A Question of Tone
Okay, so this is an old picture to illustrate a problem. I've been making the prints for the Edinburgh exhibition and getting a bit dismayed at how much better (and different) they look compared to the versions on the web. Partly this is the inevitable difference between looking at a nice 12x12 and a small jpeg on a screen, but it's also to do with reproducing tone properly - in fact, up to now, without being able to make and scan prints of every picture, I haven't really attempted it, and all b&w images on my site are just grayscales.
(And lets not even get started on the fact that not many people ever calibrate their monitors, and the same image can look hugely different on someone else's computer...)
Anyway, the above is my attempt to recreate the look and tone of the actual print in photoshop - and here is the original untoned grayscale version for comparison. What do you all think? Is it worth the extra effort to try and reproduce the look of the print on screen, or are grayscales sufficient given the limitations of web viewing?
posted by David Bennett at 12:24 pm
3 Comments:
well worth the effort imho.
This print really pops with the tone.
My vote is for the tone.
Great stuff, D.
well worth the effort.
Would you like to describe the process you went through ?
It would also be good to see the two side by side.
Congrats on the recent science exhibits.
Ian
(aka the bouncer at your gig ;)
Ian - it's a question of playing with colour levels in photoshop to try and replicate on screen what the proper warm-toned print looks like. It's not really very close at all, but better than a totally mono image at least. I'm also playing around with duo and tri-tones to see if I can get something more satisfactory.
Getting the very subtle tone of the science pics (for example) is much harder, so they'll probably stay gray for the time being!
Thanks for the comments.
Post a Comment
<< Home