Clouds
Yes Clouds are cool. They are primal and are great to meditate to. And every once and a while they reveal themselves….
Street Photography
I don’t consider myself a street photographer, but every once and a while, I do get something…
I was touring an open house at Rock Bay Square with some friends, and they were getting a little “rambunctious” I instinctively shot this image. I just heard the shout and clicked the shutter… only later did I realize I had captured such a great expression.
Street Photography
Downtown Victoria
No, I do not call myself a street photographer. I am usually a fairly contemplative photographer. I study an image for a while before I take the final image. Street photography, and related photojournalism, tend to be a much more reactive process. You may see an image starting to come together, so you anticipate when all the elements work, and take the photo. Sometimes things work out as planned, sometimes they don’t (and sometimes things go in a different direction that is even better than you planned…)
To Photoshop or not to Photoshop…
A friend sent me a link to an interesting article, with the message “To Photoshop, or not to Photoshop.” and I agree with the author of the original article, the premise is totally irrelevant. Back in the analogue film days, one might as well have said.
To Darkroom or not to Darkroom
There is not much we do now with Photoshop that wasn’t done in darkrooms of the past. Photoshop arguably makes it easier, and less expensive than chemical and optical processing. I say arguably because good Photoshopping[1] is hard and time consuming, and when you include the cost of a good computer, monitor, graphics tablet, etc it is far from cheap. Back in the day, you could outfit a small darkroom for less than the price of Photoshop[2]by itself.
For some, the process of photography is still the most important thing. “What camera/lens/software did you use?” “How did you make that photo?” and the prevalent “Did you Photoshop that?” The assumption seems to be that if I had that camera, or if I stood where you stood, I could make the same image. If only I had a many-multi-thousand dollar Mac Pro, my photography would grace the pages of all the big magazines. Now of course some people really do enjoy the process, and I have nothing against that, as long as it is recognized for what it is. Some people are car mechanics and some people prefer driving. One is not better than the other, but they are different pursuits.
For me, and my style of “art” photography, the image is the final product. If the image works, it is irrelevant how you got there. Weak execution at any step of the photographic process can lead to a less than great photograph, regardless of the path used. In other words, the final image has to say something, and say so in a cohesive and decisive way. For me, the process is a means to the end.
I had an interesting conversation with an artist friend a while ago about whether I really cared if people did not realize how much work I put into my photography. I think I was a little jealous, because no one questions the skill and work that goes into a painting.
Maybe that is photography’s Achilles heel. Because it is so easy, getting a good image is even harder…
- I really dislike the term Photoshopping. The correct term would probably be digital manipulation, but that doesn’t have quite the same assumptions that the term Photoshopping does.↵
- As of today (May 5, 2013) Photoshop CS6 is still available for between $600 and $700. The cloud version is just rolling out and will probably end up costing most people more. I remember seeing small enlargers for a couple of hundred, plus a couple of hundred for a lens. various trays and sundries may be another hundred… Of course, like everything photographic you could go up from there to whatever stratospheric heights you like…↵
Print Vs. Screen
Computers have affected photography in many ways. The most obvious is probably digital cameras. Film has been relegated to a small niche item.
We can use programs like Photoshop or Gimp to do things that were difficult, if not impossible in the old darkrooms{{1)). Cameras themselves are computerized marvels that make a lot of the technical aspects of photography almost non-existent. There is one area though that may not be as obvious…
Back in the film days, the only way to see the image was to make a print (or project a slide, but that was a whole process by itself…). Now we can make prints easier, or at least less messily, but the majority of images are only seen on a computer screen. Of course the advantage of viewing photos on a computer screen is convenience. With the wonder of the Internet, it is also very easy to share photos with many people (sometimes MANY, MANY people).
There are some disadvantages to viewing photos on a monitor though. If you are sharing photos with others, you have no control of the type of monitor they are using. The image may look great on your high end, colour calibrated monitor, but it may lack detail, contrast, saturation, and colour fidelity on a cheap monitor.
