Photography and Juried Shows

Jewelry Discussion
41 
My 2 1/2" screen gives a pretty good indicator of what the shot
will look like.

You know, I really miss looking through the lens of my film camera.
I felt that I knew pretty exactly what the shot would look like. I
simply cannot see that kind of detail with a digital. To get the
same effect, I would have to run the camera signal to a computer or
TV (as my photog does) but that isn’t practical for my purposes.

I for sure can’t see whether the shot will really be in focus!

I love many, many things about digital, but for me, there’s nothing
like the immediacy, the simple control, and the solid (if overly
heavy) feel of my old Nikon film camera… but I don’t use it any
more. Sigh.

Noel

42 
I have noticed when I work on my pictures in photo shop I brighten
them until I think they are just right and then when I put them up
on my pages they appear a lot darker. So I go back to P S and
brighten them some more. If anyone wants to give me any feedback -
I'd like to know if others are seeing what I see.

Unfortunately, all monitors are not created equal. MAC’s and PC’s
can have further differences. All the more reason to process your
images on a calibrated monitor or have someone who has a properly
calibrate monitor do it for you. Without that, the pics on your site
may look great to you, on your monitor, and terrible to someone
else.

But your pics looked great here!!

Wayne

43

Wayne,

For those of you have put up with my rantings thus far, may I ask a
question? Do you think there is a market for a CD, DVD, or book
addressing only fine photography for jewelry, including the
necessary Photshop manipulation procedures?

I would be interested in the CD or DVD with Photoshop tips. Using
the magic wand to fill in a gradient background is something I would
really like to learn. So if you are selling it, I’m buying.

Diane

44

I’d been meaning to comment on this thread when, irony of ironies, I
found in my mailbox just now my returned, professionally taken, no
retouch slides from Lark with the comment they were likely rejected
because of image quality. Sorry, Elaine, I was going to side with the
photoshoppers on this anyway, and now here’s my proof!

What’s so funny is that in fear of Lark’s rules, I’d put off
submitting anything to them for years and finally caved by
submitting older works on slides to avoid the problem. Next time I’ll
send in my usual PS improved images with the oh so faked backgrounds.
Art Jewelry and Jewelry Artist have been fine with them, so perhaps
Lark will be too.

To whomever suggested a PS for smiths tutorial CD, I’d buy one!!!
While I’m proficient at it, I’m not all that speedy, and after years
of shooting digital images, I’ve found there are still plenty of
tricks that can be learned.

Thank you, Brian, for your post on this thread!!!

A digital picture is worth 1000 slides,

Victoria
Victoria Lansford

45

Elaine,

My point still stands -- the composition, the color -- should still
be good coming right out of the camera. If you have to do some
digital manipulation fine, but the *shot* itself should be
adequate. Most of what you need should be accomplished in *reality*
not in computer-land. Because reality is a good thing and it's
faster.

You are wrong. Please read this post carefully.

I am not an expert on digital photography, but in my struggle for
better images I did do some research.

Digital cameras cannot reproduce reality. It is physical
impossibility. Human eyes in combination with brain create an image
inside our heads which is based in part on our previous experience.
That is why different people see the same color differently. Another
limitation is that camera sensor is not as good as human retina.
Manufactured lenses, regardless of the price, are inferior to the
human eye as well. That is why camera cannot possibly reflect reality
of the object been photographed.

If you want the picture reflect reality, it is your task to make it
look real using post-processing. The reason, when you look at the
picture that you took of your jewellery, looks the same to you, is
because you know how jewellery actually looks and your mind
substitute one image for the other.

Let my assure you that a person, who never saw your jewellery, would
have quite different impression. By doing post-processing, you simply
restoring the image to what it should be. Another way of looking at
it
as a correcting camera deficiencies.

Leonid Surpin.

46

Count me in on the Photoshop how-to CD. I need it in the worst way!
Right NOW!!

Cheers all,
Hans Durstling
Moncton Canada -
where it raineth torrentially; and I want to photograph stones outdoors.

