michael_mcblane

I'm trying to design a polaroid type border and have scanned one and worked on it in photoshop and it looks pretty

good. But to print in ImagePrint I've made it into a PSD file but need to make it as a transparency layer.

Being basically illiterate, I can't seem to figure out how to do that. The way it is now the border is on a white

background and is the background layer, then I added a layer above it but can't figure out how to have it as a

transparency layer.

I've brought up one of ImagePrint's own borders and it is a single transparency layer file.

Thanks in advance.

Or you could backup your work immediately after you complete it, to another hardrive. I back up whatever I just worked on during that session to another harddrive and once a week I backup to at third hardrive. It all takes very little time.

Michael

Silver Gelatin prints are black and white prints made in a traditional darkroom using photographic paper. Digital prints from inkjet printers are a entirely different technology that can't yet "exactly" copy the look.

There are many paper including Crane Museo Silver Rag (fibre glossy look) and many others that are available now that try to copy the same look. Almost every month a new paper comes out that tries to achive the silver gelatin look.

Many people have different opinions on how close many of these papers come but essentially you'll have to experiment yourself or read different threads on this site and others to see what people are saying.

But you have to remember there us a difference between spraying ink on top of a sheet of paper and chemically creating a print by affecting the silver suspended in a layer of gelatin.

Michael

Thanks Patrick. It looks as though it is staying sharp when viewed at 50 and 100. It's interesting though that previously when I sharpened the image I looked at it a lot of different magnifications to get the right amount and when I decided I backed it down the image to full frame, about 12.5 magnification

I could still see the sharpening. But like I said, after hitting OK, as it's progress reached completion, it visibly at 12.5 would seem to revert back to unsharp.

Michael

I look at the sharpening effect in a lot of magnifications from 12 up to about 33 to get a feel for how much it's sharpening. The size is 20x24.

The image is converted to photoshop working space which is adobe RGB I believe, not a NEF file.

Michael

Please explain. As I mentioned above, I'm in CS3, and have done some retouching, and have gone into Sharpen, Smart Sharpen and chosen 180 at 1.6 then pressed OK. The image is sharp until the progress bar reaches the end then it reverts back to less sharp.

Michael

I've had CS3 since it came out and has worked very well. Since I scan most of

my images I've never tried sharpening because it wasn't necessary.

Recently I've shot a few images with my Nikon D200 and when I try to sharpen

them, they sharpen in the preview (180 at 1.6 radius) but when I OK it and wait

for the progress bar to complete, it is sharp up until the end then reverts

back to it's previous state.

Any ideas.

Thanks in advance.

Michael

Thanks Patrick, I'll try that.

I was just surprised that there is such a huge difference in loading and such a memory drain with it in CS3 than there was with CS2.

Thanks Kenneth,

Yeah, I meant boot .ini. My RAM allocation in photoshop is at 70 and I had it up to 80 and down to 60. In the performance box I have listed 2625 available ram, and photoshop uses 70% (1837). History is at 10 and Cache is at 8.

As for you new user account, I saw your post on the adobe site, and when you described this, my eyes started to glaze over which happens frequently with tech talk. Could you describe the process in a bit more depth. Thanks.

It's interesting that liquify would be so different in CS3 than in CS2. It takes minutes to load where reverting over to CS2 it is almost immediate.

Thanks

I'm running an Windows XP machine with 4 gigs of memory, 250 internal gig

scratch disk, and am having a hard time dealing with the liquify filter. I'm

running the 3gig switch in the bios. The file is about 118 megs and I've

reduced all layers and shut off Bridge etc so that memory isn't being used

elsewhere.

It takes a long time to load the liquify filter and after very little

manipulation I get an "out of memory" message.

When I ran liquify in CS2 I didn't have any problems at all.

Anyone have any ideas on this.

I agree. As others have said you turned this picture into an illustration. If that was you intent you succeeded but it has left the realm of portraiture.

That being said the cropping and the look are nice, just back off the photoshop.

There is a website called RetouchPro that has a lot of amateurs and a few pros on who retouch in different styles. There is a lot of junk but a few good tips and tutorials.

http://www.retouchpro.com/forums/

I don't see where this photograph has necessarily been photoshopped at all to achieve this "effect". A high key photograph generally is a photograph will little or no dark tones in it and is usually on a light background.

This particular photograph could easily be achieved simply by lighting.

Some of Corbijn work WAS lith. Here are a few examples of lith and other users of it.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/sepia/discuss/64469/

http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/browse?id=24349

I googled this:

Not sure if that is what you're referring to

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00GAU1

I believe you'll find that his style was done by a traditionaly darkroom technique call "lith printing". I have played with this technique a few years ago and it's pretty labor intensive.

Tim Rudman who is an authority on print toning and other techniques has written a few books on the subject.

Here is one link:

http://www.worldoflithprinting.com/

Don't know if you wanted something this big but I was checking this one out over the weekend.

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/ProductDetail.aspx?sku=320-4335&c=us&cat=snp&category_id=6198&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs&Page=productlisting.aspx

Save your money. Mine crashes. Is not faster. Wait till they get it ready for prime time. Even the Adobe gurus/promoters/employees? say that you have to be a fool to trust new adobe software when it first comes out.

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=17054

Michael

I agree. As a portrait photographer for the last 30 years, the latest crop of new photographers haven't learned when to stop retouching. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

The excessive catchlights and eye whitening looks absurd so a little bit goes a long way. Nobody wants to look retouched. They want to look good. It's like makeup. You shouldn't be able to see it.

So when you do this stuff, keep it subtle.

Michael

I have an Epson 7800 and am wondering if I missed something in the directions

on how to print without leaving 8-11 inches on each end of a 20x24 print.

Granted I cut the ends off and use them for printing 8x10 prints but is there a

way to set the preferences so that there is only a few inches on the front and

back ends of the print.

Thanks

Michael

I have a backup system in place now, with an external 300Gig backup that I

backup every day with new work that I've completed. As well as that I have 2

500Gig external units that I backup that 300G drive every week.

How I do it is: I put my scans in one file, my downloads from the digital

camera in another file, and my "masters" and prints in a third file.

My question is: should I redundantly backup those three files every week onto

the 2 backups even though 95% of the files haven't changed or should I devise a

system to just backup the new files that I've recently completed.

I guess I don't understand what happens when you copy files over the same file

week after week. Are you taking up new disk space, or is it just copying over

the top of the old file.

Michael