A well made print will have way more detail, a better contrast range, and, in my opinion, more “presence” than a screen image. A print is also more permanent. A print hanging on a wall invites you to come back and investigate it again and again. An image on a computer screen can be turned off.
In the next article, I will talk about how the different display options affect the entire photography work flow, from taking the image to post processing…
[[1]]Actually there were some very creative people in the darkroom. Some of these could do more in the darkroom than some people can do in Photoshop, but overall, it is much easier to manipulate images on a computer, if only because it is easier to “undo” a mistake…[[1]]
Portraiture
Yesterday I was asked to represent Academy of Learning College[1] for the graduation ceremony for the latest HCA (Health Care Assistant) grads. Since it was known that I am also a photographer, I was “volunteered” to take the official grad photos.
I was not really comfortable with this situation for a number of reasons. First, I was not getting paid. In fact I was doing it on my own time, but I was not really too worried about it because I am not an event or portrait photographer. I have taken portraits in the past, but last summer I gave away all my lighting equipment. The only flash I had was the built in pop-up.
Again, lack of flash would not really be an issue if we could shoot outdoors. I was not able to scout the location before the day of the ceremony, so I asked someone who suggested a large tree in front of the building. This would have been great, except that the tree was in the middle of a garden, and I could just imagine the problems with women wearing high heels.
So what is the point of this article? I want to say that I was able to improvise and take some ok photos in the library inside. Yes I had to use a higher ISO than I am used to, and yes I had to edit the photos more than I would have liked, but I think the students will be happy with what they get.
Whenever you are out taking photos, don’t get caught up in what you should do, instead look at what you have and make it work.
Next year I will have to buy a flash….
- Yes I know, the name was chosen by the Department of Redundancy Department….↵
… And another photo
from my drive yesterday.
I have done the retouching for this image in Lightroom on my laptop. Of course the screen of the laptop is not the best, so I may have to revisit this…
Fairy Lake
Driving over Pacific Marine Road you will come across Fairy Lake. This must be one of the most appropriately named lakes around…
You can almost imagine a clan of fairies living on this magical “island”
Book your cruise for May 2014
Mark your calendar for May 15, 2014. Why? We will be cruising through the Mediterranean and taking photos. You can make reservations through Pam at 1 800 668 8122.
So what are you reserving?
- A seven day cruise through the Mediterranean, including two days shooting in Venice
- Return air fair from Victoria
- A small intimate ship
- Some of the best cuisine on the ocean
- Photo instruction by yours truly each evening
- Personal tutoring on your photography during daily shooting outings
- A professional print of your best shot from the week (approximately 13″x19″)
- A showing of all best shots in Victoria
- Much much more
And yes you can bring a non-photographing significant other.
This is a very early booking, so some of the details are still to be worked out, but it will be a blast.
Sidney Ocean Centre
I went back to the Shaw Open Ocean Discovery Centre yesterday to try to get some better photos of the critters there. I think it will take a few trials still…
great potential for photography. I have retouched out a few reflections though…
I did not have a tripod with me, so I had to use a high ISO (1250) and had VR enabled. Even so, parts of the image are soft or blurry. Even with a tripod, the creatures are moving, so stopping them is still a bit of a problem.
Another issue is the moire caused by the Plexiglas, both front and back. If I wanted, I guess I could blur it all out of existence, but I kind of like the impression it gives. It makes the jellyfish even more otherworldly…
A couple of diverse images…
The weather for today was supposed to be not too great so I planned on finishing my taxes and doing some house work. Of course the weather turned out to be pretty good so I had to skip the housework to go out and take some photos….
There was a lot of wind blowing down by the ocean, and I have a ton of images to look at[1] but a couple of simple ones caught my attention:
Birds on a wire
One idea that has been bouncing around my head for a while is to take a photo of birds on a wire, but arrange the birds (and the wires) so the image looks like a musical score. The problem is that I don’t know enough about music to make the image work. Maybe that is an idea to work on with my daughter since she is quite musical.
A tree in front of a hedge
This one is visually quite simple as well, but I do like it. Not really sure why. This image also needs a little bit of tweaking, but I need to figure out where I want to go with it…
- I was playing around with taking multiple exposures of waves crashing on the shore. Once I have processed them, I will have to write a how-to article↵
A trip to the aquarium
This weekend is Victoria’s annual “Be a Tourist in Your Own Home Town.” For $10 you get dozens of tickets to various attractions around Victoria.
Yesterday, Bronwyn and I went to the Shaw Ocean Discovery Centre. I had never been there before. It was pretty amazing.
It was a bit busy, and I did not have a tripod, so the images are not as sharp as I would like (I will have to go back when there are fewer people), but here is a taste of what we saw…
Camera Bags
I am on the ferry over to Vancouver and got thinking about carrying my camera gear.
I guess to start at the beginning, an aspiring photographer first needs to decide what kind of camera gear they want to carry around. Obviously carting a large format system is completely different from putting a smart phone in your pocket. Over the years I have settled on a DSLR with a number of lenses. This gives me the versatility I want while keeping the portability reasonable. I will use this type of camera as a baseline to describe my carrying choices…
Years ago I had a standard over the shoulder bag. I still see many people using these, but for me I found them bulky and awkward, especially if I was climbing over rocks or trees. Also the weight of the bag tended to dig into my shoulder.These bags are great for travelling or working on location, but they are not really “portable” for outdoor photography.
I later tried a big backpack. This was comfortable and could hold a lot of gear, but working with it in the field was a little less than convenient. Basically the backpack would be laid on the ground and acted like a cabinet or desk. Again, great for transporting gear, but not quite so good for shooting.
Next came a photo vest[1] which works great, but looks dorky as all heck…
My current solution is a LowePro sling pack. (Slingshot 100AW) I can carry a DSLR with a lens (currently D600 and 24-85) and three extra lenses (usually 20mm, 70-300, and 90mm macro) or a flash. The bag is comfortable and has an extra strap that prevents the bag from swinging if I am doing serious climbing or scrambling. The bag can swing around to become a convenient platform, and all the accessories are easily accessed. When I am shooting I don’t need to take it off. Downsides? The 100 is too small for larger lenses or cameras and I can only carry three extra lenses. However for a quick carry around bag it is very handy, and it forces me to slim down my everyday equipment.
Bottom line? The best camera is one you have with you. Choosing a good convenient bag enables you to carry a good camera with a minimum of fuss.
- To give credit where it is due, my vest was made by my ex-wife who was very good with a sewing machine. The vest is largely customized for my gear and my working style.↵
My old Camera
I gave my older DSLR to my daughter[1] so she can learn more about photography. I thought I could teach her what I know, but when we went out last weekend, it was me who was learning from her creativity.
I won’t say I was in a rut, more like a groove, but going out with someone who still has a fresh eye, and no preconceptions on what will or will not work, was very refreshing. My daughter was trying things I would otherwise have not bothered with. While we were in Goldstream Park, she was experimenting with angles, points of view, and even subject matter that I would not normally give a second thought. Of course many, if not most of the images did not work, but a few stood out and I may have to go back and try to refine her approach.
One of my daughter’s images of car lights
Later that night, we set up a tripod by the highway so she could record car light trails. I haven’t thought of doing that for years, but it gave me the freedom to experiment.
So the take away lesson is twofold. First, let go of your preconceptions and experiment. The second, and possibly more important lesson is that you can (and should) learn something from any and everyone.
… and then she really started getting creative…
- Actually I LOANED her my old Fuji S2… Since my new camera came with a 24-85 lens, I also loaned her my 35-70 and 24mm. These are both very good lenses, but they are both older then she is (and she is quickly coming up to her 17th birthday)↵
My New D600′s Images
I went up to Spectacle Lake on Saturday with my new camera. The day started out a bit overcast, but the sun came out later, giving a variety of conditions to try out.
