discarded piano

Great subject - but the lack of sharpness ruins it for me personally.

Thank you all for your comments so far. I'll jump in just to say that

is was sharp enough to be acepted as cover art for a journal. They

asked me to send the original slide in so they could drum scan it per

their usual practise. I told them I thought my 2700 dpi scan looked

OK and that I was reluctant to part with my only copy. I sent them a

CD and they said it was acceptable.

 

But that's isn't to say this scrint is as sharp as it could be. it's

one of the first I uploaded last summer just after joining and it

could be that no USM was applied at all. I think the levels could be

applied better as well, so I'll try to get a better scan up as soon as

possible.

 

It's my undertanding that it is OK, maybe even preferred, to actually

replace the mediocre scan with a better one, so unless there is a hue

and cry - and assuming I can get the new scan to actually replace the

old one - that's what I'll do.

 

Thanks again. Have at it. . .

My first and persistent impression is that the levels were way off, unless a sort of washy redness was the idea. I think the attached is probably more realistic. Dunno if thats a fault with the photo itself or just a scanning artefact.

The more I look at this pic, the more something bugs me other than the levels. I think maybe its the reflection from the black enameled part of the piano, its just distracting. On the whole though, I think its a great concept. Do you have others of this subject?

Maybe if it were sharper or a larger format neg or different light...maybe...because it just doesn't work for me this way.

The 'levels adjusted' photo did not appear inline and can not be

found . . at least not by my server. Please upload images that

are smaller since some seem to be able to access larger ones

and others can't.

 

I just rescanned it. . . . no levels adj, USM 160 / 0.8 / 2. jpg

quality '10'. Nothing else.

To be honest I am not quite sure what to think. Part of me says "interesting but not sure why" and part of me says "so what". For me the image does not really stand up on its own (a bit too busy maybe?) but it would make a good stock image for use in a magazine such as New Scientist where they use striking and odd images as a counterfoil to articles.

The black enamels part looks dark blue on my slide and the

reddish wash is what I see on my uncalibratable monitor on my

family computer. . . but on the monitor I'm looking at now, the

reddish cast is gone. If you have a chance to check it on another

monitor, try it out.

 

I do agree with you about the reflective finish on the plate. I did try

a bit of burning there and in the three round plate expansion

holes.

 

I adjusted levels and thought it looked better without . . . very

unusual. I will say that the resulting upload is a bit duller than my

scan, so it's either a color space issue or jpeg compression.

 

Jim, let me know if you think the sharpness is better in this scan

. . although I know it's a bit small. As you know, I do a lot of

architectural stuff which lends itself to MF or LF but the way

digital is progressing, I may yet go in that direction instead.

 

Still, it did make the cover . . . :-)

 

There are a couple others in this folder from the same session.

Hope you enjoy them. . . . . . .

By the way I rather like your portfolio images. Much better than the above one! I am sure the self portrait with piano is essentially taken from a very well known portrait of a famous pianist by a famous pro photographer? Nevertheless a nice photo.

Looks more like a drawing of patterns than a real photo. Composition with lines and curves is very attractive. I just miss a bit a contrast and light; sharpness is fine IMHO. But this lack of light/contrast in addition to the presence of dead leaves makes the general tone of this picture lifeless and sadly romantic. Is that intentional? A nice illustration for a Verlaine poetry book and IMO.

I think the elves removed my earlier photo because it was a PS 7 jpeg. This should be better

I like the rescan better. The row of tuning nuts at the top anchors the lines in the frame and make the abstract a little more recognisable.

Discarded suggests that the piano has been thrown aside. Must have taken someone pretty strong...

Perhaps abandoned?

This is called a strung back. The color cast is due to different

lighting conditions on the second visit. Notice there's quite a bit

more rust only a couple weeks later.

 

If you want to get rid of an old upright, you break off the sides and

the pedal board, remove the keybed, and pull the action. This is

as far as you can go without spending a whole lot of time

lowering the string tension and removing all the strings, pins,

plate screws, etc.. Then you're left with a very heavy piece of cast

iron. Better to put the whole thing in the back of a pickup and

slide it off into a ditch when no one is looking.

 

I'm not suggesting this as an ethical thing to do. He could have

spent a couple bucks - because it would have been over the

wieght limit - and taken it to the nearest trash facility.

 

I came back a third time . . .. and it was gone.

This is a beautiful abstract composition that combines what seem to be two of your loves. Bravo!

