Jump to content

emil_ems5

Members
  • Posts

    207
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. Hello, It’s been more than five years since I visited the forum last, with a lot of questions concerning tritone printing. After my book “Stockholm/Brussels” came out, I was quite satisfied with the state of affairs in printing. However, a new book is in preparation, in color this time. I recently heard about a new printing standard for my favorite Lumisilk coated sheet paper, called Fogra 51. Alas, unable to choose it from among the alternatives provided by Adobe in the Photoshop menu "Color settings”. Could someone more experienced walk me through how to install this new standard in all my versions of Photoshop, CS5, CS 2017 and CS 2021? Cheers Emil emsvision.com
  2. <p>I am working on a color managed system and am preparing, off and on, slide shows from my various travels. For this I am using iPhoto. I usually also convert those slideshows to movies with iPhoto, showing them with Apple Quicktime and exporting the movies to Youtube.<br> Whilst I have control over luminosity, saturation and contrast in my originals (due to my color managed system!), I find that the above mentioned conversion regularly results in movies, where the pictures are much darker and (partly due to that fact) appear more contrasty and saturated. I know from experience now, what type of curve adjustment to my (optimal) pictures have to be made before the conversion, to make their counterparts in the movies appear as close as possible to the originals.<br> 1 Does anyone in the Community have similar experiences?<br> 2 Could anyone point me to an easy way to prepare a script, through which I could apply my correction curve automatically to the numerous originals involved? I am a newcomer as concerns scripts, so please explain in simple terms!<br> Thankful for all suggestions!</p>
  3. <p>I am curious: what does Photo Ninja do that Lightroom cannot (or does worse)?</p>
  4. <p>Thank you all for your useful responses. The Gentleman in question was quite well off. So I think I will stick with the Bergheil, especially since he started taking pictures only in 1916, according to his son who still lives! I will mention, however, that he could have used similar models or makes, but that they all looked more or less like the Bergheil.</p>
  5. <p>Hi,<br> I am currently writing a book based on glass negatives taken between 1912 and 1918 with a 9x12 camera in Sweden. Unfortunately, I do not have any information about the camera having been used. However, the pictures are of good quality, with vertical lines kept parallel and pictures sharp overall. Since this is Europe, I gather that the Gentleman in question owned a Voigtländer folding camera. I would like to present one of those in the book but don't know whether a Bergheil or an AVUS wold be the most representative. Could someone knowledgeable about these cameras please tell me the difference between them, assuming that the camera was bought around 1912? The gentleman came from a middle class family that was reasonably well off.</p>
  6. <p>Edward,<br> With due respect to your processing methods, permit me to point out that one of the greats, Ansel Adams, subjected his negatives to all kinds of after processing, like dodging, burning in etc. He considered the negative to be the score and the processing to be the actual music making. You can get results more to your liking by processing even optimal negatives! Don't overlook this opportunity!</p>
  7. <p>OK, I tried the test proposed by John and Andrew, using absolute colorimetric and the profile for Baryta Photographique, when printing the file after conversion to CMYK. The result is: no difference to the earlier prints. </p> <p>I am forced to conclude that the HARD PROOF function in Photoshop is not working (at least not in co-operation with Epson 3880). Although I am able to soft proof the file in CMYK on screen, which shows a sizable decrease in black and contrast (w SIMULATE PAPER COLOR checked), I do not get a Hard Proof that looks like the soft proof. Rather, the printed HARD PROOF looks identical to the normal RGB print.</p> <p>I might add that the original file, although in the sRGB color space, is a black and white picture. It may be that the HARD PROOF is accurate as concerns color rendition, but it definitely fails as concerns to replicate how a b/w file would look in offset print. </p> <p>Andrew, have you ever tried to make a corresponding HARD PROOF with a b/w picture and gotten a result that resembles what you are seeing on the screen (w "Simulate Paper Color" checked)? It may be that there is a bug only in my system.</p>
  8. <p>John and Andrew,</p> <p>When printing the copy, converted to CMYK with absolute colorimetric, shall I use "Photoshop controls colors", as well as apply the printing profile for Baryta Photographique?</p>
  9. <p>Thank you John for your comments. Unfortunately, it is not that easy.</p> <p>To your first question: Of course I did!</p> <p>To your second question: You can't convert to the CMYK Profile with the black and paper simulations checked!</p>
  10. <p>I plan to print a Photo book with b/w pictures in offset, using CMYK printing.</p> <p>When preparing the pictures for print, I am proofing them in Photoshop, using the Fogra 39 Soft Proof Profile, taking care to have the "Simulate Paper Color" checked.<br> In addition, I would like to make Hard Proofs with my Epson 3880 printer, using the Hard Proof Facility of Photoshop CC. Photoshop provides for this in the Print Dialogue. </p> <p>In the Print Dialogue I first chose "Photoshop Manages Color"; then I enter, under PRINTER PROFILE. the profile for my paper (Baryta Photographique) "cifa_3880_baryta310_p_bk.icc". Finally i chose "Hard Proofing" and enter, under PROOF SETUP "Custom set-up". Therein i put "Coated Fogra 39"; "Relative Colorimetric"; and "Simulate Paper Color".</p> <p>When I am printing with this configuration, the result is, to my surprise, the same as if I had printed normally, choosing "Normal Printing" instead of "Hard Proofing". This is in clear contrast to the screen, where the soft proof shows a sizable difference in contrast to the unproofed picture. </p> <p>Is there a bug in Photoshp CC, preventing me from Hard proofing? Permit me to add that I have also checked SEND 16-BIT DATA, but that should not have any influence on the hard proofing.</p>
  11. <p>Sorry, my earlier comment was addressed to Alice, not Emily!</p>
  12. <p>Emily,<br> A pity that Ansel Adams is not among us any longer. He would have needed your advice not to mess around too much with the original, be it in the darkroom or in the lightroom! ;-) </p>
  13. <p>There are two ways to approach Photoshop as newcomer: the systematic way and the creative way. Which road you choose depends on your stamina and personal characteristics. I myself did not succeed in learning the trade through studying "Classroom in a book". It was too abstract for me and too remote from the real picture tasks I wanted to carry out.</p> <p>After various frustrating attempts to read and learn other books in the same vein, I discovered THE WAY of starting the process that worked for me. The solution was a book written by Scott Kelby "7-point system for Adobe Photoshop CS3". This genial book starts out with 20 "so so" pictures. For each of them, Scott shows us the steps he took to make them great (or at least acceptable). I spent a month (half-time) on this book, taking each step together with him, and thereafter was able to have a go at my own raw files and develop them with good spirit. </p> <p>The question posed by Emily is for instance answered by following the steps he took for picture (lesson) 18.</p> <p>Even if the book deals with an outdated version of Photoshop, this did not prevent me from following and understanding the various steps. The big difference was actually rather small; in my newer version of Photoshop I had no longer to confirm by pushing "Enter" when manipulating layers. In addition, you would have to go back to the RAW conversion of 2010, but you have that as a choice in ACR.</p>
×
×
  • Create New...