alternatives to photoshop

[Keith S. Walklet]

Ed, I'm not sure I understand your question. Do what multiple times?

[John_4185]

Alternative to Photoshop?

May I suggest the ultimate alternative: DO IT RIGHT IN THE CAMERA!

Computers - fugedaboudit!

[Ed Richards]

> Ed, I'm not sure I understand your question. Do what multiple times?

Sorry about that - I meant different sharpening parameters for different parts of the image. Would I need to flatten between each application of sharpening?

> May I suggest the ultimate alternative: DO IT RIGHT IN THE CAMERA!

I would if I could, but I have not yet figured out how to apply different processing times and grain structures to regions of the same negative.:-)

[David Luttmann]

How do you dodge and burn "in camera"?

[Tom Westbrook]

Just wave a card around in fromt of the lens. It presupposes a fairly long exposure, but that's not too hard with LF.

[Keith S. Walklet]

Ed, yes you can do it multiple times, though you will probably find it easier to keep the sharpening limited to one layer and mask, and vary the effect of the mask by painting with different shades from white to black rather than making multiple sharpening layers. Since the effect of layers is cumulative, it might get confusing. In Real World, they recommend duplicating the background, oversharpening it, creating a layer mask, hide all, and then painting with white at an opacity of about 10% to carefully erase the mask and reveal the sharpening. Depending on how much you need to sharpen and the intracacy of what it is you are sharpening, you can choose to make the layer mask a "hide all" or "reveal all" where instead, one paints with black to hide the effects of the sharpening.

And in regard to the "in camera" dodging and burning, I limit mine to half neutral density filters which I suspect is a bit more precise than waving a card around, though the latter method is handy on hot days or when the mosquitoes are so thick they show up on your film. ;-)

[Tom Westbrook]

I should have mentioned that John Sexton goes into the card waving thing in his workshops. He uses the markings on the outside of lens to remember how to limit card movement, having checked coverage beforehand on the GG.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

How do you dodge and burn "in camera"?

Aside from processing controls, you can also "mask" with a UV filter and a grease pencil if you have a high contrast range. This easier if you do it with a LF camera, but I have done it with 35 mm also.

[John_4185]

It is truly heartening that people reacted to my "do it in the camera" in a good-spirited and constructive way. Thank you.

I am no digital-dummy. In fact, a huge part of my day job involves digital imaging. However - and I am not kidding - sometimes I can dodge and burn and print better in the wet darkroom than sitting on my butt in front of a monitor. Now I am not talking about being more 'precise', but making pictures that fit the wet, "hand waving" process, and very nicely. Given enough time, I could explain it better; suffice to say there is a fitting of the hand method that works with my previsualization and practice. Do people disrepect sculpturers who don't CAD/CAM for the same? No, because some digital methods cannot reflect 'the hand' that fits the work better. I believe most people underestimate, or are blind to, how the 'advanced' technology they adopt constrains the work they attempt.

[Keith S. Walklet]

It shouldn't be a surprise that John has figured out an effective way to manage it in camera. What markings on the lens are your referring to? I have a hard enough time guestimating whether my hat or hand is in the frame when quickly improvising a lens shade. (The Flare Buster has solved this problem).

And the grease pencil idea seems like it would work wonders for irregular horizons where the standard straight edge of a 1/2 ND creates as many problems as it solves. Though, it would make working on multiple compositions quickly interesting.