47 
I simply cannot see that kind of detail with a digital.

Noel, I sometimes use my optivisor to view slides that I hold up to
the light, with a white piece of paper about a foot behind them. I
guess that it would also be useful in viewing the small screen of a
digital camera.

M’lou

48 
This is best done with the camera "tethered" to your work monitor
(which has been calibrated, hopefully) so that you can judge when
you have created an acceptable exposure...

Wayne’s generous and reasonable-sounding (as well as knowledgable)
post makes clear, once again, two things: 1) why we hire
professional photographers and 2) how we are all pulled and pushed
to reach a professional level of competency in areas that are not
our profession.

It wouldn’t be so bad if it were just photography. After all, we’re
all visual types. But it isn’t. Marketing, accounting and business,
display, scheduling, sourcing, shipping, and all the other hats we
need to wear on a daily or weekly basis-- what’s a starving artist
to do?

So, we muddle along as best we can. What choice is there? But I
simply don’t have house room in my head to absorb the details of
taking proper photographs of my work, or room in my house/studio to
set up nor money to equip a proper photo set-up.

I mention all this only because I feel sure there are many out there
reading this and saying “Yes! Exactly!”, so I’m just voicing the
frustration for myself and others, not because I expect (or think
there is) a solution.

Noel

49

Wayne,

Thanks very much for taking the time to look at my pics, its
reassuring to me that they look ok to you.

Now a dumb question, where can you get a monitor calibrated? I have a
huge, heavy old monitor - someday I’ll spend the $$ and get a lovely
new flat screen one, but meantime…

Jan
www.designjewel.com

50 
I for sure can't see whether the shot will really be in focus! I
love many, many things about digital, but for me, there's nothing
like the immediacy, the simple control, and the solid (if overly
heavy) feel of my old Nikon film camera... but I don't use it any
more. Sigh.

I hear you, Noel. But the eyepiece in my digital is pretty much the
same as my old Nikons and Canons (better, actually). I am used to
working in large format, 4x5 inch, where you routinely examine the
image on the ground glass focusing screen with a loupe…so going
to that 35 style is a real hassle.

Fortunately, the lenses I use in digital have excellent auto-focus
capabilities, far better than I could ever do manually.
Additionally, my longer lenses have built-in image stabilization
allowing for 1/15 second shots at 400 mm, hand-held. Razor sharp.
Can’t do that with the old Nikon!

I think digital is very good in most areas, and starting to surpass
the old 35 mm in many areas. But for that capability, bring your
checkbook!

Wayne

51

Hi Elaine,

... most of us are just trying to make some jewelry, shoot
documentary shots of it before it leaves the studio.

I see where you’re coming from now, but this thread was never about
taking documentary shots; it’s been about jury images, which are
something else altogether!

I agree that it helps to start with a well lit, in focus, color-true
photographic or digital image in the first place. But even the best
of those can be improved.

Beth

52 
Pat, thanks for the great tips! These lights sound very
intriguing. How, exactly, do you use them? With an umbrella? Soft
Box? Are they triggered from the camera, or just on/off?

I use them with 24"x24" soft boxes mounted to the flash itself to
diffuse the light (not to be confused with a cube tent). They can be
triggered a number of ways. The easiest way is a direct cable link
(usually included with the flash) from your full body digital SLR to
one flash (If you have two or more the others are triggered by the
master flash itself) Personally I use a hot shoe mounted radio
trigger ($30), basically its a remote for the flash that gets
triggered by the camera. For reflection control, I use either a cube
tent, or a DIY one made from 2x4 flourscent light diffusers (home
depot, $7), this also diffuses the light, an added bonus. If your
using a cube tent, you might not need the softboxes.

The one problem I see with a flash is you can't adust the light by
looking at the LCD while moving things around. My 2 1/2" screen
gives a pretty good indicator of what the shot will look like.

When shooting with flashes you always take a test shots first, then
to do any light/camera adjustments accordingly. Its always best to
have the camera linked to your monitor, or just take the card out and
view the image in photoshop. Ive gotten to the point where I can make
adjustments by reading the histogram and viewing using the on camera
screen, this saves a bunch of time running back and forth to the
computer.

