marc_schmidtmayer

Hi, I use a dSLR and most of my work is monochrome and now I like to add grain

to my monochrome pictures.

So, this topic is NOT meant to discuss why someone wants to add grain to a

digital image and not how to add grain (there are already quiet a few topics

available).

What I like to know is where in your workflow you add grain. I guess at the

end ?

But what about sharpening ? Is it wise to sharpen after one has added grain ?

And what then about the theory of output sharpening (which should come at tha

last step in the workflow) ?

Just one thing : should one add grain to the 'original' file (at full

resolution) ? What happens then to the grain when resizing (to for example 25%

of the 'original' file) ?

Thanks for your feedback, Marc.

Thanks Hakon for your explanation. Quite useful.

Can anyone please advice me some models (A4 & A3) which should be 'candidate' for purchase and which perform (very) well when printing toned prints and use inks that will guarantee archival quality ?

Thanks.

Hi, finally I would like to print my pictures at home. Until now I did

not 'follow' all the discussions regarding the printer-market. So, now I hope

you will help me on my way to a good purchase.

Well, 99% of my work is monochrome (toned) but not pure B&W.

Does this (need to) 'influence' my purchase ? I mean for example, are all the

black cartridges also 'used' when printing not completely in B&W ?

So, the printer I'm looking for should : 1. perform (very) well when printing

toned prints and 2. use inks that will guarantee archival quality.

I do not know if I will by a A4 or A3-printer, so would you be so kind to

advice me some models (A4 & A3) which should be 'candidate' (and tell me why

if possible) ?

What I can see while reading the posts here, is that most are in favor of

Epson. Is there a special reason for this ?

Good advice of you will help me a lot (in time and in preventing a 'bad buy'),

Thanks,

Marc.

Well, thanks for the info.

It was usefull.

Thanks for the answers.

Does anyone know if there's a difference in quality between the filters for the P-series and the Z-Pro-series ?

This because there's a fairly/huge difference in price between the filters of both series. Example : diffuser 2 --> 12,71eur vs 42,10eur : ND Grad --> 11,9eur vs 38,94eur.

Is there a difference in qualtity or is it just marketing ?

Last : do HiTech-filters fit into the Cokin-system ?

Thanks !

Hi, I like to start using ND Grad filters. Help !

Someone adviced me (badly ?) the Cokin-system. First : can anyone tell me

which holder I should get : the P-series (recommended for focal lengths from

28mm onwards (35mm)) or Z-Pro-series (recommended for focal lengths from 20mm

onwards (35mm)) ? I own a dSlr with cropping factor of 1,6 and like to use it

on a lens 18-50mm (35mm : 28-80mm). In the future, I like to buy a 10-20mm

(35mm : 16-32mm). So, I guess I should get the Z-Pro series but most of the

topics talk about the P-series ...

Further, I've read on topics here that the quality of the ND Grad filters of

Cokin are not the best (even bad) on the market. Right ?

So, my question is the following : can I use other (then Cokin) ND Grad

filters on the holder of the Cokin-system ? If yes, what should be a good

price-quality solution for this ? And should I go for the P or Z-Pro series ?

Or should I completely let go Cokin ?

I like to use the square filters so I can move the dividing line ...

Really, I really appreciate some (good) advice ! Thanks !

I viewed it in another program, but the problem is the same.

Strange that there are so few answers ... I thought that many people would have the problem or is the problem limited to just a few monitors ?

Hi,

When I use a Radial Gradient going for example from white to black, I can see

some banding on my screen. But it seems not to be real because when using the

eyedropper point sampler to obtain the RGB values, the progressively

increase/decrease.

I've found this topic about this 'problem' : http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-

fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=00L4bY.

But after reading this, it is still not clear to me !

What is the problem ? The software, the monitor, the graphics card or the

calibration software ?

Anyone ?

I use Pantone Huey on 2 Samsung Syncmaster monitors : 215TW and 193P. On both

the banding occurs ...

Thanks, Marc.

Hi, I'm (still) struggling with sharpening ;-)

And now I'm planning to buy the Photokit Sharpener.

I've read the manual more then once and theoretically, I do understand all of

this.

Still, I've got some questions :

1. Most of the pictures I print are B&W (or monochrome). Is Photokit Sharpener

as effective with B&W (or monochrome) as with color images ?

2. The manual is not updated regarding the workflow for CS3 (and ACR 4.2). Are

there any changes since CS2 ? What for example to do with the clarity slider

when you use Photokit Sharpener for sharpening ?

3. I'm well aware of the 3 stages in Photokit Sharpener. Capture and creative

sharpening should be applied at the 'original' size and output sharpening on

output size. But how should the images look after the creative sharpening ? I

mean, should they (already) look very sharp on monitor or should there still

be room for sharpening-improvement ?

4. Output sharpening : the sets for Web and Multimedia Output are based on

pixel-dimensions (for example : 600 pixel medium edge sharpen). Maybe stupid

question, but is it the 'longest' side that one must choose ? I mean : an

image of 600x400 : set 400 or 600 pixel needed ?