The first set of images I have worked on were all taken of ice at the edge of the lake. (the album is here). One of my favourites is this one…
I was originally attracted to the subtle colours and fractured shapes. I felt it was quite “painterly”. Maybe someone with a better knowledge of art history can tell me who this reminds me of…
The image was quite easy to work on in Photoshop, I emphasized the surface texture and enhanced a few of the sub ice colours. I also evened out the light, as the top left was a bit bright and pulled the eye away from the interesting things happening on the right.
My New D600
This review will be broken into two parts, this one on the camera and and the article following on image quality.
I bought myself a new Nikon D600 last Thursday, and this weekend is the first time I have been able to “play” with it. There is lots to learn with this camera, the owners manual is the size of a small novel (and yes that is only the English). For these reasons, this will be an evolving review as I learn more….
Of course the first thing I did after I bought my camera was to charge the battery. I wish the charger displayed the battery level, but that is not a big deal, as the camera seems to be accurate (no I have not killed a charge yet, but I am not one for taking thousands of images on a shoot). Once I got home from work, I started reading the manual. The manual will take a couple of reads before I learn everything, but a quick browse gave me an idea of some of the things I wanted to customize. Since I am coming from a much older and simpler camera, I probably have more to learn than someone upgrading from a more recent model. I am not one for gadgets on my cameras…
Out taking photos, the camera handles well. Honestly I don’t think it feels as good as my old Fuji S2-Pro, but that might just be a familiarity thing. I know build quality is better on the D600. The viewfinder is nice and bright, and seems to show everything you really need. One feature I did not think about was live view. When shooting at an unusual angle, I did not have to contort to see through the viewfinder to compose. Again, I prefer using the viewfinder, but the live view was a help for a couple of shots.
One thing I did not like was the remote release. The cord can be plugged in backwards. It takes a very little extra effort, and I am afraid it could break some contacts or something. I will have to mark the plug somehow (I am thinking of a dot of bright red nail polish). I will also need to figure out a way to mount the release to the tripod. I tend to leave the camera on the tripod and carry it over my shoulder. If I leave the remote plugged it, it swings. In other words, it is not a well designed remote. There is available a wireless remote, but having used those in the past, I’m not a big fan…
When I got home to download the images I was in for another surprise. My Linux computer recognized the raw files fine, however my windows machine did not. A download from Nikon enabled me to see thumbnails, but that was about it. Lightroom 4 recognized the files, but Photoshop CS5 did not. Contrary to what seems like most photographers, I don’t really like Lightroom, and I don’t see a real need to update to Photoshop CS6. Thank goodness Digikam understands the files. I do miss some of the controls and ease of ACR, but I can work around that. I will have to figure out a workflow…
Back to the camera though, Image quality is amazing. I could get very good images with my old Fuji, but I felt like I was pushing it right up to, and even past, what it could provide. I often had to work pretty hard to get what I wanted. With the D600, I get the feeling I have room to spare. The image files just keep going, amazing detail, tons of dynamic range, and very malleable.
Of course the camera is new, and I have to justify the cost, but I think as I learn the D600, it will prove to be a versatile tool.
Why I like Goldstream Park
(This is the post I started to write when I noticed I had written 99 posts on this blog)
The main part of Goldstream Park (that is, the banks of Goldstream Creek) is not that big, but it always seems to provide good photographic material.
This image really leads my eye into the thick undergrowth in the background:
There is a strong vertical compositional movement with a few visual pit stops on the way. I used a wide angle lens (20mm) to emphasize the depth, and then I spend some time in photoshop emphasizing details to provide more depth[1]. I used two basic techniques here, I make the top third and background cooler (more blue) to help it recede, and I used tone to paint depth. Bright tones tend to look closer, while darker tones fall back. This is where my pen and tablet are useful. I use my “glazing” technique to paint tonality.
In this image, the same wide angle lens was used to create a sense of space:
I used the same glazing technique here, but I also gave some form to the trees. I lightened the edges using a very soft graduated brush. This enhances the roundness of the trees. I increased the contrast of the water drops against the dark background, and darkened select trees in the foggy background.
If you are paying attention, you may notice that I used the same technique for opposite effects in these images. In the top image, I lightened to bring forward and darkened to push back. For the second, I lightened the edges of the main trees to emphasize their roundness. In other words to push the edges of the trees back. I darkened background trees to bring them forward.
So what is the lesson here? Tone can be used to shape, as well as to separate elements in space.
How do you learn this? Study art, especially masters. The Rembrandt and Ansel Adam each understood this, and used various techniques within their medium to achieve this. With digital imaging, various programs such as Photoshop give us the tools to copy the techniques from other art forms.
But by far the most important skill to learn is how to look at your images objectively and critically. And of course this is probably the hardest skill of all to learn…
Oh, and why do I like Goldstream Park? It continues to teach me subtleties…
What I love about Victoria
Victoria is “The City of Gardens.” It could also be called the City of Parks. There seem to be little gems everywhere.
I have driven past Cuthbert Holmes Park many times but never stopped. Sunday morning seemed like a good time to have a look (either that or housework…). It was a nice walk on a wide path, but later in the morning all the dog walkers came out.
I did manage to get a few shots. Here is the first… (click on the image for a larger version)
And yes there is a little bit of photoshop work, but it is not obvious.
Left behind
Why is software (and hardware for that matter) is such a moving target?
Years ago I did a lot of research to find a good on line gallery software. I tried a bunch and settled on Gallery2. As I learned the software, I grew to like it more and more. It was versatile, it let me do what I wanted, and it looked good. Unfortunately, software developers get bored with maintaining the same software, so they came out with Gallery3. Of course Gallery3 is not compatible with Gallery2. All the tweaks and customizations I put into my website would not work with the new system. I have been using Gallery2 anyway, but it looks like I may have to change. All the extras[1] don’t seem to work as well as they used to, and the main integration with WordPress is not quite as easy as it once was….. Bummer….
- There was a plugin, for example, for Linux that let me upload photos directly from my desktop by right clicking on an image. Now that plugin seems to have disappeared. I can still upload photos, but it is not quite as quick and easy↵
How to test a lens…
I am a bit different from most photographers (no smirking in the back row….) in that I do not believe there is such a thing as a “bad” lens. You may get a defective lens, or a particular lens may not do what you want it to do, but if you take its quirks into account, you can get great photos from any lens. The corollary is not true though, not every lens is a “good” lens. Some lenses are too specialized, or take too much effort to understand their quirks that they do not easily work for a specific type of photography. I used to have a Nikon 70-200 f2.8 lens. Many people love that focal ranged, and the lens itself was very sharp and high quality, however, for me, it was not a good lens. Using a crop frame camera, the lens was either too long, or too short. For the weight of the lens (it was a bit of a brute) it was just not worth carrying around for the number of photos I could get from it.[1]
Since I was working two jobs last December, I bought myself a Christmas present, a Tamron 90mm macro lens. The owner of Japan Camera gave me a great deal and I could not say no. But since I was working two jobs, I was not able to take any real photos until this weekend.
Tamron has been making a version of this lens since forever[2] and it has always had good reviews. I was impressed by the build quality. It does look quite different than most Nikon or Canon lenses. Maybe it is the smooth barrel and lack of aperture ring (although the latter is more common with many modern lenses). The focus ring on the Tamron is quite slick. Click it forward and the lens is in autofocus, click it back and it is in manual focus. I have a Sigma lens with a similar mechanism, but on the Sigma, the focus ring turns while in autofocus. The Tamron doesn’t. For some reason, the reversible lens hood seems a bit cheap. Nothing I can really explain, it seems to work fine, and it clicks into placed on the lens. We will see after a few years of use…
But of course handling of a lens is very secondary to picture quality. The weekend was overcast with drizzling rain, so the light was quite even, but water drops and wet reflections provided lots of contrast.
- And it was not just the weight. I have a 300 f4 that is about the same weight, and a little bit bigger, but the reach is worth the weight. When I bring the 300 I find shots that I could not get otherwise. The 70-200 did not solve enough photographic problems for me, so I traded it for a 60mm macro.↵
- Wikipedia says 1997↵
Happy New Year
A case for more than one camera…
Today, New Years Eve, I went skiing with my dad and my daughter. After a year of being in school (and under stress) I am not in good shape, so I was not sure how fit I would be, so I decided not to bring my expensive camera, in case I wiped out[1]. I thought I could use my cell phone if something really exciting happened.
The sun came out over the mountains and sparkled on the trees, but my cell phone could not do them justice. But if I would have brought my DSLR, I would have been worried about it all day. A small pocket size waterproof camera might have been useful. Maybe if I start skiing more, it might be a good investment….
- My favourite “camera case” is a small LowePro Sling 102 AW. It holds 3 or 4 lenses, a few other accessories (like extra batteries and a cable release). is comfortable to wear on your back, and provides easy access to everything↵
Perfect Images
In the days of film, we photographers never really knew what our pictures looked like until we had the film developed[1]. When I was a kid growing up in a small town, I had to wait an eternity to see what my photos looked like. First it took a while to finish a roll of film, then I dropped it off at the local drug store where it took a good week or so to get developed. finally, I had to save up my allowance so I could pay for the magic package. During all this time, I would imagine the images that I had captured. In my mind, I would soon be seeing 24 or 36 masterpieces that would transform photography in the 20th century. Ok, maybe not quite that bad, but the point is, I imagined the best possible scenario.
Business people[2] suffer from the same malady. When doing a business projection, many prospective entrepreneurs over estimate income(everyone will want my service/product. I will grow phenomenally quickly) and under estimate expenses (I can get a better deal on that….). I think it is part of the creative mind. We imagine reality to be better than it may be. This is not a bad thing, and, in fact, it may be what drives artists and entrepreneurs to keep going…
My Mom calls me a survivor. I have gone through some tough times, but I always seem to land on my feet. I think the biggest factor is that I don’t give up. I keep trying. Sometimes things work, sometimes they don’t, but I am always moving forward. It frustrates me that some people give up. They become afraid of “what if”. I think creative people, such as artists or business people, become excited with “what if”. It isn’t a case of glass half full or glass half empty, it is a case of what can be done with the extra room in the glass….
- This post was inspired by this blog, specifically the quote, “Any photographer will tell you that exposed film only contains perfect images. It’s only in development that you find out that you did it wrong.”↵
- and others. Why do people buy lottery tickets? To imagine a dream. Until you check your numbers, you can imagine what it would be like to have 50 million dollars…..↵
Printing and DPI vs PPI
I have seen a question asked in a number of forms (and forums). The most common variant seems to be along the lines of, “Why does my super expensive uber-camera only record 72 DPI?”[1]
This can get quite complicated, but I will try to keep it simple. Before we can even start, though, we need some definitions:
DPI or Dots Per Inch is an often misused printing term.[2] For ink jets printers it refers to the number of distinct drops of a specific colour of ink placed on the paper. As a simple example imagine a 3 colour printer that has 300 holes in an inch wide print head, 100 for the cyan ink (C), 100 for the magenta (M), and 100 for the yellow (Y). This printer has 300 dots per inch[3]. But remember that each of these dots can only be one colour (we will ignore black and other colour inks used in higher end printers, this is a cheap make-believe printer just to demonstrate a point). Additional colours can be made by mixing different numbers of dots of these inks, along with the white of the paper, in a very small area (look at a print under a magnifying glass sometime). The way a printer does this is to place a number of dots of each required colour (CMY) within a matrix[4].
cyan pixel |
magenta pixel |
light yellow pixel, some paper white is allowed to show through |
blue pixel, made from cyan and magenta ink drops |
Now, back to our original 300 dpi printer. Imagine that this print head used a 100 dot matrix to make each pixel. It takes 100 dots to make up one colour. It may take 27 cyan dots, 56 magenta dots, and 7 yellow dots while leaving the rest of the matrix white to make up the required colour . Each colour matrix represents ONE pixel. Therefore, this theoretical print head can print three (3) PIXELS per inch (PPI).
This is why some printers say they have 1200 dpi or more. This is NOT the same as 1200 PPI. The number of pixels, and the actual resolution has nothing (ok, very little) to do with the DPI. A higher dpi may mean a higher ppi, it may mean a larger range of printable colours, but it could also mean absolutely nothing!
So now we know what printed dots are, but what about resolution? Resolution is the number of pixels in an image, usually measured along the horizontal and vertical axes. 640 pixels wide by 480 pixels tall as an example[5].
So where does ppi come in? Let’s say we want to print an 8 inch by 10 inch picture. We know from experience that we need about 300 ppi to make a photo realistic image[6]. We multiply 8 inches times 300 ppi for 2400 pixels and 10 times 300 for 3000 pixels. We need an image of 2400 x 3000 pixels[7].
A lot of the confusion comes when printing programs or graphics programs use dpi when they mean ppi. People also get confused when they are re-sizing images. If you don’t change the number of pixels in an image (which is what affects the file size) you can specify any dpi you want. An example I used in a forum was, ” Which has more resolution, a 10 ppi image, or a 1000 ppi image?” The question is unanswerable unless I also tell you either print size, in which case you can calculate pixel dimensions, or pixel dimensions directly.
So keep an eye on pixel dimensions, and make sure your software isn’t changing the pixel count when all you want to do is print your image.
Note: If you have any questions or comments, please contact me so I can incorporate them in future articles.
- The 72 number may vary. This post was inspired by someone asking about 200 DPI vs 320 DPI. Another common question is, “What dpi should I print at?” hence the title of the article↵
- It is also been used to describe the number of each red, green or blue elements on a monitor. In common usage, dpi and ppi (pixels per inch) are often used interchangeably, which leads to much of the confusion.↵
- This printer doesn’t exist of course, and most print heads have fewer holes than their DPI rating. This is accomplished by the head moving across the print surface and “firing” multiple times per inch during that pass.↵
- One of the differences between a good photo printer and a regular colour printer is the way these dots are arranged. Some laser printers put down a very regular and rectangular grid. This can be visibly distracting in a photograph.↵
- For some reason Great Britain (not sure about the rest of Europe) measures images opposite to North America. What we call 8×10 they call 10×8. I guess they think we also drive on the wrong side of the road…↵
- The ppi required (often also called resolution – see where all the confusion comes in?) is partly dependant on the printer you are using, and partly on the viewing distance. For a regular print you are going to be looking closely at, use around 300 ppi. I may write on this topic in more depth at a later date…. or maybe not….↵
- as an aside, note that this is a 7.2 megapixel image. If you are willing to go to 200 ppi, which a lot of people find more than acceptable, you can get away with a 3.2 megapixel camera. Yes you can make decent prints with your cell phone, as long as it has good quality pixels (another topic, and rare in a cell phone) and a good lens (very rare).↵
Old Photos
I randomly came across this image I had taken last year. At the time I put it in my rejects pile. One of the problems with the image was lack of sharpness, but the biggest issue was that I could not figure out how to make it work as an image.
As it happened, I came across this image shortly after meeting a graphic designer named Boo. Although she is just getting back into photography, her work has a gritty style I like. It seems to work well for this image. It also hides some of the flaws in the original capture. I have not printed it yet, but I like the story it is trying to tell. A little bit more tweaking and it may end up in my portfolio…