Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10 »
 1 
 on: Today at 03:55:42 AM 
Started by Peter Barnes - Last post by Peter Barnes
I am one of a group of photographers who won a commission to supply photographs of the local landscape to be used as part of the interior design of the large new hospital being built in our city. Some of the photographs are to end up as murals, printed on film and applied in sheets to walls - the largest is 8 by 2 metres (26 feet x 6 feet) and it is to go in a 3 metre wide corridor! 

Part of our brief is to supply print-ready files. We are told the final resolution required is 150ppi. There is a local professional photo lab that has proved it can up size files to this magnitude with high quality results - the method used is to resample in 1% increments and check the file for artefacts and problems regularly during the process.  This is obviously very labour and machine intensive when increasing the size of a file from 5000 pixels wide to about 45000 pixels wide.   And in the lead up to Xmas they haven't the capacity to do this for us to meet our end-December deadline. 

I've read the discussions I can find here on the topic, one is way too technical for this little black duck, the other referred to an article by Jeff Schewe which turned out to be written in 2007 and didn't really address our issue.

Can anybody point me to some online resources, or an experienced expert in this area who could advise, or a service with the ability to prepare the files for us?

 2 
 on: Today at 03:16:54 AM 
Started by geezerhood - Last post by BartvanderWolf
If the Golden Ratio were so appealing for "rectangular artistic images", one would expect simple nearby shapes like 8:5 to be offered, but I have never seen canvasses, drawing pads or photogrphic printing paper offered in that shape, or in any shape between 3:2 and 2:1, other than the outlier of 17"x11", derived from doubling US letter size of 11"x8.5" and probably originally for two-up printing for folding to 11x8.5.

Hi,

The usual problem with such analyses is the disconnect between correlation and causation. When there are no Golden Ratio image formats offered (e.g. paper or canvas size), then they will not appear in the statistics. That says nothing about their visual appeal. One would first have to establish if an output size is appealing enough to produce such an option, and it's apparently not that commonly requested.

The difficulty with that is that the golden section is also about relative subject dimensions and placement, and equally applies to a square output as it does to a rectangular output. Some subjects, e.g. landscapes may be represented in a more panoramic output size to stress the wide vista and rolling hills, but elements within that composition (e.g. the position of the horizon/vanishing points) may be preferred to follow the golden section principle if a pleasing rendering is desired, or deliberately not (e.g. dead center, or close to an edge, or even partially cropped) if tension and an uneasy feeling is required. There is also a difference between placement at the exact section lines, or subdivisions of regions in which to place.

Here is an interesting paper by Prof. McManus that covers two angles, namely the individual preferences for for simple figures, and also that of composition in a frame. Another paper explores the findings that while the aesthetic prefererence  of a population may be centered at the modal point around a golden section rectangular shape, there are also strong individual preferences for other shapes.

So things may be a bit more complicated than some might wish, but there is something special about the Golden section (and Fibonacci ratios) because it occcurs so often in nature. It has also been used for book design proportions ("Many books produced between 1550 and 1770 show these proportions exactly, to within half a millimeter").

Cheers,
Bart

 3 
 on: Today at 03:15:53 AM 
Started by Paulo Bizarro - Last post by Paulo Bizarro


My best advice to the OP though is to bite the bullet and get the Zeiss/Sony zooms. Even with th crop sensor, the lens is just cleaner and has OSS

And the 55mm 1.8 also is a very nice lens with right now AF. I mean Canon-fast almost as fast your 6D which as you know is a monster. I have one too. Lightning!

Cheers


Thanks everybody, very useful information. I have been watching the Sony A7 series with interest. For now, the A6000 plus the Zeiss 16-70 is what I will be able to borrow from my friend, so I will give it a spin. In the future, I can see myself migrating towards something like the new A7 MKII (with IBIS, which is fantastic) with a trio of primes, to cover my needs. One of these primes will no doubt be the 55 f1.8, it seems that in 2015 there will be a new 85 f1.4. What is missing to me right now is some sort of "landscape" lens, like a 21 f2.8 or 24 f2.8. I know that there is a new FE 16-35, but... a lens in that range and characteristics will have to be really good, as good as my Canon 6D and 16-35 f4 are right now.

 4 
 on: Today at 03:07:58 AM 
Started by aaronchan - Last post by aaronchan
Problem solved
At the beginning I printed the 21steps target in 8bits which it supposed to be
then I converted into 16bits, the target actually came out really well
So something is going really wrong with either the ACPU or the epson driver with ABW printing mode

aaron

 5 
 on: Today at 03:07:03 AM 
Started by chuckn - Last post by Paulo Bizarro
Others said it all already, beautiful work. I was wondering if the subject would render itself to a nice panoramic view?

 6 
 on: Today at 03:06:07 AM 
Started by bcooter - Last post by Aphoto
The Prussian House of Lords, since 2000 again the "Bundesrat" (Federal Council) of Germany in the center, in the face of a new big shopping mall in the front (Mall of Berlin).



Aptus II + Ts-e 24mm

 7 
 on: Today at 02:56:30 AM 
Started by PeterAit - Last post by PeterAit
Hi Dave,

You may be onto something regarding hand size and the E-M1. I have unusually large hands, maybe that contributes to my accidental changing of certain settings. Now that I am aware of the problem, I do it less and try to always check the settings before snapping a pic.

 8 
 on: Today at 02:48:12 AM 
Started by disneytoy - Last post by D Fosse
They also had a blog post recently about 4K monitors.

Interesting quote there about 4K displays, which confirms what I've said all along:

"Thus our conclusion is it remains vastly more important to get a model that is highly colour accurate than one which has very high resolution, and this should always be the primary consideration for image makers".

So my CG246 and CX240 will do for quite a while yet...However, for text and vector I can see the benefits of higher resolution. If that's a large part of your work 4K might be worthwhile.

Incidentally, I have one newish i7 / 32 GB system, and another four year old i5 / 16 GB system. They're both SSD-based. Although I work with rather big D800 files, I have to say I don't notice much difference between them performance-wise, in normal everyday work. They both seem snappy and fully up to the task.

As for video card, the main thing is to get one that works and is bug-free, and that's something you never know in advance. Photoshop's OpenGL functionality is particularly vulnerable. It depends a lot on driver version. When you get a stable driver version, stick to it - an update may easily throw everything overboard again.

 9 
 on: Today at 02:40:58 AM 
Started by dsapkota - Last post by dsapkota
up.

 10 
 on: Today at 02:32:33 AM 
Started by FrankG - Last post by William Walker
Hi Frank

Regarding your post on settings on the 3880 with Canson Inifinity Baryta Photographique: Eric Chan made an ABW profile for that paper a few years ago ( http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/Epson3880/abwprofiles.html ) and recommends the Platen Gap to be set to "Wide".

If you find "track marks" on your prints - try that.

I also enjoyed your work, and as soon as I saw one picture, (you'll know which one it is!) I knew you had been to South Africa!

Regards
William
(Pietermaritzburg).

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10 »
Ad
Ad
Ad