[argyllcms] Re: Best way to proceed?
- From: Ben Goren <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 11:32:35 -0700
On 2008 Jun 1, at 1:11 PM, Hal V. Engel wrote:
I guess the main point I was trying to make was that this specific
issue is not a colorimeteric issue. Rather it is a lighting issue
related to how that lighting interacts with the subject. Your three
test photos clearly show how this interaction works. As such it is
more about the ART of photography and I don't think there is any
science that can be applied that will just "fix" it so that you can
do exactly the same thing with each piece.
Each of these pieces will respond to the light in different ways
because that is the nature of the materials in the subject and the
lighting that optimally brings out the grain and figure of one piece
can be far from optimal for the next one. In fact in your sample
shots it appears that even in the same piece that different parts of
the piece need different lightling to get optimal results. Because
of that you will need to either decide that you can ignore this
aspect or that each subject needs to have different lighting to be
shown it to it's best. This will be a challenge but it appears to me
that you are up to learning about this and perhaps will come up with
some systematic process that allows you to get near optimal results
without too much effort. I wish I could be of more help but at least
you now have an idea what it is you are dealing with and that is the
first step in solving any problem.
Actually, that's exactly the advice I think I needed -- though I'm
still really excited about Graeme's (indirect) suggestion of
stereograms.
With the realization that getting a ``perfect'' match is impossible, I
gave the i1 scan target another chance. And, it's actually not that
bad, after all. When comparing a print with the art in shaded sunlight
-- my SoLux lamp won't arrive until later in the week -- I could
nearly match almost every portion of the piece to the print by tilting
the piece at a suitable angle. It wasn't perfect, but can't be -- I
now understand that. It certainly gets me very close, if it's not
actually ``good enough.''
The lighting is going to be a bit more of a challenge. Stereograms
will be easy -- just shoot with one light only, and then switch to the
other light for the other frame.
Because of the confines of the space I'm working in -- my parents'
garage for the large works, and my apartment kitchen for the few small
ones -- I don't have much (any, really) room to move the lights from a
standard 45o setup. I can, however, adjust the ratio of the lights.
I've played around with it a bit already, and I think it'll
significantly enhance the results. The one I've posted samples of
probably needs about a 3 - 1 ratio, I think.
Of course, it'll also seriously slow things down, but....
Cheers,
b&
Other related posts:
