Orton Fall Pano

Here is a shot from fall that I just made a 34 x 64 canvas of - you can see the stretched canvas at the gallery opening next weekend. I ran the Orton action on it and backed the opacity off to about 60%. I don't use that technique much but sometimes it can make a dull scene into something more...

Hi Tim, By the way I really enjoyed your slideshow and meeting you in Fort Smith. I have yellowstone in winter on my photography to do list (sometimes fantasy) now!

I love the image and would love to see print where is the gallery going to be at.

Also I am not familiar with a Orton action please give us some brief information.

Thanks Gale

Really nice image Tim and I like what the subtle Orton effect has done here. I really like the stark tree trunks contrasting with the colorful fall leaves. It's too bad that people put their names on the tree trunks though.

I wish I could make it down for the open house but your place is a bit too far from me for a casual visit. I'm sure it will be a packed house!

That is funny about the signature - I've never though about that before! With these kinds of images I find the black tree trunk is a great place to sign, however it does not make the best statement though does it!

For those who don't read the Cloudland Journal, we are having an open house in our new Buffalo River Gallery on December 8th, from 10-4. All of the big gallery-wrapped canvas prints that we will have in stock will be on sale for 50% off, and it only costs peanuts to attend! There is info here - BUFFALO RIVER GALLERY open house.

The "Orton" technique is one that goes in and out of style, originally created by a guy named Orton who used to sandwich two 35mm color slides together and project them that way - one in focus and one out of focus. I've been doing the same type of technique for many years, and call it my "Double Exposure Blur" technique. There is an action available online somewhere for free that will do all of the dirty work for you (there are several steps), and if you just back up a little bit when it is done you have quite a bit of control (the action itself flattens as the final step so you need to undo that). It works great for some images, and not at all for most images - and the only way to figure that out is to run it and see what you get. Bill Dark is the expert on this technique on this board...

Oh, by the way, after looking at this image above some more I have decided to make a "Triptych" out of it, which will consist of three 34 x 52 prints side by side that together will make up the whole scene - a great deal of work and expense for just one print! The final group of images will be more than eight feet wide when hung together.

Very nice pano, Tim. Wish I could come to AR for the Open house. I'm sure it will be spectacular! Gale if you want a step by step on the Orton Technique, here is an address for one version of the technique.

http://www.naturephotographers.net/articles0106/dw0106-1.html

You'll find that almost everyone modifies the technique a bit.

Nicely done, Tim. I do think the Orton technique makes some images really come alive, as you've shown here. I have several of them on display at the AR World Trade Center, and have learned that some people really like the effect, while others think it looks too "fake". As you have said on numerous occasions, I think many photographers' goal is to create beautiful images of nature so as to inspire more people to take good care of it. You've certainly done a good job with this one!

BTW, you can put me down on the open house RSVP list!

Love the image! Can't wait to see the final version!

I spent a bit of time thinking about the "Orton" effect when asked to put together something on it for the camera club. Here's what I wrote:

------------------------------

This is a Photoshop effect designed to digitally mimic the film-based technique of Michael Orton. He takes two overexposed images - one intentional blurry and the other one sharp. These two negatives are combined to make a print. In Photoshop, we have much more control over the process and only need one image for the effect.

I'll describe two methods to accomplish this effect in Photoshop. The first "Quick" method is described in many places on the web. However, once it's done, there's not a lot of control you can exert. The second method is one I've designed to allow maximum control over the elements of the screen.

Quick method steps are as follows, and assumes you have only a background layer in your image:
1. Duplicate the background twice. (Ctrl-J, Ctrl-J)
2. Change the blending mode of the top layer to screen.
3. Merge down (Ctrl-E)
4. Duplicate the top layer (Ctrl-J)
5. Blur it (around 16%)
6. Change the blending mode to Multiply.



My modified version:

1. Optional: Duplicate the background layer – or if you have more than one layer, do a “stamp visible” layer at the top of the layer stack (i.e., click on the top layer and then type Ctrl-Shift-Alt-E). Name this layer “Sharp”.

2. Perform step 1 again, though this time it is not optional! Name this layer “Blurry”. Move this layer to the top of the stack.

3. Click on the “Sharp” layer (or if you didn’t create a “Sharp” layer in step 1, click on the layer right below the “Blurry” layer) and add a “Levels” or “Curves” adjustment layer (doesn’t really matter - your preference) and set the blending mode to “Screen”. This will put an adjustment layer between the Sharp and Blurry layers. Name this layer “Sharp Screen”. (Optionally, if you performed step 1, this can be made a clipping layer by Alt-Left-clicking the boundary between the “Sharp Screen” layer and the layer below it.)

4. Click on the “Blurry” layer and ad a “Levels” or “Curves” adjustment layer (again, it doesn’t matter) and set the blending mode to “Screen”. This will be the top layer. Name this layer “Blurry Screen”, and make it a clipping layer (by Alt-Left-clicking the boundary between the layers).

5. Click on the “Blurry” layer and change its blending mode to “Multiply”.

6. CS3 only: While still on the “Blurry” layer, go into the Filter menu and select “Convert for Smart Filters”

7. While still on the “Blurry” layer, apply a Gaussian Blur (Filter->Blur->Gaussian blur) and set the blur amount at about 16%.

You’re now in a situation where you can change the contribution of the bottom and top images (opacity), and can also change how the screening is applied through the “Sharp Screen” and “Blurry Screen” adjustment layers. And if you’re using CS3, you can control the amount of the blur!

------------------------

I really like the use of smart filters for this kind of operation because you can go back at any time and change it. Of course it adds to the file size.

Dominic hey thanks for the link.
Tim, I am familiar with the technique didn't know the term. I haven't actually tried it yet on any of my stuff yet. Thanks for information also. I wanted to ask you what spray finish you are using on your canvas prints. Also what canvas are you using and either matte or gloss on your canvas. I was about to order some from breathing color canvas and their finish (roll on). They have a trial that is a great price.
http://www.breathingcolor.com/bc/catalog/index.php?cPath=300
Thanks Gale

Tim B. I stepped away while typing my reply and didn't see your post. Thanks for the info I'll save this for later!!

I had my finger on the button ready to tell Tim B he was going to have to rewrite that using smart filters and then he was a step ahead already.

This is a great photo for a triptych!

Just FYI, this image is 16,920 pixels wide at 180ppi. That's what you need for a 30-inch wide (x3) gallery-wrap triptych, and it is going to take about 15 feet of 36" wide canvas to print it.

Amazing job Tim, the Orton effect is very effective but at the same time subtle with this composition.

What was your native size in pixels (wide) of the image before you upsized to 16,920 pixels?

Mark:

It was a D2x file, so what, 4288 wide I think?

Mark:

It was a D2x file, so what, 4288 wide I think?

And for those of you who may not be completely bored with this photo yet, here is what the three panels will look like (the full spread will be almost eight feet wide, not counting the space in between). It will take me about four hours to print them, two days later I will spend another couple of hours spraying a special varnish on them, then two days later we will spend a couple more hours stretching them on the wooden frames.

Orton x 3 - 30" x 48" gallery-wrapped panels.

Gale:

I forgot to answer your canvas question. The only canvas that I have found that meets my standards, and faithfully reproduces the details and color gamut of the best fine art printing material, is the Breathing Color matte canvas with two coats of their special varnish sprayed on. The results have raised my prints to the next level, and then the next one beyond that. I've tried other canvas prints, including the leader of the pack (the good Epson canvas), and all the rest literally pale in comparison - you just can't get good blacks with any other canvas, at least not that I have been able to find. Holy cow the colors are just amazing with their canvas - just like it should be on a fine art print, only it is canvas! Using Breathing Color canvas and varnish is very expensive and a royal pain in the butt all the way, but well worth it. I had two of the big canvas prints at the program in Ft. Smith...

Gotcha, sounds like we are in the same ballpark with our native images for upsizing. I have a couple of 4300 pixel native images at 300 dpi that I have outputted to 90" wide at 200 dpi that I am trying a couple of different upsizing techniques with. In CS3 which method are you using to upsize? Upsizing by small increments repeatedly or some other technique? After the output do you see any major flaws at all with an output size that large? Sorry for all the questions but I am just trying to get a comparison with someone else that is beginning with the same native size.

Mark:

No need to use stair-step method any longer with bicubic smoother - just do it in one step. Fred Miranda lost a lot of business when they came out with bicubic smoother - we used to teach using his special "stair-step interpolation" action (and I got 25 cents every time someone bought one), but it is just not needed any more, and in fact it is better to do it all in one step. One thing to keep in mind - if you are putting a print on the wall that is eight feet wide, your viewing distance will be probably six feet back or more - no way folks are going to see artifacts from that distance, but I'm sure there are some there with that magnification. I generally don't print for people who inspect prints up close (they don't buy art - they just pixel peep as a hobby), but rather real customers who will be putting my art on their walls to enjoy. Having said that, an eight-foot wide print does look a lot better when printed from my Phase One file (39mp) than it does from a D2x or even 1Ds2 file! But with the new canvas and other printing techniques even the "tiny" 35mm film files can look pretty good on a large gallery-stretched canvas.

Actually the biggest item that I see with these large prints is the CA - you normally won't ever see CA with prints like 16 x 20 and down, but you do see it in very large prints. Sometimes that can be taken out and sometimes not. How in the world did we ever get along when our only option was to view a 35mm slide with an 8x loupe? Of course, I think the quality bar is now much, much higher than ever before...

Oo la la, I really like the triptych version!!! If you keep on posting stuff like this, I'm going to have to start digging around under my mattress for some cash to buy a 44" printer. How are you and Sue getting along anyway? I'm debating about one of the new Canon 8100's, which I'm told can be had for $4200, with free shipping.

Tim, the three panels are great. I think I know where I could hang this one!

Bill:

NO, you don't need a big printer - stay away from them! Nothing but trouble, and your wife will leave you and you will go broke. Now if you moved to New Jersey then I would say go ahead and run to the store and buy one - you will still go broke, but you will have a lot of fun printing out those giant prints!

OK Tom, I'll put your name on this one, but you will need a big box...ha, ha.....

Ghostly.

Tim,
I really like your orton fall pano scene. Did it sell at your gallery opening?

Tim,
I really like your orton fall pano scene. Did it sell at your gallery opening?

Hey Mike, the gallery open house is this coming Saturday. The 30 x 60 stretched version looks pretty darn nice - we are stretching the 3 x 30x48 version here in a few hours - it is going to take up a big chunk of wall space!

Tim, I only posted my question once so I don`t understand the double post. I just discovered the Orton method so it really interests me. Would like a report on the response you get at the opening-good luck.

Mike:

To answer your question above, yes, it was one of the first to sell, and I even had it hidden in the back room since there was not enough room in the main gallery! We had a very good turnout...

Tim,
That is great news. Did the buyer ask about the technique you used on it? Where is the gallery?

Tim,
That is great news. Did the buyer ask about the technique you used on it? Where is the gallery?

No questions. Actually when you look at the big image it looks pertty natural, which is the way I like things. The reason I used the technique was to give the feeling of what I saw and experienced while I was there shooting the photo (same thing I try to do with all of my images - reproduce what I saw and felt while I took the photo). The triptych of this image (three 30x48 prints) is also now sold. In fact we sold a total of 20 canvas prints on Saturday (the triptych only counts as one though!).

Our new Buffalo River Gallery is right next to our Cloudland Cabin in the upper Buffalo Wilderness area of Arkansas (www.Cloudland.net). (only open by reservation, or at special open houses like we had on Saturday.

Tim, you mean if I were to just pop in from Kansas City to see the Buffalo River Gallery without an appointment, you'd turn me away?

Not if you arrive with a blank check in your hands! Actually we will be installing an electronic gate and it will only be open when we know folks are coming by, but that won't be in place for a few weeks yet. It is easy for folks to hear about a new place and then assume it is open to the public all the time - we are not like that and probably won't ever be "open" other than for appointments and open house events - I won't ever be able to get out and take pictures if I had to be stuck indoors all the time...

Great to know Tim .... I've got plenty of blank checks left ... so I must have more money!