Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Yellow Wall  (Read 2388 times)
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« on: July 18, 2010, 03:33:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Looking at the yellow of the wall and at the yellow flash above it on the LuLa page, I realise that my monitor calibration isn't any longer what it should be, accounting for much of the frustration with my B9180 and what I had thought to be its failures with producing subtle reds - well, reds of any sort, to tell you the truth...

;-)

Rob C



Logged

michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4924



« Reply #1 on: July 18, 2010, 08:33:06 AM »
ReplyReply

If it assuages your anxiety I can rename it "Orange Wall".

But I assure you that it is yellow(ish).

Michael
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8947


« Reply #2 on: July 18, 2010, 09:21:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Rob,
If it helps at all, the approximate centre of the right side of the wall is 16% cyan, 30% magenta, 62% yellow and 0% black. So Michael is right. It's certainly yellowish.

However, there's 2% missing in that total, from the Photoshop info pallette. What can that be? Noise?  
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8301



WWW
« Reply #3 on: July 18, 2010, 09:45:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Ray
Rob,
If it helps at all, the approximate centre of the right side of the wall is 16% cyan, 30% magenta, 62% yellow and 0% black. So Michael is right. It's certainly yellowish.

However, there's 2% missing in that total, from the Photoshop info pallette. What can that be? Noise?  

It must be anti-noise, because your total comes to 108%, Ray.  
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8947


« Reply #4 on: July 18, 2010, 10:00:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Eric Myrvaagnes
It must be anti-noise, because your total comes to 108%, Ray.  

So it does, Eric. But I assure you that the individual figures are correct, according to the info pallette. If I made a mistake in the addition, it's because I have so much respect for photoshop, I just couldn't believe they would be out by 8% in that total, and I let my subjective biases take over, momentarily. That's my excuse   .
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8947


« Reply #5 on: July 18, 2010, 10:17:10 AM »
ReplyReply

Actually, I tried again to get a reading in approximately the same position and got 114% total. I presume there's some reasonable explanation for this.

[attachment=23216:Yellow_Wall.jpg]
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #6 on: July 18, 2010, 11:12:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Ray
Actually, I tried again to get a reading in approximately the same position and got 114% total. I presume there's some reasonable explanation for this.

[attachment=23216:Yellow_Wall.jpg]
You read CMYK not RGB.
Each tint can reach 100% coverage.
It is not that the total of all tints in porcentage has to make 100%.

My english is too limited to be able to explain that clearly.

Clearest colors have generally a small % of tint while dense colors have more %.
A strong red for example would have 2% C + 93% M + 90% Y  and 0% black.

This is a sustractive process, not additive. Each tint can have from zero to 100%

If you check the guard's jacket that looks black-blue, you will find higher %, like for example 80%-80%-90%-80%.

This is completly another system than RGB.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2010, 11:31:15 AM by fredjeang » Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #7 on: July 18, 2010, 11:44:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: michael
If it assuages your anxiety I can rename it "Orange Wall".

But I assure you that it is yellow(ish).

Michael





Nope, Michael, no need to change a thing; my nerves are calmed and the puck can remain in its box. (This sounds vaguely 'hockey' to me, but I certainly don't intend that.)

;-)

Rob C
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8301



WWW
« Reply #8 on: July 18, 2010, 12:32:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: fredjeang
You read CMYK not RGB.
Each tint can reach 100% coverage.
It is not that the total of all tints in porcentage has to make 100%.

My english is too limited to be able to explain that clearly.

Clearest colors have generally a small % of tint while dense colors have more %.
A strong red for example would have 2% C + 93% M + 90% Y  and 0% black.

This is a sustractive process, not additive. Each tint can have from zero to 100%

If you check the guard's jacket that looks black-blue, you will find higher %, like for example 80%-80%-90%-80%.

This is completly another system than RGB.
And to think: I was just going to blame it on rampant inflation! 
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8947


« Reply #9 on: July 18, 2010, 01:25:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: fredjeang
You read CMYK not RGB.
Each tint can reach 100% coverage.
It is not that the total of all tints in porcentage has to make 100%.

My english is too limited to be able to explain that clearly.

Clearest colors have generally a small % of tint while dense colors have more %.
A strong red for example would have 2% C + 93% M + 90% Y  and 0% black.

This is a sustractive process, not additive. Each tint can have from zero to 100%

If you check the guard's jacket that looks black-blue, you will find higher %, like for example 80%-80%-90%-80%.

This is completly another system than RGB.

Fred,
You're getting a bit technical here, aren't you? This is most unusual. You're not on (or off) your medication are you?  
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #10 on: July 18, 2010, 04:43:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Ray
Fred,
You're getting a bit technical here, aren't you? This is most unusual. You're not on (or off) your medication are you?  




No, Ray, you're getting distracted: it's the wall wots orf.

