Printing the Image - 2017 - 2018 Ann Edition
I have to admit that over the past few weeks my work-break trips upstairs to see what Ann is up to have been quite a joy. Ann is continuing her image review and organization and, by now, is almost done with 2019. Fortunately for me, Ann has also been taking the time to stop on images she’d previously dismissed, evaluate them and occasionally develop them. Thus, I’m often greeted with an interesting image on her monitor when I head up there and usually a great conversation to boot. Several times over those weeks I’ve mentioned to Ann that she really should print this image or that.
Well, last weekend was the time to do it. Given that she’ll be gone for a month or so while I’m holding down the fort (and have the opportunity to print whatever and whenever I choose), last Saturday we figured that we’d print only Ann’s images.
For the first time in a long while, there were a couple of images on Ann’s monitor that I though should be printed on a matte paper. We tend to use a fairly smooth matte, so often not much detail is lost. The main difference in the paper surfaces we use is in just how dark one can get the darks as well as the overall feeling of the image. Why I mentioned matte paper on a couple of images (and not others) I couldn’t really tell you, but Ann went with it.
Given that we’re really just learning the intricacies of papers, etc, Ann was smart and said that with one of the “matte” images, she wanted to also print it on our standard “F” surface paper (our Red River, Paolo Duro Soft Gloss Rag), a moderate glossy paper that closely resembles the darkroom surface I used to prefer. It was an excellent thought because, although the image looks great on both papers, there is a real difference between the two that might help us understand when to use one and not the other paper.
That image was one of Ann’s from the Painted Hills, though you couldn’t really tell it from the photograph. There is a little plateau that lies in the opposite direction from the parking lot for the main Painted Hills view point. Ann and I often like going there because of the textured grasses and the distant Ridgeline.
Click for larger view
It’s in these grasses where the greatest difference between the two paper types appears. With the F surface PDSGR, the grasses seem hyper sharp, almost too rough even for desert grasses. On the matte paper they come across as more realistic, still distinct and coarse, but flexible enough to blow in the wind. It’s hard to describe and is something I’m sure Ann and I will think about a lot as we review these prints, but it’s a good thing to see. Hopefully, we learn from the comparison and come to understand which papers are best for which types of images.
The second image Ann printed was from a 2017 trip to the Redwoods. Again, the photograph gives no hint at where the image was taken (Redwoods, what redwoods?). It was the second of the images that I’d mentioned to Ann she might want to print on matte paper. You can see how much texture is in this image and the stark contrasts between the tree trunks and branches and the various grasses in the foreground. Again, the matte paper handled that mix of textures superbly, not losing any of the sharpness of the image, but taking away a bit of the coarseness (perhaps it’s that overly sharp “digital look” that so many complain about that got removed).
Printing on matte paper takes a lot more work to go from what looks great on your calibrated monitor, to something that looks equally good (preferably identical) with the ICC profile for the paper/printer you’re using entered into the equation (in theory, because everything is calibrated, the print will look just like the monitor with the correct ICC profile [. . . in theory]). As I’d mentioned in the past, often the contrast has to be increased a bit, darks and blacks have to be darkened (sometimes a lot), and sometimes other areas of the image have to be adjusted to get the same feel as our monitor in its regular Adobe RGB profile. In this case, it took quite a bit of adjustments for Ann (with me collaborating) to figure out how to get that sun streak across the foreground grasses to be visible. Well, it is simply lovely on the print, so all that extra effort was worth it!
The remaining images Ann printed on Saturday used our familiar F surface paper. Sometimes, adding the ICC profile to the monitor-developed image requires next to no adjustment. Thank goodness for calibrated monitors. Anyway, I really enjoyed this next image because of the wide variety of conditions (and colors), particularly in the clouds. I think it’s good that we printed all of the images fairly large (on 13”x19” paper). I suspect the clouds would have an incredible feel regardless of the print size, but the larger size allows the rest of the image to provide separation between the various elements (the foreground rock, the green rocks to the right, the ocean) as well as permitting one to explore some of the details within the image (the gulls on the far rock, the shells on the foreground rock). In those respects, size matters.
Like so many of Ann’s images, this one is deceptively simple yet rewards those who spend the time to examine it.
The last print was another one she had originally passed over at the time she made it, but revisited during the cataloging process. Who knows why she decided to convert it to black and white (sometimes you just have to listen to your instincts), but it was a good development decision. It turned a rather harshly sunlit image that had rather bland colors into an image rich in form, lines and textures.
I think that sometimes we don’t know why we are compelled to make certain images, we just do. Again, call it instinct or intuition. My suspicion is that it was the forms, lines and textures that made Ann feel like this could be a good image at the time she made the exposure on her camera, but it was the empty, rather harsh colors that led her to initially reject the image for further development when she first downloaded it. Her conversion of the image to black and white brought those elements to the forefront, which is why it is such an interesting print. This is probably a lesson I should store in the back of my mind for the Q2MR - focus on form, line and texture, because there will be no color to help out an image.
That was it for Saturday’s printing session. However, that is not the end of the story . . . .