determined?

Izzat yourself?

Best regards,

Doug

Doug, there is very little picture generating technology involved in "Old-time Photographer" but there is a lot of sneaky subject management and studio wrangling hidden in the back story. Here are some notes:

The subject is me in costume. Because Harman Direct Positive is a very short scale material I dressed in grey to avoid empty shadows and hard highlights. Direct Positive is severely orthochromatic so coloured clothing can deliver bad tonal response surprises. Grey garb dodges the problem. The tatty T-shirt with the white pattern came out well. I guess the result is "shabby chic" or the next level down from that.

I ran out of money during the sky-light studio built and the ceiling height is a bit low. Result: heads get more light than feet. The black beret prevents "chrome dome" glare. The "granny spectacles" are a contrivance to put metallic glints near the eyes. The mid-grey studio backdrop is on the back wall but the other one, a brilliant white, carpets the studio floor to kick light up and keep luminance ratios under some control.

The main props, camera and tripod, were chosen for the bright metal-work accents. These blow out to featureless white but the areas are small, the eye accepts them, and they liven up the picture.

Exposure was determined by trial and error starting at an assumption of EI = 6. I would make an exposure, walk to the darkroom, and process immediately. Development goes to completion in a couple of minutes so I know what adjustments to make for the next shot.

Experiments continue.
 
This s wonderful and just what I wanted to see! If t's not gong to be this good, it needs local work in the darkroom, real or digital. Your picture here, Maris, is far more important to me than you might imagine!

[*]The pre-flashng technique I saw first with my late father in law, a fine photographer. He simply pre-exposed the paper or film under and enlarger! Per Ellström, a carbon transfer, platinum and silver gelatin B&W photographer does it, (to reduce the high contrast of a landscape scene), using a big grey card in front of the lens. So what exactly do you do?

Asher, you are right when you suspect pre-flashing is the key to taming this recalcitrant material.

I use one of the 4x5 enlargers set to 950mm high, 150mm lens at f16, 150 watt bulb in the lamphouse and 0.8 seconds set on the timer. Your set-up will surely vary from this but trial and error and persistence always win. After the paper is loaded into the 8x10 holders (dim red safelight) the holder is centred under the "pre-flash" enlarger, the dark-slide pulled, and the 0.8 second blink is given. With the dark-slide back in, the holder is carried up into the studio for trial exposure in the camera.

Pre-flash is a critical quantity. I find results at 0.7 seconds and 0.9 seconds are solidly different from 0.8 seconds. A confounding factor is that a change in pre-flash seems to cause a change in the the effective speed of Direct Positive. The only way through this nest of variables is continued experiment. My first 50 sheets of this expensive material went on exposure and pre-flash tests! Exposure is critical. Even +/- 1/3 stop makes an obvious difference. I've had all my shutters electronically timed (to the third decimal place) and all lens apertures calibrated to avoid bad surprises.

A nasty consequence of pre-flashing is the loss of a proper black tone. The picture edge in "Old-time Photographer" didn't get any pre-flash and it shows a good black but nothing in the picture area actually matches it. That's the trade-off: control contrast but kill black. A partial compensation comes from using fresh, strong paper developer. I actually warm the Dektol 1+2 to get maximum activity. Development goes to completion in about two minutes. Direct Positive is demanding of fixer. I use fresh Hypam 1+4 warmed a bit for 5 minutes.

The orthochromatic response of Direct Positive delivers vile (harsh, ugly, gritty) skin tones but I find that a 2 stop orange filter improves things a lot. The downside is that the effective EI is down to approximately 1.5.

Mysteries still unexplored include the effect of illuminants of different colour temperatures. I suspect daylight is not like flash is not like hot tungsten. And I haven't tried to work out the reciprocity characteristics of Direct Positive. It may be that Direct Positive actually gets "faster" with extended exposure times. I just don't know.

Asher, if you are going to take on the challenge of Harman Direct Positive Paper I sure wish you luck.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Maris,

You've done a brillant job of making the "set" work for you. Also, you have a cooperative model! All your planning paid off and the result is simply wonderful.

Exposure was determined by trial and error starting at an assumption of EI = 6. I would make an exposure, walk to the darkroom, and process immediately. Development goes to completion in a couple of minutes so I know what adjustments to make for the next shot.

