I first viewed this image on my i-book, and it looked quite good. I
like the fact that it's somewhat high contrast and a bit on the dark
side, because it draws attention to the principal characters. As far as
the people in the background are concerned, you certainly can't expect
to see much detail since they are out of focus due to depth of field.
To expect to see detail in the purse on the far left background or in
the dress on the far right background is not realistic, although both
of these elements are clearly defined against the rest of the
background.. I look at Frank's images as flatbed scans of prints.
They're a representation of the print rather than perfected internet
images. I must admit that if it were my image I would have worked it in
shadows/highlights a bit and re-evaluated it after that step. Yet it's
by no means a disaster in grayscale. The paper plate shows shadow below
the rim. The little girl's face is nice detailed in its balance of
shadow and highlight. The tones range from almost pure white to almost
pure black, with plenty of variations in between. That's an acceptable
range by any measure. My monitor is, of course, operating at 1.8 gamma.
i think that anyone who is working with photographs should be at 1.8.
At 2.2, the photo is way off. But 2.2 is for video games, not
photography. All of the stock houses I've worked with insist that
photos display correctly at 1.8 gamma., because most purchasers of
stock are working at 1.8. That's generally the standard for
photography. At 1.8, Frank's photo is quite satisfactory.
On Jan 18, 2005, at 9:51 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Hi Paul,
I'm having a hard time with you saying that this image has a nice
range of
grayscale and good contrast. You must be seeing something on your
screen
that's very different than what's on my screen. Frank's rendition of
the
image has blown highlights (note, for example, the paper plate being
held
by the woman), minimal, and sometimes blocked shadow detail, and an
overall
dark tone. The Maple Leafs logo shows virtually no separation of tone
between its background and the cap proper, and a couple of people in
the
background have all but disappeared into a deep murkiness. There are
details on the little girl's jacket that are either lost or barely
visible,
the purse being carried by the woman on the far left side of the frame
shows no shadow detail, a reflection in a window is obscured, the
woman's
dress in the upper right side of the image shows no detail, and so on.
I
see many, many problems with this image, as I usually do with many of
Frank's pics. Perhaps it's because you're using a Mac, with a
different
screen gamma than a PC, that you see this as an image as you described.
I've discussed this with Frank several times, and have shown him other
versions of some of his posted pics where the image tonality has been
opened up, shadows and dark areas given some detail, highlights toned
down
to show detail rather than pure white. He's agreed that some of these
alterations looked better than the posted pics and more like the
original
prints.
My screen may not be perfectly calibrated, but it's pretty close, and
considering the number of people who say that some of my images are too
dark, the screen before me can't be so far off, and may in fact even
be a
scosh too bright, so on that basis, I should be seeing more than I am.
Anyway, I played with this image a bit and sent the results to Frank,
who
felt it was superior to his posting. He may put it up, and it will be
interesting to see how they compare for you (and others), and if the
new
rendition looks too bright or washed out. Considering the number of
images
put up here on the list, I cannot help but wonder if there might be a
way
to have all our monitors calibrated so they are closer to one another.
Maybe that's too much to ask, however, considering this is a
photography
list, a list from which we learn from one another, share our vision,
and
explore things visually, might a "global" calibration be something to
shoot
for, and is it even possible to do?
Shel
[Original Message]
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I like this a lot. Excellent composition and framing. Nice range of
grayscale, good contrast.
