Re: ImageMaker tip 'Print More'

Hi Alan,

Maybe I wasn't clear. I guess my point is that in the old days in the darkroom I'd get my
negs, take a loop to them on the lightbox, eliminate the obvious flawed ones and then do
small prints, for me usually 8x10's, to examine the images further, get an idea of how to
'develop' the image with dodging and burning, etc. Now with a digital workflow we tend to
look at low resolution versions that our viewing software, whether Bridge, Aperture,
Lightroom or whatever has prepared. Now you can judge composition from the low res
version. But you can't judge composition in relation to sharpness from the downsampled
version you see on screeen, and so things like considering sharpness contrasts across the
image (sharp areas vs blurred areas) aren't possible and you need to zoom in. But when
you do you loose the overall perspective.

So doing a suitably sized print allows you to judge and compare all aspects
simultaneously and thus keep the whole image in mind at all time. I find that superior.

Hope that helps,

Wayne

--- In Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com">Nikon-D70yahoogroups.com, "Alan K. Martinez&quot; <akmartinez1...> wrote:
&gt;
> "The key to the value of prints lies in the resolution. With any camera
&gt; above around 2MP, if you view the full image on screen you will not be
> seeing the actual pixels, but rather a scaled down version. With higher
&gt; resolution cameras you may only be seeing a full image at 16 to 20% of real
>; size. It is not possible to judge anything like detail, sharpness or focus
&gt; from such a reduced size image. This means that you must zoom in to 100% and
> out again to assess an image, and in doing so there is a strong risk that
>; you will lose perspective over the whole image.&quot;.
>
>
>
> For me this statement can be a little mis-leading in a way that I might have
>; trouble explaining.
>
>
>
> Yes, you may be viewing an image at 16 to 20% of real size but to say it is
> not possible to judge anything like detail and sharpness and that you will
>; need to zoom in at 100% you won't be gaining anything of the same by
> printing it out either.
>
>
>
> And using a digital image judging composition, framing and cropping then you
> have to view at 16 to 20% unless you have a monitor of ridiculous size and
> resolution to view it at 100% (which is not impossible but not very cost
>; effective for the casual end user).
&gt;
>
>
> So there is a mix of two ways to judge an image from this statement,
> composition then detail. Composition you don't have to print it out and can
> use a screen, detail you will have to or you should use a monitor.
>
>
>
> Am I mis-understanding this?
&gt;
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com">Nikon-D70yahoogroups.com [mailto: Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com">Nikon-D70yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
&gt; Of avrahamreiss
> Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 1:24 PM
> To: Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com">Nikon-D70yahoogroups.com
&gt; Subject: [Nikon-D70] Re: ImageMaker tip 'Print More'
&gt;
>
>
> My G-d! What astoundingly refreshing and original advice: PRINT your
>; photographs! Why couldn't I have thought of that?
&gt;
>
>
> --- In Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com">Nikon-D70yahoogroups.com <mailto:Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com>; ,
> "Wayne J. Cosshall&quot; <dimi>
> wrote:
&gt; >
>; > HI All,
>; >
> > The latest ImageMaker tip is up:
> > http://www.dimagemaker.com/article.php?articleID=1369
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Wayne
&gt; >
> > Wayne J. Cosshall
> > Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker: http://www.dimagemaker.com/
> > Blog: http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/
> > Moderator Fine Art Photography Yahoo Group:
> > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fineartphoto/
> >
>;
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Messages in this topic (4) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

.

That clears this issue up a bit but now I have another point to consider.

With more and more people moving over to 10+ MP cameras like the D300, D40
and so on your example of a suitable sized picture is around 13x9 inches to
print so you can make a better decision on composition and sharpness and
contrast.

Printers that can handle 13x9 or more aren't cheap, and overall paper size
and ink can add up too. I'd like to make a suggestion that might help for
people who have and can afford it and that's to go with a dual monitor
setup, as large as possible on the size of the screen and as large as
possible on the resolution. You can use one screen that can display your
image completely to judge composition and the other to show a 1:1 resolution
to judge sharpness and detail, and as you edit on the one screen you can see
the full results on the other. This would save a tree, and ink. at least
this is my opinion. not sure if anyone cares or takes it into consideration.

Printing is nice and maybe people should print more but it might not be the
best solution for initial post processing..

From: Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com">Nikon-D70yahoogroups.com [mailto: Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com">Nikon-D70yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Wayne J. Cosshall
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 5:14 PM
To: Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com">Nikon-D70yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Nikon-D70] Re: ImageMaker tip 'Print More'

Hi Alan,

Maybe I wasn't clear. I guess my point is that in the old days in the
darkroom I'd get my
negs, take a loop to them on the lightbox, eliminate the obvious flawed ones
and then do
small prints, for me usually 8x10's, to examine the images further, get an
idea of how to
'develop' the image with dodging and burning, etc. Now with a digital
workflow we tend to
look at low resolution versions that our viewing software, whether Bridge,
Aperture,
Lightroom or whatever has prepared. Now you can judge composition from the
low res
version. But you can't judge composition in relation to sharpness from the
downsampled
version you see on screeen, and so things like considering sharpness
contrasts across the
image (sharp areas vs blurred areas) aren't possible and you need to zoom
in. But when
you do you loose the overall perspective.

So doing a suitably sized print allows you to judge and compare all aspects
simultaneously and thus keep the whole image in mind at all time. I find
that superior.

Hope that helps,

Wayne

--- In Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com">Nikon-D70yahoogroups.com <mailto:Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com>; ,
"Alan K. Martinez&quot; <akmartinez1...> wrote:
&gt;
> "The key to the value of prints lies in the resolution. With any camera
&gt; above around 2MP, if you view the full image on screen you will not be
> seeing the actual pixels, but rather a scaled down version. With higher
&gt; resolution cameras you may only be seeing a full image at 16 to 20% of
real
> size. It is not possible to judge anything like detail, sharpness or focus
&gt; from such a reduced size image. This means that you must zoom in to 100%
and
> out again to assess an image, and in doing so there is a strong risk that
>; you will lose perspective over the whole image.&quot;.
>
>
>
> For me this statement can be a little mis-leading in a way that I might
have
> trouble explaining.
>
>
>
> Yes, you may be viewing an image at 16 to 20% of real size but to say it
is
> not possible to judge anything like detail and sharpness and that you will
>; need to zoom in at 100% you won't be gaining anything of the same by
> printing it out either.
>
>
>
> And using a digital image judging composition, framing and cropping then
you
> have to view at 16 to 20% unless you have a monitor of ridiculous size and
> resolution to view it at 100% (which is not impossible but not very cost
>; effective for the casual end user).
&gt;
>
>
> So there is a mix of two ways to judge an image from this statement,
> composition then detail. Composition you don't have to print it out and
can
> use a screen, detail you will have to or you should use a monitor.
>
>
>
> Am I mis-understanding this?
&gt;
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com">Nikon-D70yahoogroups.com <mailto:Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com>;
[mailto: Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com">Nikon-D70yahoogroups.com <mailto:Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com>; ] On
Behalf
> Of avrahamreiss
> Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 1:24 PM
> To: Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com">Nikon-D70yahoogroups.com <mailto:Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com>;
> Subject: [Nikon-D70] Re: ImageMaker tip 'Print More'
&gt;
>
>
> My G-d! What astoundingly refreshing and original advice: PRINT your
>; photographs! Why couldn't I have thought of that?
&gt;
>
>
> --- In Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com">Nikon-D70yahoogroups.com <mailto:Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com>;
<mailto:Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> "Wayne J. Cosshall&quot; <dimi>
> wrote:
&gt; >
>; > HI All,
>; >
> > The latest ImageMaker tip is up:
> > http://www.dimagemaker.com/article.php?articleID=1369
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Wayne
&gt; >
> > Wayne J. Cosshall
> > Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker: http://www.dimagemaker.com/
> > Blog: http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/
> > Moderator Fine Art Photography Yahoo Group:
> > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/fineartphoto/
> >
>;
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Messages in this topic (5) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

.

Excellent, common sense advice, Wayne. As for printing, you took a few hits for that one, I guess, but I think it was something that needed to be said. We've come to think of photographs as images on a screen. We need to see what they look like on paper, because normally, they're not nearly as "contrasty,"; or as spectacular as they are on a monitor.

Keep up the good work.

Maybe you could write something about the elements of compositions. I don't mean the rule of thirds. More like the five different kinds of lines, shape, volume, etc.

Best to you,

John Sevigny

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Messages in this topic (7) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

.