Critique Notes - No. 19/Nov. 2007
IN THIS EDITION:
:: Convincing color between the sky and land - a photo demonstration
:: Preparing slides for submission
:: Is it still necessary to shoot slides?
Convincing color between Sky and ground - a photo demonstration
Working too closely from photos, especially if they are under- or over-exposed, can make it very difficult to capture a convincing light within the painting. This demonstration shows how an overexposed original photo can be "doctored" in Photoshop to create a new version that can serve as a much better reference than the original. The first image, appearing most washed out, is the original. The second is the original, but darkened. The third is the doctored image, with full value and color correction.
Original photo. The original photo demonstrates a common photographic problem when shooting high contrast subjects. The camera makes a single exposure based on how dark or light it reads the subject. The trouble is, the camera is very poor at finding a compromise exposure between darks and lights, as there usually are between the land and the sky, especially at sunset. You have probably seen this in photos you've taken yourself: when the photo is exposed for the sky, it has lots of saturation and color, but the ground turns to black. The opposite happens when the photo is exposed for the ground. The ground becomes much lighter, but the sky "blows out" to white and loses most of its color, as in this example. When taking photographic reference, then, the solution is simply to take two photos, one that exposes for the sky and one that exposes for the land.
If you only want to take one photo, err on the side of exposing for the sky and letting the land get dark. If the sky blows out to white, it is not recoverable. The information simply doesn't exist in the digital image. However, there is lots more information buried in he darks. In Photohsop, the Shadow/Highlight filter can work miracles in bringing light and exposure back into the darks.
Shadow Highlight. If you have a digital photo in which the shadows have all gone to ultra dark green or black, here's an easy way to fix that.
1. Image > adjustments > Shadow Highlight.
2. A dialog box with a slider will come up. By default, the amount in "Shadows" is 50% (which is usually too much), but you can lower that amount for best results
Darkened original. Now the original image was simply darkened, which alone is a big improvement. The addtional contrast and saturation of the foreground colors, even as muted neutrals, is much more convincing.
Fully altered photo. 1. I darkened the ground further and gave it considerably more contrast. 2. I inserted a sunset sky from another well-exposed photo, replacing what was missing in the original. 3. I altered the color of the ground, shifting it to red. 4. I ran the entire image through a shape filter in Photoshop to give it the appearance of a painting. Step 3 is the key to creating a convincing light. Not only are the colors of the sky and land "exposed" properly, but the color of the ground has been modified to feel like it is actually being influenced by the color of the red sunset.The final version may be a far cry from the original, with much of the color "invented;" however, it does demonstrate an important truth about landscape light: there is a direct relationship between the color of the sky and the color of the land. To be convincing, the ground colors must have the appearance of being influenced by a light of a particular color.
I don't suggest relying on the photographic colors unless it's a very good photo and you're sure it works. The color that you invent, or put back into the painting, will almost always be better and more creative than anything the camera will record.
Preparing slides for submission
What information should go on the slide, and should a separate sheet listing the slides also be submitted? Each slide should basically include everything: artist's name, title, dimensions (the vertical dimension goes first), medium, date, and the orientation (if it's not completely obvious from the image). An additional sheet listing the slides is not essential if the slides are labeled clearly; if you're still unsure, simply ask the source to whom you're submitting. Also, hand written labels or writing directly onto to the slide casing is fine, as long as it's legible. If you do want to get fancy and use printed labels, the Avery series 840 labels are the right fit -- 1/2" x 1-3/4".
I also suggest — and I have no formal verification that galleries actually like this — that printed samples; i.e. a page with 5 or 6 pieces grouped together can really grab someone. Slides have to be held up to the light or placed into a projector. A printed sheet is immediately noticeable and arresting.
Is it still necessary to shoot slides?
Slides are in a period of transition. In the not too distant past, they were the only accepted way to submit to any venue. Now, more and more places are accepting digital images. As someone who works with digital images on a regular basic, I still recommend taking slides. Here's why: There is, as yet, no fool proof method to ensure that what you photograph, or the adjustments you make on your display, will appear the same way on the display of the person reviewing the images. Slide consistency, on the other hand, is very good. (They've had a few years head start!) Getting a slide professionally shot, with perfect color correction, will stand as the only reliable record of what the color of your painting actually was. If I sell a painting and all I have is a digital image, and that digital image is not an accurate rendition of my original, then I have no real record of the accurate color. For the cost, $15 or less per slide, I still shoot slides and will continue to do so for a long time. Admittedly, you don't need to shoot everything, but anything of importance needs that record. For those in Seattle, Wash., I recommend Art & Soul Photo, 2860 NW Market St. (206) 297-1223.
|