The nice advantage when shooting with these flashes is your ISO and
shutter time, I tend to shoot at the lowest ISO on the camera, for me
thats 100, this reduce the noise associated with higher ISO settings,
and the shutter speeds are pretty fast, in the 180-250 range. Once
again dictated by the lighting and camera, but shooting at these
speeds elminates the need for a tripod.

Once you have all these things set, it immensly reduces the amount
of time spent in photoshop.

P@

53 
Most of what you need should be accomplished in *reality*
not in computer-land. Because reality is a good thing and it's
faster.

That is the point I was trying to make cameras don’t capture
reality. No color film records the correct color they can come close
but there is always some bias, some are warm (more reds) some are
cool (more blues) some are saturated (more intense brighter color)
etc. So when you have the ability to correct for a more “real” color
correction you will have a better documentary or or jury image.
Focus, lighting and composition are best done in the setup and with
the camera wether it is digital or film as you noted.

It's terrific that some of you know so much about pre-press
printing and whatever, great, but most of us are just trying to
make some jewelry, shoot documentary shots of it before it leaves
the studio.

It has nothing to do with pre press but whether you want to have the
real correct colors so that when you look at the image in 5 years
you will know what the colors were. In the days before digital this
was just not an option without very fancy equipment and lots of
training and skills. Now you can do what you need for documentary
shots in a flash with a variety of photo editing programs.

James Binnion
@James_Binnion
James Binnion Metal Arts

360-756-6550

54 
I love many, many things about digital, but for me, there's
nothing like the immediacy, the simple control, and the solid (if
overly heavy) feel of my old Nikon film camera... but I don't use
it any more.

The only word I have a problem with in that paragraph is “imediacy”
used to describe a film camera. Unless you are a photographer who
does your own processing, film cameras give far from immediate
results. For sure you can see what your picture will look like when
viewing through the lens of a film SLR but having to wait until
you’ve finished a film and sent it off for developing and eagerly
await your pictures was something I always found extremely
frustrating.

The word “immediacy” for me aptly describes my new digital SLR. I can
take many many pictures in whatever format I want, raw, jpeg, raw
plus jpeg, etc, etc, change various settings between pictures, plug
my camera into my Mac laptop and see the pictures IMMEDIATELY! And
then if I’ve taken them in raw format, can do whatever I want with
the aid of Photoshop. Now that’s what I call immediacy. I too have a
film SLR and loved using it but since the advent of decent digital
SLR’s, surprise, surprise I no longer use my film SLR either. I’m
still learning how to use my new Nikon D40X but it’s producing some
great results already

Helen
Preston, UK

55

I haven’t read all of this thread but, I just had to jump in here
because it is so important for metal artisans to know what the
different publishers aren’t explaining because it is kind of complex
and hard to understand.

Please, If you want to get your photos of your jewelry published DO
NOT Photoshop the images in any way, shape, or form! It really messes
with the image file and the production people will need to do to a
lot more work to get your photo ready for the printing process. It
will cost the publisher a bunch more money so your jewelry will have
to be just incredible for the publisher to take on that extra cost.

Get really good professional photos taken with a neutral or a
gradient background, that doesn’t always have to be gray. Have your
photographer get the film or slides scanned to a digital disk as part
of the job he is doing for you or ask them to shoot in digital.
Remember a good photographer has a creative vision too and can really
help the look of your work.

Send tiff files or bigger (RAW) because the publisher need that level
of file size for it to print well. Do Not send jpegs. If you don’t
have huge, untouched digital files, send your best and most recent
35mm slides.

Do Not compress your digital images at anytime. It degrades the file
to the point that the image file can become un-usable by
the publisher. DO Send huge image files (tiff or raw) burned to a CD

I just got my fifth notice of being accepted for publication in 2008
and I owe it to my great photographers Doug Yaple and Jim Forbes.

Individual results may vary.
Nanz Aalund

56 
how we are all pulled and pushed to reach a professional level of
competency in areas that are *not* our profession.

Isn’t THAT the truth!!

We must become expert in so many fields that it is indeed a
challenge. I think of Van Gogh, who knew nothing about marketing
(left it to his brother), accounting, sales, etc. Of course, he was
broke when he committed suicide.

There’s a dark thought!!! I think we can do better…

Wayne

57 
where can you get a monitor calibrated?

Try this for … How to Fix Discoloration and Distortion on a Computer Screen

Wayne

58

Hi Nanz!

Just to prevent more confusion on the subject of photography…

What you said is precisely correct IF the submitter is presenting
photography for print publication. But I don’t think that was the
subject of the discussion.

Rather, we were discussing the narrow subject of “slides” for juried
exhibition. Unless the photographer has a strong relationship with a
given publisher, it is impossible to know what methods a given
publisher would like…unless, of course, the photographer asks. I
think it is safe to say that what you suggest (submission of
un-retouched RAW or TIFF files) is certainly safe.

But we need to keep in mind that the making and processing (or not)
of photographic images demands that we understand the end use. The
processing of images is different for inkjet printing for display,
CMYK printing, web display, etc. One should not paint with too broad
a paintbrush, so let’s make it clear that post-processing is
something every digital photographer should learn and use. There are
many uses for that image beyond four-color printing, and each use
needs to be handled differently.

The creating of fine photographic images of jewelry for the Internet
is really not that difficult once one has the proper tools and a bit
of knowledge and practice. Not unlike soldering, it seems impossible
at first, but, with practice, becomes quite simple.

Best regards,
Wayne

59 
Please, If you want to get your photos of your jewelry published DO
NOT Photoshop the images in any way, shape, or form! It really
messes with the image file and the production people will need to
do to a lot more work to get your photo ready for the printing
process. It will cost the publisher a bunch more money so your
jewelry will have to be just incredible for the publisher to take
on that extra cost.

Nanz I have a real problem with this. I hire a professional photog
who shots work for catalogs. One day we had problems lighting a
piece of jewelry so both the gold showed warm and “gold like” and the
facets of the stone showed as well as the great color of the stone.
We tried a variety of lighting in his well equipped studio. Finally
he took 2 shots. One with the gold lit properly & 1 with the stone
lit properly. Then he put them together to create the perfect shot
of the brooch. This “composite” photo didn’t misrepresent the work in
anyway, in fact it was a truer representation (one our imperfect
human eye could see) then either one of the photos he used. He also
photoshopped out fuzz, wax marks etc.

I have had this piece printed into a post card…and sent it other
places for jury slides, brochures etc. no problems.

Now as an artist I am to (with or without a professional photog) to
shoot the most perfect of photos so a publication will pick mine
AND!!! it must not be photoshopped in anyway…to save them
production time?

Damn, do I have to provide the ink & paper for them too & pay for
the electricity to run the presses?

Nanz, I’m not shooting the messenger as I know you are just sharing
the reality as you have experienced it. So my frustration is not
with you. I really thank you for the further clarification.

But…as an artist there is a limit to what I can do. When does
the publication/magazine/book publisher take some responsibility for
their work? I’m a jeweler not a graphics print person. I did my job
of sending them an accurate, well shot, well composed photo of well-
made work. Now I have to make it easy for them to print too? Sheesh.
Give me a break. Give us all a break. Isn’t that what THEY get paid
for? (This is a rhetorical question, no need for an answer.)

For the record, I asked my photog if anyone could know what he had
done. He who has worked with catalogs and press people for years,
fed his family, paid his mortgage, bought cars… earns his living
as a professional photog, said, “No.”

Carla

60

My husband recently bought a Pantone Huey Pro monitor calibration
device. It makes your monitor “speak” colours according to the
standard Pantone colour system. Here is the link to a UK supplier but
I’m sure they’ll be available in the US too:

Apparently you can get a kit that will make your monitor, scanner
and printer all “speak” the same colours.

No affiliation etc.

Helen
UK