5. Last, a more or less 'general' question : Nowhere, I can find any 'link'

between the 'original' size and 'output' size. I thought that whenever one

resizes an image, a part of the sharpening gets lost ? Right ? And as capture

and creative sharpening are done on 'original' size and output sharpening

on 'output' size, there's no link between the percentage the 'original' final

is downsampled (resized) to its output size. I mean, if I want to print an

10x15cm photo and my 'original' file is a 3MB-pixel camera or a 10MB-pixel

camera : the percentage of resizing to get to the 'output' size is quite

different and this does affect the sharpening differently, not ? Any comments

on this ?

Thanks for helping me out,

Marc.

Thanks for your help.

But, as opposed to some answers, in some cases, it can get very tricky to compose for a square without any 'help'.

So, thanks to Len, I've put grid lines on the screen (it helps, even though they are not square).

And the tip of WT, 'just make a simple square format picture window out of cardboard', is one which I will try.

The more expensive options will be left to the side at the moment ... ;-)

Thanks.

Hi,

I like the square format but with my dSLR (NIKON D200), the only way I can

achieve this, is with cropping in postprocess. This is not my problem ... ;-)

My problem is composition at the moment the picture is made. (Sometimes)I find

it very hard to previsualize my 'square'-photo.

What options do I have (without changing my dSLR ;-)) ?

It seems that that there are (special) focus screens which should help to make

a square composition ...

Anyone experience or info with this ? Where can I find these ?

Or are there other options ?

Thanks for your info, Marc.

Hi Ted,

When you say that you "leave the ACR noise reduction sliders at zero and use NeatImage as the first step of my workflow after opening the image" ... does this mean you do this in PhotoShop after Camera Raw adjustments ? Or before Camera Raw ?

Thanks.

That's something I thought, but I wonder if those programs can handle RAW files directly ??

Anyone experience with RAW-files and using Neat Image or Nois Ninja or NoiseWare ?

Hi,

I do not have any experience with noise reduction software but have read a

number of topics here on photo.net.

From what I've read, I conclude that noise reduction is best done as the first

'manipulation', especially when using the 'profiles' which can be optained.

When using RAW-files ... is it possible to use as first 'manipulation' ?

I do a lot of editing (B&W), so I'm interested in 16bit noise reduction.

So, can anyone tell me how to do noise reduction on RAW-files in 16bit ?

Which workflow is adviced for this ?

Thanks, Marc.

Thanks Peter !

I'm looking forward to your 'site' ...

Thanks for your info. And yes, I will get the book "Real World Image Sharpening" ... ;-) And indeed, the thread is great ... BUT ...

But, a lot of the info concerns Ligtroom (which I don't have and use) and (almost) everything I 'produce' is b/w, which includes a lot of editing and in the post Peter Stacey writes : "However, if you have a photo where you are planning to do a lot of editing, I wouldn't apply capture sharpening globally."

So, now things are not really clear to me (regarding MY workflow) ... Please, can someone help me with defining what my workflow should be considering following 'things' :

- I do not use Lightroom

- Use CS3 (since this week) with Camera Raw 4.2

- Do a lot of editing - Produce (toned) b/w prints

Well :

- Should I use (initial) sharpening in Camera Raw ?

- Should I use 'clarity' in Camera Raw ?

- When and which sharpening should I use/apply ?

Would someone be so kind to guide me to the right direction ? It would be greatly appreciated as things are not clear to me ...

Just this : What with landscape photo's with a lot of sky ? What is the technique regarding sharpening of skies ? And is the 'treatment' different for a photo with lots of detail or one without much detail the same ?

Thanks for helping me out, Marc.

Hi,

Technically, I understand the dpi, ppi and 'other' terminology.

And what sharpening concerns, I'm able to 'apply' a few techniques.

And I understand that sharpening is best done with the final size, resolution,

and printing medium in mind.

But, my question is the following :

What is the 'right' resolution of a photo to send to a lab or inktjet ?

For example : What do I need to do when I want a 15cmx20cm photo printed by a

lab or inktjet ?

My 'master' has no sharpening :

Do I need to downsample my 'master' ?

At what resolution ? And why ?

Most of the time I use 300ppi but is this 'right' ?

Why 300ppi ?

Why not 250ppi or 350ppi ? And what difference does this make regarding the

sharpening ?

How do you know that your resolution (and the sharpening applied to this

resolution) is the right one ?

Thanks for making things clear ... ;-)

Greetz,

Marc.

Thanks for the answers.

I tried this technique and I seem to get decent results when the shy is already a bit 'dark'.

The problem is when I want to this om a 'blank' sky (like this http://www.michaelkenna.net/html/books/calendars/2006/8.html), I do not get 'natural' results.

Probably I'm doing something 'wrong' ...

Hi folks,

I've a photo and I want to burn in the sky (and bottom) similar to this :

http://www.michaelkenna.net/html/japan02/7.html

http://www.michaelkenna.net/html/moai01/9.html

http://www.michaelkenna.net/html/archive/92.html

So, even with a 'clear' sky (or bottom), burning it in like this ... how

should I do this in PS (to get a realistic effect like the example) ?

Thanks, Marc.

Hi,

For a little project I want to do, I would like to achieve a similar look (and

feel) like the photo's of Keith Carter (www.keithcarterphotographs.com).

Does anyone has tried something like this ?

Can anyone help me out on this one ?

Of course, I can experiment with the different blur possiblities ... but I

wonder if anyone has more detailed help for me ...

I would appriciate any help ...

Greetz, Marc.