Experiments continue.


Maris,

I think that Susana has the same lights in her booth all the time and the paper goes into a roll feed processor and is out in minutes. I wonder what the temp of the light is? Does she use filters?

From what she shows, this looks like a repeatable process but we don't know her success rate.

Of course, but for the fact that you've never shown us color, I'd ask about your use of lfochrome too, as that's also in my plan!

Asher
 

Lee Tracy

New member
Asher, it is possible to make reasonable photographs with none of the above; no automation, no printing, no files, no labs, and no alterations either global or local. The ultimate form is one that is very rarely seen: camera-original material. The following picture is a simple scan of the actual thing that lay in the back of the camera and absorbed the light that was a moment before part of the subject.

5910612888_551d2c5513_b.jpg

Old-time Photographer

Gelatin-silver photograph on Harman Direct Positive Paper 8x10 exposed in a Tachihara 810HD triple extension field view camera fitted with a Fujinon-W 300mm f5.6 lens.
The Harman Direct positive Paper was pre-flashed to reduce contrast and then given a camera exposure of 3 seconds at f5.6. Development was in Dektol 1+2, fix was in Hypam 1+4, and a 30 minute archival wash followed.
Lighting was from a skylight in a traditionally arranged photographic studio without electricity.
This photograph like all direct positive reflective images (Daguerreotypes, Ambrotypes, Tintypes for example) is mirror reversed with respect to the subject.

Wow that is an amazing image. THAT is the kind of image I want to learn how to take. Perhaps not exactly like that with that camera equipment but in 'spirit' - perfectly framed and composed, lighting, exposure etc just spot on.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Wow that is an amazing image. THAT is the kind of image I want to learn how to take. Perhaps not exactly like that with that camera equipment but in 'spirit' - perfectly framed and composed, lighting, exposure etc just spot on.

Well then, Tracy,

While Maris varied pre-flashing and exposure, in the next "Abandoned House", where the lighting is tough, you can simply bracket exposure on your Nikon!

?

Asher
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
And then HDR the results I suppose?

Actually, I never do that. Usually one of the pictures suits me perfectly!

I have not found HDR to be useful for me, but not because I don't respect it's utility, but because I am turned off by its artificiality and attempt to go above and beyond human experience as some sort of praiseworthy "fashion" like thigh-high boots, LOL!

Still, in patient and disciplined hands, SDR - HDR is simply magical and so effective.

The challenge is to cover with just one shot, a scene that's poorly lit or has very bright and dark areas. One just needs an exposure that works for the your own private purpose. It's only you yourself that has to be pleased. So this is what I do outside of the studio, in the street, for landscapes or at social events:

I set the camera to bracketed exposure. in a sequence of a few shots. With one press of the shutter, 3 pictures are taken. I keep just the best one!

In my studio, my lighting is perfect and I shoot one picture and it's done! The jpgs can be printed directly out of the camera if I so wished and would be impressive. However, that's only when everything is set right and planned, as Maris Rusis does, from the beginning!

Note that for non-studio photography, I almost never use on camera flash, just bracket the exposure.

Asher
 

Jerome Marot

Well-known member
Asher, it is possible to make reasonable photographs with none of the above; no automation, no printing, no files, no labs, and no alterations either global or local. The ultimate form is one that is very rarely seen: camera-original material. The following picture is a simple scan of the actual thing that lay in the back of the camera and absorbed the light that was a moment before part of the subject.

5910612888_551d2c5513_b.jpg

Old-time Photographer

Except that the later discussion showed that you altered the reality by pre-flashing the paper and choosing a particular developper for compensation of the lighter black level.

It is a great picture and direct photographs are certainly impressive, but they are not "unaltered". You are simply using a particular choice of paper, pre-flash and chemistry for your alterations instead of using a contrast curve in computer.

Not so long ago, directors chose film stock and processing in function of the colour rendering they wanted for feature movies, sometimes on a scene by scene basis. Nowadays, they do the same in software. Yesterday they did it by chemical means, nowadays they do it with computers and the purpose is the same: chose colours which correspond to the mood of the scene.
 
Top