I have just watched a docu on Caravaggio: man, did that hombre get around! And a lot of good it did him. I worked in Malta many times - what a pity I hadn't any idea about what the knights really really got up to in their spare time. It would have given me a completely different attitude to the place, which I saw as little more than a very concentrated little studio with relatively poor cuisine. I always liked working on islands: the ideal would probably have been somewhere like Fuerteventura which, at a stretch and with some imagination, you could claim runs north/south, giving you the best of both sunrise and sunsets on the beach. Oh well, I ended up on one anyway, and as with Caravaggio, a lot of friggin' good it did me either.

But as I never did dig cities much... sort of makes me realise I didn't really have the mentality to be in fashion pix for too long, even if I did enjoy it while it lasted.

I suppose the hat would have made a good white reference point.

Rob C
« Last Edit: July 18, 2010, 04:46:10 PM by Rob C » Logged

fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #11 on: July 19, 2010, 03:41:55 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Ray
Fred,
You're getting a bit technical here, aren't you? This is most unusual. You're not on (or off) your medication are you?  
Enjoy it Ray! This is not going to happen many more in the future.
I think I've been contaminated by the recent threads in the MF sections  
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8947


« Reply #12 on: July 20, 2010, 12:17:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Rob C
No, Ray, you're getting distracted: it's the wall wots orf.

I have just watched a docu on Caravaggio: man, did that hombre get around! And a lot of good it did him. I worked in Malta many times - what a pity I hadn't any idea about what the knights really really got up to in their spare time. It would have given me a completely different attitude to the place, which I saw as little more than a very concentrated little studio with relatively poor cuisine. I always liked working on islands: the ideal would probably have been somewhere like Fuerteventura which, at a stretch and with some imagination, you could claim runs north/south, giving you the best of both sunrise and sunsets on the beach. Oh well, I ended up on one anyway, and as with Caravaggio, a lot of friggin' good it did me either.

But as I never did dig cities much... sort of makes me realise I didn't really have the mentality to be in fashion pix for too long, even if I did enjoy it while it lasted.

I suppose the hat would have made a good white reference point.

Rob C

Rob,
I saw a docu on Caravaggio a few months ago, in Australia.  I was looking forward to an exposition on the photographic techniques he employed to make his paintings.

I was disappointed. No mention of it.

This theory is not just an opinion of David Hockney, who's written a book on the subject, but has been researched for many years by Professor Roberta Lapucci, art restorer and art historian based in Florence.

The arguments in support of the theory are compelling. They include:

(1) Caravaggio's paintings are extremely photographic in nature, similar in effect sometimes to the work of some contemporary photographers who appear to have emulated his chiaroscuro style. (I'm thinking of certain MFDB photographers who often clip the shadows to black despite the huge and enormous dynamic range potential of their DB.)

(2) Traces of mercury salts and luminescent powder from crushed fireflies have been discovered beneath the paint. Mercury salt was one of the ingredients in the chemicals used in the first photographic images created 200 years later.

(3) There are a disproportionate number of left-handed people in Caravaggio's paintings, indicative of the reversal that takes place when projecting an image through a lens or from a mirror onto a surface such as a canvas.

(4) Caravaggio was a contemporary of Galileo, born a few years later but died a few years earlier. The science of optics was in rapid development, although a contentious issue at the time because it allowed observations to be made which were in conflict with church dogma. (We all know from our school history what happened to Galileo.) Caravaggio would also have been very interested in such developments.

(5) It's known as a matter of historical fact that Caravaggio's method of painting directly to the canvas without the aid of preliminary sketches and drawings, was very unusual. That he could produce such detailed and photographic results with this approach almost beggars belief. That he didn't need to use drawings as a guide because he painted directly onto a 'short-lived', photographic image on his canvas, makes sense.

(6) He was a quarrelsome bloke with a bad temper, who got into frequent brawls, killing at least one person in such brawls. It's well-known that mercury poisoning affects the  nervous system, and therefore it's credible that such poisoning could partly explain and might have contributed to his violent behaviour. Perhaps one could say, that's the price he paid for messing with photographic (light-sensitive) chemicals.

For those who are interested, more information can be found at  http://forums.canadiancontent.net/1064006-post1.html  and  http://www.walksinsideitaly.com/blog-9-CAR...N-FLORENCE.html

I was in Vienna a few weeks ago. If I'd know about this exhibition at the Uffizi, I would have extended my trip for a few days. Florence is only a skip and a hop from Vienna, but from Australia it's a long haul.

Tell you what, Rob! Why don't you nip up to Florence, see the exhibition, attend the lectures on Caravaggio's technique (delivered by Dr Roberta Lapucci) and report your findings on Lula for our edification. Take a few photos whilst you're there.  
« Last Edit: July 20, 2010, 01:03:09 AM by Ray » Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #13 on: July 20, 2010, 02:32:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, Ray, but though an interesting idea, isn't it beggering belief that all those models were able to retain their highly dramatic poses suspended upside down? Also, what about chromatic aberration at the cornices? You can't simply ignore the mind-bending light-bending properties of fine, late-sixteenth century stucco.

