Bob Duff re lightbox setup.
Nathan Buck on how to shoot crams
Pat Sampson or Gary Yeoh on scanning images
What's on you wish list?
Posted by Lorna Taylor on February 16, 2011 at 11:36 AM
Yes I am in too ,I want to know more about the scanning as well!
Posted by Phil Pogledich on February 16, 2011 at 12:40 PM
Good topic. I believe Nathan wrote a detailed article on the crams a while ago . . . I think I read it about a year ago, though the article itself is older than that. It conveyed his technique pretty well.
Posted by Gary Yeoh on February 16, 2011 at 9:37 PM
I would like to add to the wish list:
Ram Pai on SOA,
Pat Sampson on workflow and processing of flora portraits,
Ken Smith on multiple exposure.
The process of scanning is actually quite straight forward. I had given quite detailed commentaries with my earlier posts when I started playing with the scanner. May be I can compile those at some stage (...but there never seem to be enough hours in a day).
Posted by Mark Windom on February 16, 2011 at 9:54 PM
I'ld like to see someone give a review of the use of Nik software, specifically, Color Efex Pro. I'm seeing some terrific processing results where Nik was used but have no idea what was Nik and what wasn't.....
Posted by Lorna Taylor on February 17, 2011 at 5:53 PM
Hi Gary , I read your earlier posts and if I read it right you just put them on the scanner and the I guess up load it to the computer to process??? Could it really be that simple, aside from your arrangement of the image and processing skill ,I just stick them in there and scan??? Your images are astonishingly beautiful . Do you scan in a darkroom or just as is ? Arrangement I think is trial and error until you get the feel of it. But I am surprised they don't get squished!!! I am a little slower than most, so If you could dumb down your technical info I would greatly appreciate it, so I can steal (oh did I write that) all your yummy ideas!!! Cheers
Posted by Pat Sampson on February 17, 2011 at 7:39 PM
I'll be glad to talk about my workflow and it covers both scans and stacks.
First, I want a beginning image with decent exposure, sweet light and a good composition including the dof that supports where I want to take the image. I view post processing as being quite a bit more than polishing a gem stone. I think of it more like sculpture and mathematical modeling. I plan to create what I want from the starting image using software tools that I've tried to study and understand. If I could paint, that's what I'd be doing. I can't though. So the next best thing for me is taking something that I can whittle on and trying to make it into what I want.
In stacking I control the dof when I shoot the stack, in scanning I obviously can't except through how I position the subject.
The first thing I try to decide is how much texture I want in the image: With a stack or the scan, I have a lot of control there and the Viveza 2 sharpening tool is my favorite for controlling this. Please note that I'm not using it initially for sharpening but rather to bring out finer structure, if I want finer structure. If I'm emphasizing texture, I use a light Mr. Contrast filter, the texture contrast filter in the Nik color suite or a silver metal texture that I built on my own. If I'm going for soft, I don't use any of the filters I just mentioned but probably go to Orton effect to get the hightlights I want and the softness.
After that, I take pretty much everything dark and then work the exposures I want from the subject. I control selective exposures mostly with the LR 3 gradient tool and the color/luminosity filters. I may also use a control point or brush in Viveza from time to time if what I'm doing seems a better fit for that tool. I also use
PS selecting burning and dodging sometime. The shape I'm working dictates the tool. I usually spend a lot of time in LR 3 playing with shadow fill, levels, exposure and white balance. Basically I just dink around with these until I get what I want, possibly through multiple iterations.
After I get the exposure I want, I start playing with the colors. Darkening the image tends to make them over saturated. So, i inevitably reduce the vibrance using LR 3. Then I hit them again with the LR3 color controls.
When I've got texture, exposure and color where I want it, I start cleaning and cloning things out that I don't like.
My last step is sharpening, and I tend to use the LR sharpening tool for that. For the jpeg I use Andreas' sharpening utility if I bother to sharpen the jpeg.
This is my flora workflow. Avian is totally different and landscapes are totally different from either of the others. I usually spend a couple of hours working a flora image to get it the way I what it. I can't create good composition, sharpness or exposure in post processing. If I don't get what I want to begin with I don't bother to proceed to post processing.
Pat,
For scans, I sit with a Feinstein book open and constantly evaluate my processing by comparing it to the image of his that I've selected. I do deliberately diverge if I see something happening in the image that I prefer. I think I'm getting closer to creating images in Feinstein's style but I'm not there yet. Thanks for your interest in what I do. I take it as real compliment.
pat
Posted by Gary Yeoh on February 17, 2011 at 7:43 PM
Lorna:
Yes it is really that simple. Clicking the scan button on the computer is just like pressing the shutter. I normally leave the lid open in ambient light. The sensor on the scanner can only record light very close to the glass; so the bg is alway black if you leave the lid open. Of course if the ambient light is very bright, then the bg will be shades of grey. You can of course cover over the flower with colored paper to get different bg but I have done this because I like the black bg. It is just like doing a photocopy, nothing technical at all.
Posted by Lorna Taylor on February 17, 2011 at 9:01 PM
Thank 's Gary . Here is my first scanner image, some dried tulips I have been hanging on too for a different project, not perfect but so much possibilities.Thank you so much!!! Cheers (Oh and by the way it was way technical here ,ours is wireless took for ever for it to scan and for me to figure out how to turn it on first!!! It is very nerve racking not being able to see the image through the view finder to see if it right, but plan it out upside down and cross your fingers!!!! )
Posted by Lorna Taylor on February 17, 2011 at 9:04 PM
Thank you Pat for the great tips and information! Cheers
Posted by Gary Yeoh on February 18, 2011 at 12:55 AM
Lorna:
Congrats! Yes, many possibilities! Looking forward to seeing your scanning posts.
I don't know about your scanner but with the Epson 4990, you can do a preview to see what it looks like before doing the scan. You can also use a third party program Vuescan to control the scanner.
Posted by Pat Sampson on February 18, 2011 at 7:45 AM
Lorna,
Several of us have concluded that many of Harold Feinstein's images are scans. Take a look at his books. (Orchidelirium, The Infinite Rose, The Infinite Tulip and particularly One Hundred Flowers) It was trying to duplicate his style that got me interested in scanning.
pat
Posted by Gary Yeoh on February 18, 2011 at 9:33 AM
Pat:
Thanks for detailing your workflow. You are a real gem-smith . Two hours for one image; well I guess you need that time to create a masterpiece.
Discussion
15 repliesBob Duff re lightbox setup.
Nathan Buck on how to shoot crams
Pat Sampson or Gary Yeoh on scanning images
What's on you wish list?
Ram Pai on SOA,
Pat Sampson on workflow and processing of flora portraits,
Ken Smith on multiple exposure.
The process of scanning is actually quite straight forward. I had given quite detailed commentaries with my earlier posts when I started playing with the scanner. May be I can compile those at some stage (...but there never seem to be enough hours in a day).
First, I want a beginning image with decent exposure, sweet light and a good composition including the dof that supports where I want to take the image. I view post processing as being quite a bit more than polishing a gem stone. I think of it more like sculpture and mathematical modeling. I plan to create what I want from the starting image using software tools that I've tried to study and understand. If I could paint, that's what I'd be doing. I can't though. So the next best thing for me is taking something that I can whittle on and trying to make it into what I want.
In stacking I control the dof when I shoot the stack, in scanning I obviously can't except through how I position the subject.
The first thing I try to decide is how much texture I want in the image: With a stack or the scan, I have a lot of control there and the Viveza 2 sharpening tool is my favorite for controlling this. Please note that I'm not using it initially for sharpening but rather to bring out finer structure, if I want finer structure. If I'm emphasizing texture, I use a light Mr. Contrast filter, the texture contrast filter in the Nik color suite or a silver metal texture that I built on my own. If I'm going for soft, I don't use any of the filters I just mentioned but probably go to Orton effect to get the hightlights I want and the softness.
After that, I take pretty much everything dark and then work the exposures I want from the subject. I control selective exposures mostly with the LR 3 gradient tool and the color/luminosity filters. I may also use a control point or brush in Viveza from time to time if what I'm doing seems a better fit for that tool. I also use
PS selecting burning and dodging sometime. The shape I'm working dictates the tool. I usually spend a lot of time in LR 3 playing with shadow fill, levels, exposure and white balance. Basically I just dink around with these until I get what I want, possibly through multiple iterations.
After I get the exposure I want, I start playing with the colors. Darkening the image tends to make them over saturated. So, i inevitably reduce the vibrance using LR 3. Then I hit them again with the LR3 color controls.
When I've got texture, exposure and color where I want it, I start cleaning and cloning things out that I don't like.
My last step is sharpening, and I tend to use the LR sharpening tool for that. For the jpeg I use Andreas' sharpening utility if I bother to sharpen the jpeg.
This is my flora workflow. Avian is totally different and landscapes are totally different from either of the others. I usually spend a couple of hours working a flora image to get it the way I what it. I can't create good composition, sharpness or exposure in post processing. If I don't get what I want to begin with I don't bother to proceed to post processing.
Pat,
For scans, I sit with a Feinstein book open and constantly evaluate my processing by comparing it to the image of his that I've selected. I do deliberately diverge if I see something happening in the image that I prefer. I think I'm getting closer to creating images in Feinstein's style but I'm not there yet. Thanks for your interest in what I do. I take it as real compliment.
pat
Yes it is really that simple. Clicking the scan button on the computer is just like pressing the shutter. I normally leave the lid open in ambient light. The sensor on the scanner can only record light very close to the glass; so the bg is alway black if you leave the lid open. Of course if the ambient light is very bright, then the bg will be shades of grey. You can of course cover over the flower with colored paper to get different bg but I have done this because I like the black bg. It is just like doing a photocopy, nothing technical at all.
Congrats!
I don't know about your scanner but with the Epson 4990, you can do a preview to see what it looks like before doing the scan. You can also use a third party program Vuescan to control the scanner.
Several of us have concluded that many of Harold Feinstein's images are scans. Take a look at his books. (Orchidelirium, The Infinite Rose, The Infinite Tulip and particularly One Hundred Flowers) It was trying to duplicate his style that got me interested in scanning.
pat
Thanks for detailing your workflow. You are a real gem-smith