Статьи о загранице, путешествиях и отдыхе

обзорные экскурсии в спб недорого

6 Август 2010

Notes on the mat

написано в рубрике: How-to, News, Review — Метки: , — admin @ 23:17
Page 1 of 612345...Last »

To paraphrase a famous thought, we can say that the image must all be beautiful: the work of the creator, and the mat, and baguette, and hanging works in the exhibition hall. In this small article will discuss how not to spoil a good job a bad design.

What is a mat and why is it necessary?

Passepartout – a colored cardboard (or other similar material), framing a picture, painting, photograph or other work of fine art. In other words, the mat – this field between the physical frame and image.

Why is it necessary? First, the mat facilitates the perception of the work, helping the viewer to focus on the image. Secondly, the whole mat and frame as a whole to protect the product from adverse environmental factors. Third, correctly matched mat can accentuate certain details of the image and thereby enhance the aesthetic impact on the viewer. Fourthly, frame and mat are elements harmonize the image as a wall surface, and with other closely spaced objects. Fifthly, it may itself be the subject of art. Surely you can add to this list anything else, but the objective of this article mainly is to highlight the basic practical questions. Therefore, this concludes our discussion of issues of high theory and move on to practice.

On the dangers of symmetry

Unfortunately, most commercially available mounts are symmetrical. This means that the field on opposite sides of the image in such mat are equal. This allows the same mat used for processing images as both horizontal and vertical formats. This approach is very practical, but in terms of aesthetics it is rarely justified. This idea often try to challenge. For example, Sharon Himes (Sharon Himes) writes in his article on ArtCafe: «If the image is large or intended for hanging above eye level, sometimes the bottom field mat made wider, allowing the viewer looking from the bottom up, not to notice the reduction in size lower field compared with the lateral fields. Since such situations are rare, it usually mounts do with the same margins on all four sides. ” In order that the upper hanging requires additional increase in the lower field mat is hard to disagree. But with what can not accept is the fact that when hanging at eye level is always possible to limit the use of symmetric mat.

Let’s try to figure out what was going on. To do this, we recall a well-known example of a Latin letter S. Look at Fig. 1. The lower and upper halves of the left letter “S” seems to us almost the same (proportional), and the whole letter as a whole looks quite harmoniously. At the same time, this can not be said about the right letter S. Here we see clearly that the upper part of the letter too high. But the most surprising thing is that it is one and the same letter! The second option was obtained by turning the original letters to 180 °.


The visual perception of humans is arranged so that the harmonious perception of the object vertically to the lower part must have a few more visual weight. This “secret” has long been known to all who, one way or another, connected with the printing process. And that is why the letter S in almost all regular fonts asymmetric: its lower part slightly exceeds the size of the upper.

This “secret”, of course, know all manufacturers of frames and moldings. In English literature it is called «bottom weighting effect». Thus, the only reason for the high incidence of symmetric mat is of commercial expediency.

In fairness it should be noted that symmetric mat in some cases look good. This happens mainly when the zoom function of the visual weight in the lower sector performs the image itself. Symmetrical mat are also relevant in cases where we do not deal much with artistic works, as with cognitive or scientific illustrations. But most of the bottom field mat still be increased.

Look at Fig. 2. In its upper part are examples of symmetric placement of the image in a frame (option A). Option B differs from variant A increased the lower field. In my opinion, even on these, small in size, illustrations can be seen that option in the show in general harmonious.

Sometimes it is only slightly larger bottom – and the perception of the image is significantly improved.

How to place an image in a frame

In all cases, when it comes to human visual perception, rigid formal rules can not be formulated. All that will be described below, no more than recommendations. Sometimes they quickly lead to success. Sometimes they require a significant correction. The most sensible thing applies to him as a good starting point. It should also be remembered that in this article refers exclusively to a single mat, frame the only image in the frame.

First of all, you should answer the question: what size should be mat? Zero field normally used for framing paintings. When it comes to graphic works (including on the pictures), it should be noted that the small field practically does not perform any function. They just visually merge with the physical frame. Very wide margins in many cases inappropriate, since excessive mat may distract attention from the image.


Width of lateral field usually ranges from 1 / 3 to 1 / 2 narrow side of the image. Left field should be equal rights. Top field often choose roughly the same size as the side of the field. Bottom field for the reasons mentioned above make several more.

Often, you can also meet the following recommendations: for vertical image top margin must be greater than the side. For horizontal images, on the contrary, the side of the field must be wider than the top field. And only in the case of square image must comply with the equality between the upper and lateral field. However, in practice, these rules often violated, so treat them should be very critical.

Sometimes it is allowed to make lateral field is very broad. This situation may, for example, occur if the image itself is not balanced. As another example of this kind can lead engravings (as well as images, like the engravings on the technique of execution). The slight increase in field is also required for “dense” image (in this case, the image objects are densely filled with painting, as if under pressure from within its borders).

For vertical pictures with aspect ratio a / b = 2 / 3 good work the following formula: sidebar = a / 3, the top margin = b / 5; bottom field = b / 3. These relations allow to determine not only the size of the mat, but also the position of the image.

If, on the basis of these or other reasons, the size of mat you have chosen, and the deployment of the image is not specified, as a good starting point, you can use the recommendation from the book of VP Mikulina “25 lessons pictures. According to this book, the image should be at the optical center of the frame. Find the optical center can use the simple geometric construction (see Fig. 3).

In general, the construction of clear and without additional explanation. On the left drawing the blue dotted lines divide the right and bottom halves of the field. As found in this way point A should be placed lower right corner of the image.

The magic and myths of medium format

написано в рубрике: How-to, Software, Tips — Метки: , — admin @ 23:15
Page 1 of 612345...Last »

In an era of total victorious march of digital technology, many supporters of traditional film photography are increasingly turning their gaze to the middle and large format. After hearing about the benefits of these formats, newcomers are often imbued with a confidence that even small footprint obtained with medium format will be strikingly different from similar-sized prints obtained with a narrow film. How justified these expectations?

To answer this question we must first learn to properly compare the different formats together.


First, we must compare the system with lenses having the same angle. This means that we must move on lenses with longer focal lengths in the transition from a narrow format to the average. For example, often believe that the narrow screen normal “half a ruble” corresponds to the medium format lens with a focal length of 80 mm.

However, the exact figure is not important. Without rigor, we can assume, for example, that the normal medium format lens should have a focal length of 100 mm.

Secondly, the need to compare the system with the same depth of field (DOF) or, in other words, with the same degree of fuzziness of various elements of the image. Let us examine this issue in more detail.

In an article devoted to understanding the physical meaning of sharpness, a formula that allows to assess the degree of blur on the negative. Blur is directly proportional to the square of the lens focal length divided by the aperture value: f 2 / N, where N = 1,4; 2, 2,8, 4, 5,6, 8, …

The formula for assessing the degree of blur is easily obtained from the classical formulas for determining the depth of field, if we express the diameter of the circle blur terms of the other options.

In this case we are interested in the degree of blur of the prints, not negatives. Therefore, in the Formulas you need to add another factor K, which shows how many times would increase the negative when printing. The result is that the degree of blurring the point on the print is directly proportional to the following value:

C * = (K f 2) / N = (K f) (f / N),

where
K – coefficient of increase of the negative when printing;
f – focal length lens used in the shooting;
N – aperture number (1,4, 2, 2,8, 4, 5,6, 8, …).

Within the same DOF of the prints obtained from the negatives of various formats, can be written as:

C * = const.

This condition is satisfied, while respecting the two conditions:

A. (K f) = const
B. (f / N) = const

Condition A is carried out almost automatically. Indeed, on the one hand, the transition from the narrow format on average, we use lenses with long focal length (subject to the uniformity of the angle of view – see above). On the other hand, for equal area poster-size prints have increased in the smaller number of times (in proportion to the increased focal length). As a result, the product of K, f remains unchanged.

Condition B means that when taking a long-focus optics must be stronger than the spinning aperture. Only in this case the following condition is equivalent GRIP.

So, while respecting the two conditions (A and B) all points on the print (both within and outside the permissible area of field) will be equally blurred. This equal-prints obtained from the negatives of various formats, will not differ greatly from each other (ideally in general will not).

But this does not mean that all the formats are equal. So it would be if we were dealing with an ideal foil and ideal optics (the word “perfect” here, above all, means “with infinite resolution”). Yet the real combination of optics and the recording medium (film) is always far from ideal. And this non-ideality is more pronounced, the more we will increase the negative when printing.

Characteristics of lenses, often united in the concept of “image”, also be interpreted as a set of individual imperfections. Ideal optics has no specific figure.

CONCLUSION:

So, if the transition from the narrow format on average
1. using lenses with long focal length to maintain constant viewing angle;
2. tighten the diaphragm in proportion to the focal distance (f / N = const), thus providing the same depth of field on the print;
3. print with different negatives prints of the same size (K f = const), for example 20 x 30 cm;
4. use an ideal foil and ideal optics;
the obtained image will not differ from each other.
However, if the execution pp. 1 – 3 of great complexity does not matter, then the condition 4 is simply not realizable. All the observed differences were due to practice is non-compliance with this condition. The more the final print, the more obvious will be for the observer all imperfection and characteristics of a particular combination “lens + film.

By the way:

1. From the above considerations, in particular, that the shooting medium format lens with f = 80 mm at aperture f / 6,7 is equivalent to the narrow screen shooting lens with f = 50 mm at f / 4. However, most often, the lens with a relative aperture of 6.7 have higher rates of real resolving power compared with the lenses in which shooting is set to aperture 4. In some cases, this factor may be another explanation of the observed in practice, the benefits of shooting on medium format. In other words, to speak about the characteristic features were not the combination “lens + film”, and the combination “lens + iris + film”.

2. Another important factor – the projection error. They appear when you print using the magnifier, and when you use the projector for viewing slides. Errors of this type the more noticeable the greater the increase. In some cases, the advantages of medium format is due to a smaller degree of increase in the projection device. However, one must bear in mind that not all cases, the viewer is faced with this phenomenon. An example of such a situation can serve as a scanning negatives (or slides) in preparation for printing polygraphic methods.

From Theory to Practice

Let’s see whether our findings are consistent with the practice.

First consider the test image with a relatively small increase (ie, submitted photofragments will meet a large area of negative). Fig. 1 shows the photographs obtained in accordance with the formulated above theoretical conditions.
Fig. 1
Yes. narrower; f = 50 mm. @ F / 8; b. medium format; f = 80 mm. @ F/13

In general we can say that the theory is well confirmed by experiment. Both images in Fig. An approximately equal. Here, it is necessary to make a reservation, that in making such a conclusion, we deliberately ignore the subtle differences caused by the imperfection of optics and experimental errors. But if you wish to find such differences can be without special efforts.

Among the experimental errors should, above all, mention the following. First, the focal lengths are not equal in accuracy of 50 mm and 80 mm. Secondly, 50 / 8 = 6.25 and 80/13 = 6.15. When viewing a need to make allowances for all these factors. But again, as a whole must admit that the images do not differ greatly, ie, the results agree well with theory.

At what distance should be considered a photo?

написано в рубрике: How-to, Lens, News — Метки: , , — admin @ 22:47
Page 1 of 612345...Last »

In texts on visual perception can be seen two opposing opinions about whether, from what distance should be considered photographs and paintings.

1. Boris Rauschenbach in his work The General Theory Perspectives “wrote:” … the geometric size of the picture is (in these matters <natural perception>) a secondary role. It is well known that in the album reproductions are given, usually in reduced size, and it is not too upset the owner of the album. Likewise, we know that with one and the same negative prints can be printed in different sizes, and they will be perceived as essentially the same image. (P.36)

This position seems to me only partly true. Indeed, part of the brain corrects the perception, focusing only on the relative angular size of the depicted objects. But to successfully deal with such a correction, he can not always. Anyway, I am different things to many gatefold reproductions and originals of the relevant, precisely because of the need to look at them from different angles.

The fact that the album version of themselves are designed for viewing from a distance of 25 – 40 cm Zoom eyes closer to the image does not physiology (unless, of course, looking not sighted). Removed from the album at a distance of more than a meter, too, is unlikely anyone will. As a result, the viewer is often forced to consider the reproduction of a very unnatural angles, which can not bring sorrow.

2. In the opinion Raushenbaha obviously would not agree to Yakov Perelman. In his classic “Entertaining Physics” (Book 1, Chapter Nine), he wrote: “It is equally important … the rule – to keep the picture in the appropriate distance from the eye; otherwise violated proper perspective. … For the full experience should be considered a snapshot at the same angle of view, under which the camera lens “see” Removable objects.

Perelman last edited his book in 1936, when about the fine mechanisms of visual perception has been known very little. Therefore, his opinion should not be separated unequivocally.

As usual, the truth lies somewhere in between. It seems reasonable to this approach: should follow the recommendations of Perelman, but at the same time and do not forget that within certain limits, the brain is able to correct errors of perception.

What are the best viewing distance of standard sizes of photo prints? The answer to this question in relation to the narrow screen images gives Table 1. Using it is easy to find the best viewing distance in centimeters on the focal length used for shooting the lens and the size of the print.
Table 1. Distances best viewing photos (in cm)

The red color value in the table of distances, which are difficult to use in practice.

In green color the most convenient distance. For their compliance does not need to produce a photo of his hands.

The values of the distances marked in blue, you can observe, but this takes place the photo on the wall, because it is, rather, the exhibition race.

It should be noted that only a lens of 50 mm whole line has a green label. For pictures taken with “half-rubles”, choose the optimum viewing distance most simply, no matter what the size was not the final print (in the considered range). Could this be another hidden secret of the popularity of the lens with the focal length?

The following table provides an explanation and another fact. It is known that many landscape painters, to eliminate the wide-angle lenses, choose to make the slides, which then can be projected with high magnification on the screen. As the table shows, wide-angle image can be caught in the “green” and “blue” zone only at fairly high magnification.

What should be the images for posting on the Web

The average user looks at the monitor from a distance of approximately 50 cm Based on this fact, one can easily obtain the sizes of images for the Web, which will be optimal in the approach used. The results are shown in Table 2.
Table 2. The optimal image size for publication on the Web

Here again it is worth paying attention to the fact that it is best to take pictures for the Web by using lenses with focal lengths from 50 to 100 mm.

Knowing the optimal size of thumbnails and screen resolution, you can easily counted in Table 2 the size in pixels.

The general theory perspective Raushenbaha eyes photographer

написано в рубрике: How-to, Lens, News — Метки: , , — admin @ 22:44
Page 1 of 612345...Last »

In 1986, Academician Boris Rauschenbach published a book called “The General Theory Perspectives. In this work he suggested that a successful mathematical model that allows to create different display systems surround the world on the plane pattern. His theory also allowed to quantify the deviation from natural visual perception for a particular method of perspective construction. Rauschenbach with mathematical rigor to substantiate the fact that the classical theory, known since the Renaissance, is not always possible to create natural images on planar images.

This article attempts to popular exposition of the basic principles of the theory Raushenbaha for photos. The material contained in brief as possible and accessible. Those who are not afraid of scientific style of presentation, are encouraged to review the text of this book in the original.


In reading this material is very important to understand the following:

- Here, nothing will be said about what lenses draw the prospect of true and what is not. In a sense, all they can get the correct image.

- Also there will be nothing said about the fact that some lenses are capable of seeing reality like a man. The sight of the man – a single major issue, which in this article deals in a very limited extent.

- Without a doubt, and an artist, photographer and solve the problem first and foremost art. In this sense, the beautiful illusion of a better reality, and not always worth striving for display in a work of art naturally perceived image of the world. Nevertheless, knowledge of the laws of natural visual perception significantly helps the artist in solving creative tasks. In other words, follow the laws of perception is not necessary, but it is useful to know them.

All quotations are from: Rauschenbach, BV Systems perspective in the visual arts. General theory of perspective. Nauka, Moscow, 1986.

To begin with we recall the classical

Any camera operates in the linear system perspective. The properties of such systems are well known and described in detail in books on all types of fine art, as well as projective geometry. Before discussing the theory Raushenbaha, recall briefly the main classical situation and their relationship to photography.

What is meant by “undistorted perspective” in the classical theory?

Consider the image, taken me out of a textbook on painting. It shows how it will look promising for the construction of different distances between the eye of the artist and the image plane (in the photos, these cases correspond to different focal length lens). In all four cases we are talking about the image of three people in the same room measuring 4 x 5 m.

a. The artist was too close to the picture plane (the case of wide-angle lens). The distance between the faces of a man and seems far more true of 4 meters. The window was taken very wide. Beside him is clearly able to rise a few people. The depth of the room is passed unnaturally exaggerated.

b. and c. Here we used the distance to the image plane, which is recommended by most guidelines. Depth is transmitted almost naturally.

d. The eye of the artist is far from the picture plane (the case of a telephoto lens). The room does not seem to us so deep. It looks as if it had a depth of two meters, not four. Far man approached us. The window looks very narrow. It seems that near him may get only one person.

Note that in all four cases, the prospect of being built is absolutely right! You can not argue that some of these constructs geometrically correct. All lenses draw the prospect’s true! But the audience is perceived differently. And in painting, and photography!

Unfortunately, quite often be found judging that the transfer of Outlook does not depend on the focal length lens. Supporters of this idea reinforce its position by the following argument: “Do not move, make two shots: one – full-time lens, and the other – a telephoto lens. If the first shot to make vykadrovku corresponding visual angle telephoto lens, it is easy to find that the prospect of equal size prints will look the same. Consequently, all lenses transmit equally perspective. In the same way they “prove” the independence of the picture perspective on the magnitude of the diagonal frame. “Is that something can fundamentally change what we cut out of the whole frame of its central part?” – They exclaim. However, proponents of this position, only show their lack of understanding of the mechanism of different ways to transfer perspectives in painting and photography. But to understand the causes and consequences – very important! Of course, if the photographer is in one place, the change in focal length will only lead to a change in scale. The reasons for different transmission perspective is quite different!

Supporters of the above arguments overlook one simple thing: lens focal length (as well as the value of the diagonal frame) affects the prospects of drawing indirectly: through the mechanism of changing the distance to the object, not the other way! In order to see changes in the transmission perspective, the photographer is simply obliged to move, making sure that the foreground took full frame. The above image is just that and shows. Thus, to talk about the differences in the display of the prospects for a fixed frame format, different lenses can only be provided ravnomasshtabnoy shooting foreground: f / d = const (f – lens focal length; d – the distance from the camera to the foreground!) (See also, eg, Fig. 100 of Chapter 19 in the book of VP Mikulina “25 lessons pictures.”) It is in this sense (and only in this sense) can talk about different perspectives of the transfer lenses with different focal length .

Generally speaking, the transfer of prospects determined by the angle of view of “lens + recording medium”. Equal angles correspond to the same display perspective. Different angles – different perspective building, while in the pictures is understood that the shooting at different angles is accompanied by a change in the distance between the camera and the foreground.

To quote the textbook (School of Fine Arts: Issue 1, the manual.. M, depict. Art, 1986): “Most artists depict nature, at a distance equal to one and a half or two diagonals of the picture plane, that is, the angle of view equal to elect 28 ° or 37 ° ». Classical theory asserts that it is in this range of viewing angles and photographic images, and paintings will be perceived as natural. The word “natural” should be understood as forming the viewer to be accurate picture of the change in the scope and the distance between objects along the axis directed from the beholder (ie, deep). Recommended normal (not to be confused with the “right”, because they are all “correct”) image in our case the image «b».

For those who do not overpower reading this article until the end :-) I will say at once that the theory Raushenbaha (like many other theories) is different from the classical approach, mainly to the fact that states: it is impossible to achieve a natural display of scale and natural transmission of depth at the same time. Using the more correct wording, it can be argued that the mathematical model Raushenbaha generally proves impossible without distorting the reality show on the plane. However, it is not surprising. This view dominates among professionals involved in the visual perception of man.

So, we remember why lenses with a normal focal lengths naturally convey perspective in the classical approach. Now we proceed to discuss the finer things.

What is wrong in the classical approach?

The visual perception of humans is characterized by the same property as constant.


Constancy of form makes the artist to depict the ball round, in some place where the picture he was not, despite the fact that the projective geometry requires portray it in some cases, as ovals.

Due to the constancy of color people will always see the white chalk and carbon black, even when the lighting conditions on the chalk reflects less light than coal (Cretaceous – in the shadows, and coal – in the sun).

Constant quantity (size) explains why the size of the observed objects does not change the laws of classical linear perspective. Indeed, very close objects in perception is automatically reduced by the brain, while increasing somewhat remote. According to the theory, for each object and the environment there is an optimum viewing distance, providing the most natural visual perception.

The classical theory of perspective, as, indeed, fotooptika does not take mechanisms constancy values in the calculation. If we take pictures multifaceted landscape lens with a focal length of 35 mm, that the picture we find that the long-range plan looks too small, and short-range – unnaturally large. You can slightly improve matters, if slightly larger focal length (50-70 mm). This would bring together long-range and medium plans almost to the level of natural perception. If this was to reduce the foreground, then everything would be fine. But, alas, the lenses with such properties does not exist. And in this sense, no lens is not able to form an image closer to the natural human visual perception.

On the role of mathematics in the theory Raushenbaha

At first glance at the text of the monograph Raushenbaha may be the misperception that all the arguments and conclusions with mathematical precision result. However, in this case should not seek logical (mathematical) relationship between initial conditions and conclusions. Theory Raushenbaha is not solely a logical (mathematical) consequence of a certain set of assumptions.

As stated in the previous section, the theory is based Raushenbaha lie constancy mechanisms, which are almost impossible to describe within a single mathematical model of perception.

But if the results can not be obtained purely mathematical way, what is the role of mathematics in this theory? The answer is: mathematics in this case is used as an auxiliary tool in the evaluation of distortion.

Therefore, in theory Raushenbaha should not seek the procedure mathematically rigorous results. Perception – Psychophysical and not mathematical problem.

For this reason and in this article do not have to try to identify the logical flaws and strong arguments leading to the only possible conclusion. It will contain only some results, with an extremely truncated form.

The scale, similarity and depth

Mimicking the real world on the plane, an artist or photographer is always striving to natural transmission (ie, without noticeable distortion) similarities, the scope and depth. Alas, says Rauschenbach, can not properly convey these three parameters simultaneously. And since this is so, the author of a work should always seek a reasonable compromise, depending on the subject, camera angle, the ratio of plans at various distances, etc.

Elucidate this small illustration. Suppose we need to represent two similar triangles are from us at different distances (see figure). We also assume that the distance to the triangles are known.

1. Correct display of similarities implies respect equality a1 / b1 = a2 / b2. All the traditional system of linear perspective to comply with this condition. All general-purpose photographic lenses also draw the prospect of no errors displaying similarity. In any case, their manufacturers are doing everything possible to minimize such errors. (Specialty lenses, such as type of “fish-ai” are not considered here.)

2. Portraying the far smaller triangle, we must choose the scale, ie, the ratio a1 / a2 = b1 / b2. According Raushenbahu, there is some scale mapping, which corresponds to the natural perception. This is the reference value of the ratio a1 / a2 in the general case depends on the plot of the image, the distance between us and the first triangle, as well as on many other factors. However, in the first rough approximation we can assume that there is some absolute standard of correct display size. Photographer can change the scale, removing the plot lenses with different focal length.

3. To correctly display the depth, the author of works should choose the optimal value of the ratio a1 / d. As is the case with the choice of the correct scale, the desired optimum is determined by many factors. But as a first approximation again, we assume that there is some universal standard of natural mapping depth. As in the second case, the photographer can select a value ratio, which characterizes the depth by changing the focal length of your lens.

With all this new and surprising? Why is the author of the theory needed to complement the classical theory of perspective? The answer is simple: according to Raushenbaha (and I see no reason not agree with him) model of the natural mapping the extent and pattern of natural transmission does not match the depth and force the artist to depict a different perspective. Is crucial place in the whole theory Raushenbaha. If the application of these two standards would lead to two identical images, then it could be limited to the classical theory. But, alas! Reduced to zero error mapping scale, we can not get rid of the error to the depth. If we achieve the depth of natural images, the error magnitude remains nonzero.

For the photographer this means one thing: there is no focal length lens, Godea for all occasions. Select the focal length should be determined by the task facing the photographer.

On the sky, soap and minilab

написано в рубрике: How-to, News, Review — Метки: , — admin @ 22:30
Page 1 of 612345...Last »

Once at the end of this summer I got a lot of lab test prints measuring 10 x 15 cm
I immediately started watching in the hope to find among them anything worthwhile, noting in passing their own mistakes and bad luck.

Among other caught my eye and the picture, reminding me of one my trips to Prague. In general, this picture without thinking made no claim to special art, but as a tourist sketch, I thought it quite has the right to exist. Sorry, ladies legs a bit off a slice, I thought. We had to proceed carefully. And with the sky I am not very lucky. Too monotonous boring it looks in this picture (picture left).

It should be noted that the clarity and sharpness of this picture in my claims have arisen. The image on the left was obtained scanning a print 10 x 15 on a flatbed scanner. I tried hard to bring it closer to that obtained from the minilab prints. Largely succeeded. Only solution, unfortunately, leaves much to be desired. But what to do? Flatbed scanner and a screen resolution of about 72 dpi leave no hope for the transfer of a large number of small parts. And it’s not about that, in general, in this article we …

Send a picture of marriage is clearly not wanted, and I decided to look at the negative, cherishing the hope that the picture is not so bad as it presented the minilab. Considering the results of the scan on a film scanner (picture right), I realized that I was hoping for a reason. As it turned out, his feet cut the ladies I’m not, and minilabs. Even though the sky is gray, but not so depressingly monotonous, as the imprint.

Here we must note that I do not blame the staff minilab for their results. Sky just do not fall into a narrow range of densities that can be transmitted on paper. Minilab operator always tries to put an exhibit on the plot important elements of the image, to which the sky, alas, almost never applies. The legs were also clipped unintentionally. The specifics of machine framing and uneven mezhkadrovyh intervals on the film may well lead to this result. Many laboratories honestly warn clients about this possibility cropping the image. Photo print for 10 cents apiece, the operator minilab, of course, will not spend time on a scrutiny of all the negatives and meaningful framing.

The first obvious conclusion: the use of film scanner greatly helps to see the image the way it was recorded film. Get photos of the minilab, you’ll always look at the result of the operator’s eye and upset, noting numerous inconsistencies. A good idea to do scanning in person, rather than resort to others. As I mentioned above, mezhkadrovye distance may be different within the same film, while many scanners are equipped with frames, calculated on the same mezhkadrovy period of fixed length. In other words, in this case the legs may be clipped, and scanned in a specialized Photocenter.

Now let’s talk about the sky

With a dull monotonous sky have to fight quite often. Modalities such a struggle just three:

1. Application of polarization or gradient filters. The method is very effective, but helps not in every situation. Thus, gradient filters are used mainly in landscape photography. In this example, the gradient filter would not have saved the situation as very prominent tower, too, would fall into a zone of its action. The effectiveness of the same polarizing filter depends on its position relative to the sun, as well as general lighting. In addition, a polarizing filter affects not only the sky, but the whole picture in general.

2. If the sky is uniformly gray (almost white) or pale blue, can only think about how to reduce the occupied area of the frame. Only in rare cases a large proportion of the sky in the frame can be justified by any artistic idea.

3. If the skies are at least some shade, you can try to pull them in hand-printing, or computer processing. But it is hardly count in this case, the satisfactory operation of the minilab operators.

Without belittling the importance of the first two approaches, comment on a little more detail the third approach.

The above photo shows the Prague sky can be a bit dramatic, raising the contrast in the highlights of the image.

Photo left – the result of scanning film scanner. Photo on the right was obtained with the Curves tool from Photoshop.

As far as this operation is justified in this case, will not discuss. I do not insist on any artistic value of the snapshot. :-) Here, I just wanted to show beginners the easiest way to solve this problem. Sometimes it can help the deformation curve in the light in another direction. In each case, useful experiment.

Consider another useful technique to highlight the details in the sky. I must say that I am not its author. In the description of several variants of this method can be found in various publications.

- In fact, a new layer contains the red channel of the original image. Set its mode Blending = Luminosity and if necessary slightly adjusts its transparency (Opacity).
Result with Opacity = 100% is shown in photo number 2.
- If you want to enhance the effect, it should also slightly decrease the parameter gamma in the new layer Background copy. This can be done, for example, in the window Curves, shifting the center point of the curve down a bit. The result of this operation is shown in photo number 3.

Sometimes used and elementary way: simply change the parameter gamma for the entire original image (see photo left).

Clouds, of course, in this case accented, but the color images are somewhat displaced. The above is more complicated procedure to allocate the clouds with little change in color tone of the image.

You can combine both methods, I have mentioned in this article.

The second obvious conclusion: “Saving the sky” can only be made when initially contains at least some details and / or shades. Milky white sky to save nearly impossible. Well, perhaps radically create it from scratch in Photoshop.

And finally a few words about a soap dish

On the Internet you can constantly come across the opinion that it is impossible to get a decent result with a digital camera, a soap dish. Only with the help of SLR, considered by many to be a technically perfect shot. Of course, I can not shout down a powerful chorus of supporters of this idea, but I think that to say a few words it is still necessary.

The fact that the above is just a snapshot of Prague and was made soap box Yashica T5. And this is exactly the case when I have no complaints about the work of the chamber. What is more, SLR, I just could not get this picture. So, why: the picture was shot just for instance, no statement was not. A few seconds before the shutter, I did not know what I come up with the idea to shoot. I just stood on the corner and looked at the square, and turn off the camera dangling from my hand strap. Shot lined up unexpectedly and quickly. I raised my camera and turn it on. The lens cover opens automatically. Another second – and the picture was taken.

If at that point in my belt hung SLR, I first took a few moments out to remove the lens cap. Then turn on the camera. Then give to work out a passive focusing system, hoping that she coped well with its task. And only then doge the shutter button. I’m afraid, SNG time would be lost. Besides, I said nothing about the fact that when you turn the camera could be in the wrong mode, and some time it would take to ensure that the desired mode set.

In my opinion, this was just the case when a good soap dish is better than a reflex. The word “good” I would particularly like to emphasize. Of course, I would not expect the qualitative result from a simple camera for $ 20, fitted with a plastic lens.

In order to support his view illustration, I cite here an increased part of the photo, with which I began my story.

The fragment is part of the scanned-in film scanner shot wide 50%. Scanning was carried out with a resolution of 2820 dpi. No processing in Photoshop was not done. If you have a screen resolution of 800 x 600, then we can assume that you are considering a fragment of the full image with a size of 1 x 1,5 m do not know about you, but I think this picture is more than satisfactory for such a large increase. Budget optics SLRs often leads to less quality results.

If you want to see this piece at 100% (ie 1:1), download sky_fragment100.jpg (its volume is less than 160K). I used a milder compression, so this file is almost equivalent to the original TIFF-file.

I note also that the picture was made on the film Agfa Vista 200, of which many are treated with prejudice. Personally I have no complaints on color reproduction to films Agfa, one of which, incidentally, was made and the second illustration to this article.


The third obvious conclusion: do not remove the camera and the photographer. A good soap can get pretty good technically shot.

Работает на WordPress