I like it, Carl, but this sort of thing cries out for a larger format to

get all the little details and tones. One thing that bothers me a

little is the glare on the dark wood a little right of center -- it takes

away from the overall richness of the image. A makeshift gobo or

a bit of diffusion might do the trick to knock it down a bit -- or

perhaps just a very slight change in the camera angle.

 

Congratulations on the POW!

First of all, I'd like to bother Geraldine a bit about what she wrote above:

"I prefer the way it is without too much contrast or over saturation, mainly because it is a found object rather than a studio set-up."

I don't think so, Geraldine. You don't want over-saturation, and that's absolutely agreed - wouldn't match the subject. I see autumn here as much as I see a discarded piano. I see the truth of aging, and that doesn't go well with striking vivid colors imo. What I don't agree with is the reason given: "because it's a found object". Can't you find an object under the sun...? Harsh sun might be too lively as well... Basically what I was thinking of was just a ray of light, gentle, and some mild shadows created by a bit of a soft sunlight. Light would help here to feel the passage of time. It works fine without it though.

Now, back to the little nits... When I first saw this picture, long ago, I had tis strange feeling that it was maybe slightly slanted, meaning not shot with the lens absolutely parallel to the subject plane. Well, I didn't mention it then, but after a while looking at it, I have to say that I consider this a minor imperfection. Another issue here is the lens you use... A 20-38mm, is that right...? Well, typically, if I had to shoot this (and by the book), to prevent minor distortions, you would normally use an 80mm - a 50mm in the worst case. Problem is that you might not have been able to use an 80mm or a 50 without climbing on something... I'm wondering what the shooting situation was like... Care to tell us, maybe ? Could you have used a lather or such...? So far, nothing else bothering me.

Is the new scan sharper ? It's tough to tell at this size. It seems to me that the leaves at bottom left are still not too sharp at least - but I can't be sure. How is the DOF on the original slide ?What I can say is that I find good your decision to crop the top part before uploading the original image. This picture really needs that crop imo. I also prefer the brightness of the original, as opposed to the rescan. That would be all. Best regards.

I would agree with marc on all accounts except the crop, I think the label adds to this image without compromising the composition. The lighting seems flat, and though it might have been impossible, a soft beam would have really brought this to life. Other than that...I like it!

I found this photograph to be very compelling when I first saw it a while ago. I also envied Carl for discovering such an interesting subject. I could not quite put my finger on what I liked about it when I first saw it and I was not able to sort out any thoughts into words. Is the proper name for this component a strung back or a strong back?

 

At first I wondered where it came from and who had deposited it by the side of the road. How many chubby-fisted grandchildren had pounded on its keys? How many times had it been at the center of a familys holiday gathering? How many hands had touched it and what became of all those people?

 

The piano in our house was already battered and old when we first brought it home. It is an ancient baby-grand and after seeing Carls photograph, I now imagine it sitting deep in a lonely hardwood forest as the Fall leaves float gently down from a dense lattice of branches high above. Perhaps a pale woman in a gauzy white dress will appear to break the ghostly silence by playing us a sad melody. Drawn to the sound we approach slowly, only to see her image fade as we come near. Perhaps what we heard was only the wind or the dried leaves striking the strings at random. If we look away for an instant the piano may also vanish leaving only a space on the ground void of the fallen leaves.

 

I like the primarily warm tones of this photograph that along with the dried leaves makes me think of a late fall afternoon. Things are coming to an end and many things are being put aside or forgotten for the year. We have begun to turn our backs to the beaches and the lakes. Very soon it will be winter and everything but the rust will be asleep until spring.

 

The other thing that appealed to me is the incongruity of leaves inside the piano. The piano is out of place and out of time. It is not where it is supposed to be and that makes it thought provoking to me. So this is both a competent illustration and an alluring image. I can easily imagine getting lost in the activity of photographing it. The fact that it disappeared as mysteriously as it arrived only serves to show us that an opportunity not taken is an opportunity lost. This photograph works well for me, and the revisions show some good refinements to the original post. Congratulations Carl, Im a sucker for rust in all forms.

Marc Said: I don't think so, Geraldine. You don't want over-saturation, and that's absolutely agreed - wouldn't match the subject. I see autumn here as much as I see a discarded piano. I see the truth of aging, and that doesn't go well with striking vivid colors imo. What I don't agree with is the reason given: "because it's a found object". Can't you find an object under the sun...? Harsh sun might be too lively as well... Basically what I was thinking of was just a ray of light, gentle, and some mild shadows created by a bit of a soft sunlight. Light would help here to feel the passage of time. It works fine without it though.