Indeed, there is room for huge and enormous expansion of perceived accuracy - high definition, in a word (more spatial fidelity comes to mind as an added benefit) - using lenses and mirrors in place of the more usual smoke and mirrors even though the use of such artificial (and not strictly artistic) measures may downgrade the collectability of some of the works.

The disproportionate number of lefties in the Caravaggio oevre may actually be more to do with subtle political posturing - somewhat à la Da Vinci - and not a lot to do with the optical mechanics of getting there - to the finished product, I mean, though I am assured there was a plethora of mechanical devices available to convince the populace of almost anything in which the establishment thought them in need of finding conviction. For example, they had some pretty heavy iron virgins hanging around at the time - bondage was a big deal too, and I need not remind you about the fun with masks.

All in all, it sort of reminds me that there was, indeed, a true Golden Age that has long gone the way of the Super Amfix.

Alas, the post-breakfast chores await - tempus fugits with increasing alacrity as I slow down in compensatory mood and the world just keeps on turning.

Trust me, Forence may beckon but Marianne will win, the delectable Roberta notwithstanding.

Rob C

EDIT: it just occurred to me: perhaps it could be done if the canvas was easled upside down instead, and if no frescos attempted...?
« Last Edit: July 20, 2010, 02:41:37 AM by Rob C » Logged

Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8947


« Reply #14 on: July 21, 2010, 11:09:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Rob C
Yes, Ray, but though an interesting idea, isn't it beggering belief that all those models were able to retain their highly dramatic poses suspended upside down? Also, what about chromatic aberration at the cornices? You can't simply ignore the mind-bending light-bending properties of fine, late-sixteenth century stucco.

Indeed, there is room for huge and enormous expansion of perceived accuracy - high definition, in a word (more spatial fidelity comes to mind as an added benefit) - using lenses and mirrors in place of the more usual smoke and mirrors even though the use of such artificial (and not strictly artistic) measures may downgrade the collectability of some of the works.

The disproportionate number of lefties in the Caravaggio oevre may actually be more to do with subtle political posturing - somewhat à la Da Vinci - and not a lot to do with the optical mechanics of getting there - to the finished product, I mean, though I am assured there was a plethora of mechanical devices available to convince the populace of almost anything in which the establishment thought them in need of finding conviction. For example, they had some pretty heavy iron virgins hanging around at the time - bondage was a big deal too, and I need not remind you about the fun with masks.

All in all, it sort of reminds me that there was, indeed, a true Golden Age that has long gone the way of the Super Amfix.

Alas, the post-breakfast chores await - tempus fugits with increasing alacrity as I slow down in compensatory mood and the world just keeps on turning.

Trust me, Forence may beckon but Marianne will win, the delectable Roberta notwithstanding.

Rob C

EDIT: it just occurred to me: perhaps it could be done if the canvas was easled upside down instead, and if no frescos attempted...?


Rob,
I get the impression you're not too keen on this idea that Caravaggio might have used lenses and/or mirrors as a guide to help him achieve more realistic results in his paintings.

By the way, I hope Michael does not object to this slight digression from his painting (oops! photograph) of a yellow wall , but it's an interesting subject which is still related to photography.

From a recent copy of Scientific American, regarding Michelangelo:

Quote
At the age of 17 he began dissecting corpses from the church graveyard. Between the years 1508 and 1512 he painted the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel in Rome. Michelangelo Buonarroti—known by his first name the world over as the singular artistic genius, sculptor and architect—was also an anatomist, a secret he concealed by destroying almost all of his anatomical sketches and notes. Now, 500 years after he drew them, his hidden anatomical illustrations have been found—painted on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, cleverly concealed from the eyes of Pope Julius II and countless religious worshipers, historians, and art lovers for centuries—inside the body of God.
 Wow!

Check out the article at http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/pos...-the-2010-05-26

The fact is, during the time of the Renaissance there was not the great dichotomy between the arts and the sciences that we see nowadays. Knowledge was knowledge. Da Vinci could not only paint sublime works like the Mona Lisa, he could make engineering-type drawings of helicopter-like flying machines, and Michelangelo was probably a better anatomist than any doctor or surgeon of the age.

Those small-minded people who are scared that any revelations that Caravaggio might have used optics as an aide to his style of realism, might devalue their Caravaggio collection, should ask themselves why any enterprising, educated and knowlegeable person of that age, involved in the visual arts, would not investigate the use of the new science of optics, as a tool or a guide or an aide. Such people of that era didn't have any prejudice against technology. Any sunstantiated evidence that Caravaggio was one of the few artists of the era who succeeded in employing such methods, despite significant technical difficulties, should enhance the value of Caravaggio's works. He was a very talented bloke.

You might find the following article on Caravaggio's style, suggestive of the use of optics, interesting.  http://grad.mnsu.edu/research/urc/journal/...rnal/Harper.pdf

Now Rob, I think you  should ask Marianne to accompany you to Florence, just to make sure you don't get into trouble. Roberta Lapucci should be able to clarify any technical issues you may have on this subject.  

Cheers!
« Last Edit: July 21, 2010, 11:10:32 PM by Ray » Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad