Forum Replies Created
AuthorTopic: Members Read 0 Times
Film, I Just Don’t Get Iton: September 15, 2023 at 4:03 pm
I think film is trending strongly with a younger generation that never used film before. So, for them, it’s undoubtedly a “new” way to create an image that happens to be fun, and it’s a way to distinguish themselves from the instagram masses. That said, I grew up in the same era as Kevin, so for me, starting to use film again is about trying to retrace my photographic journey, a look back if you will in order to breath some new life into my current interests in photography. No, I’m not abandoning digital imaging. It’s just too damn powerful a tool to walk away from, but taking some time out to work with film again is helping me to reconnect with what photography meant to me in the first place.
FWIW, I’m still trying to decide whether the term “photograph” even has any validity today over what I’d otherwise describe more accurately as “photo illustration”. I think it does, but I can’t explain why. Back when I started taking photography seriously in the mid 1960s, everyone had a fundamental perception about what a photograph was. Sure, compositing and “fake” photographs have existed since the dawn of photography, but the overwhelming majority of photographs prior to Photoshop represented a uniquely singular exposure…a single moment in time, what Henri Cartier-Bresson spoke of as “the decisive moment”. Today, with computational photography effortlessly combining multiple exposures right on our smartphones to overcome traditional process limitations plus post-processing algorithms like “sky replacement” filters, AI generative fill, etc., creating millions of heavily manipulated images every day, what looks like a photograph nowadays often does not bear any spatial reality to an original scene. Not knocking this rapid and profound change in image creation for those who find elaborate image manipulation aesthetically and/or technically pleasing, but can we still call the final image a photograph?
Re: Color Science With Jeff and DanoReply #1 on: February 21, 2022 at 10:21 pm
- This reply was modified 2 months, 3 weeks ago by Mark McCormick-Goodhart.
Nice job guys! It’s hard to introduce folks to this subject matter, so kudos to you for a really well crafted discussion of the color science/gamut volume subject, but (there’s always a but, right?) it’s important for photographers and printmakers to understand photographic color and tone reproduction beyond the principles of color spaces and gamut volumes. I encourage you to consider creating a sequel which discusses the anatomy of the tone reproduction curve 🙂
Re: Ink Jet Paper Surfaces and How Paper is Made – PXL Print SeriesReply #2 on: January 25, 2022 at 11:54 am
- This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by Mark McCormick-Goodhart.
Alan, A lot of people feel the same way. Photographers concerned about archival issues especially those that are doing exhibits, papers without OBAs may be important.
“A picture is worth a thousand words” on this subject. https://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/lilis-redux/
I suspect the vast majority of photographers still aren’t fully aware of OBA/TiO2 issues, and for many that do print or have prints made, the belief that the paper simply reverts to its “natural” color as the OBAs fade is still prevalent. There are essentially no OBA-free RC papers on the market today, but plenty of great OBA-free options with fine art media. However, preparing an image to look its best on an OBA-free paper requires a somewhat different “edit for print” than printing on a cooler white OBA-fluorescing paper. Perhaps worth covering in the upcoming PhotoPXL print series :-).
Re: Ink Jet Paper Surfaces and How Paper is Made – PXL Print SeriesReply #3 on: January 6, 2022 at 2:04 pm
- This reply was modified 1 year, 10 months ago by Mark McCormick-Goodhart.
If indeed there are “minimal OBAs”, those OBAs are so minimal that my i1Pro 3 spectro was incapable of picking them up.
Trace levels of OBA do sometimes end up in production lots, often as a consequence in the paper making step where the tailings of prior production run get tossed back into the pulping slurry of the next production run designated to be OBA-free. Those trace levels don’t really pose a quality problem and color measurements won’t pick them up. Sometimes you can detect them with a UV led as little flecks of fluorescence in the paper base, but again, not a quality control issue to be concerned about which is why some paper mills elect to re-pulp some of the scrap from an earlier production run. Also, I see this trace contamination at at a higher level more often with canvas and linen making, not so much with paper making. Again, not really a problem for final product quality.
“Minimal levels of OBA” really deserves to be noted when the OBA content is indeed intended to visually tweak the final media color, even if only by a very small but nevertheless measurable and visually detectable amount. The loss of that “minimal” fluorescence over time isn’t too serious unless the product also contains TiO2, and then these combined components contribute to further yellowing when the print gets taken off display and placed in dark storage. And the only way to know for sure how serious the yellowing will be is to conduct a proper light fade/dark storage test. Or, as a pragmatic approach if you are a printmaker, avoid this OBA/TiO2 induced media yellowing conundrum altogether by seeking out truly OBA-free media. Consumers can’t easily test for the presence of TiO2, but we can easily check for OBA content using UV leds. Thus, the practical printmaker’s approach to best practices for “archival” printing is simply to learn to print on slightly warmer OBA-free papers and appreciate the aesthetics of the wide variety of truly OBA-free media that are available today.Re: Ink Jet Paper Surfaces and How Paper is Made – PXL Print SeriesReply #4 on: January 6, 2022 at 11:19 am
Glad to hear about your findings, Mark. Great if printmakers will eventually be able to choose more OBA-free fine art media in the “Baryta” category. That said, IMHO Epson still needs to clarify its OBA-free messaging for the new Baryta II product. Please see the specifications listed for it here: https://epson.com/For-Work/Paper/Pro-Imaging/Legacy-Baryta-II/m/S450095 A close look at the claimed specs on this web page states “minimal OBAs” not “OBA-free”, thus contradicting what one reads about the product at https://epson.com/pro-photo-legacy-papers.
- This reply was modified 1 year, 11 months ago by Mark McCormick-Goodhart.