Marc, I was meaning too contrasty in terms of the original being boosted in PS, not natural light on the day of shooting. I agree that a little more natural light would contribute more depth and dimension. My reasoning about prefering lower contrast owing to it being a found object, was therefore related to my opinion that too much PS contrast would make it less real for me, as a found object. In a graphic design, commercial or set-up shot for example I tend to expect less 'reality' with higher contrast and saturation from post process PS. As I said though, a little more natural light here would have been different altogether, and yes quite desirable.

It seems like a lot of people really like this image, unfortunately I am not one of them. I find the features to compressed. I find that there is nothing to guide which way the eyes move across the frame. I find it confused and uninspiring.

If, when seeing the full size strung back, you tell me you would have

kept right on driving, then we're on different pages and have little

to talk about. The people who would have utilized that all-important

U-turn, parked, and thought about which equipment to bring are the

ones whose opinions I value. The object either inspires you or it

doesn't. The next question is "how do you appraoch it?" You could 1)

hire some help, put in the back of a pickup and bring it to your

studio. 2) Prop it up to near vertical so you don't have to straddle

it and hand hold it like I did. 3) Add or remove leaves to suit. (I

removed a couple for some of the close up shots. 4) bring some kind of

lighting system.

 

You're looking at painted cast iron which is highly reflective, as

several of you have noted. Maybe some diffused low angle lighting to

override that would help, but to do that without making it look like a

studio shot is beyond my experience, not to mention equipment. I

don't remember if I tried a circular polarizer, but I'm no where near

90 degrees to the sun plus it adds to shutter speed problems, given

the diffused light.

 

A strung back is roughly four feet by five feet and weighs several

hundred pounds. I'm going to play it where it lies. A tripod won't

help you here . . maybe with a PC lens, but I don't have one. I skewed

the heck out of the strung back in-line image to give you some idea of

the proportions of the object and each of the elements within it, but

it's for illustration purposes only . . probably not printable.

 

Regarding levels. . . . . in some ways, the adjusted levels version

looks more like my original scan, but without the blownout leaves and

exaggerated highlights of the reflected surfaces. I think we could

have an indepth discussion about the difference between adjusting an

image for thumbnail or snapshot size impact on the web and adjusting

it for an 11 X 14 print that would stand up to close examination. I've

been thinking about posting that as a separate forum question for some

time. . .

I really don't like the adjusted levels version Carl. It is way too harsh for me. The reflecting light on the cast iron is obtrusive and has also boosted the blue saturation. I like the muted tones and colours of the original, it's much more subtle. Your rescan is quite small (difficult task keeping within upload size limitations) so it is difficult to tell if it's any sharper. However, I think I prefer the fuller frame you have there, more than the original posted which has been cropped. The addition of label and string pins contribute even more to the composition. Perhaps too much more for some people, considering the number of elements already. But, for me the full frame on the rescan is even better and didn't need cropping.

Regarding the web version & print version; I always store a web copy which has been levels adjusted, colour balanced and USM'd after sizing down, and in Windows RGB mode (sorry Mac guys & girls). My Tiff for print however, I leave a master copy as it is unadjusted. I will make adjustments at the last minute before going to print, and perhaps save a second copy. Because required adjustments ultimately depend on what print technology is going to be used. You may want a dye sub print today, but perhaps a diamond laser print next week, and a CMYK litho next month. Talking of prints, I would imagine this photo to render beautifully by inkjet on epson matt paper where the colours are rich and velvety. I think I would prefer that over a glossy on this one.

The original image posted by Carl really has a completely different feel from the one with the adjusted levels. The original image is much more subdued and calm, the piano resigned to it's fate of being transformed back to the earth that it came from.

 

The adjusted level image gives me the impression of a piano struggling to survive, fighting the inevitable outcome, maybe looking for someone to rescue it and bring it back to life.

 

I prefer the original that Carl posted as I believe that it would be more true to the scene as it was found. The piano was dead. Long gone from any useful stage of existence, except for leaving its skeleton for Carl to make this photgraph of.

I love abstractions of this type and you have captured a nicely composed shot with lots of subtle details. I love the contrast of the warm tones of the wood competing with the cold surface of the metal. congratulations!