lf digital options

[adrian tyler]

my wife has an "old master" restoration studio and for the last couple of years i hear nothing but bitter complaining about the quality of the photography which she contracts.

she uses the most presigious fine art (or whatever you call them) photographers in the business, yet a lot of these old master still lifes' are very difficult because of the subtle detail in the shadows, and to confound the problems her providers are late into digital and the results are driving her to tears.

so given the volume of work she handles, and the fact that the majority of her clients want a cd, i was musing about helping her out exploring a lf digital solution, but i can only seem to find "betterlight"...

i'd be really appreciative of any hints or advice on a digital approach...

please, this is not a "troll", i don't want to start a fundamentalist war, let's just assume that film dosen't exist for the duration of the thread...

[Armin Seeholzer]

Hi Adrian

I know some german artist which work with them and they are happy, but it isn't cheap!
http://www.anagramm.com/

Much success, Armin Seeholzer

[gregstidham]

Sounds to me like her contracted photographers need to learn how to prep their files better in postproduction for her specialized needs. With a good scan from film, it is not usually a problem to bring out more shadow detail. Does she request the photographer open up the shadows a little?

Also, using a digital back instead of film won't necessarily fix the problem unless the photographer knows the tool and how to adjust the gamma curve.

[adrian tyler]

Sounds to me like her contracted photographers need to learn how to prep their files better in postproduction for her specialized needs. With a good scan from film, it is not usually a problem to bring out more shadow detail. Does she request the photographer open up the shadows a little?

Also, using a digital back instead of film won't necessarily fix the problem unless the photographer knows the tool and how to adjust the gamma curve.

that's entirely true, but the state of the art of fine painting reproduction does not reside in film, restoration studios in all the major museums are now digital. hence my question about options.

[Ted Harris]

Adrian,

you might want to contact Academic Imaging Associates in Manchester, VT http://www.academicimaging.com/ they are one of the world's leading firms in consulting witih museums to establish the best equipment for their needs, etc.

[Henry Ambrose]

Adrian,

She might look at this:

http://www.crusedigital.com/

[Struan Gray]

Our university repro shop went digital a few years ago. They use an MF back on Hasselblad for most of their work, but when they need lots of pixels they mount the digiback on a special rear stitching frame on their Sinar P. I'm pretty sure they sourced everything from Sinar, but cannot find anything on the Sinar website. I do know that the stitching frame makes assembling the full scan easier than doing it by hand.

I can dig out specifics if this is of interest. For them, it was a good way of trading cost against scan size, and of being able to digitise quite large originals without investing in a large-bed scanner.

[Tim Lookingbill]

I've got a local gallery owner in my small town in Texas attempting to reproduce his client's paintings using an amateur photographer with an Olympus Evolt and printing to canvas with an HP wide format inkjet. He's teaching himself calibration, photoshop editing and color management and loosing his shirt and maybe his wife in the whole process.

He gets the same complaints about the lack of depth in the prints compared to the original. From what I've seen in his setup he shoots the paintings in his gallery under 5000K gallery fluorescents, converts to and edits in a CMYK space-(he said because the calibration target he built the printer profile from had color patches with the letters C,M,Y,K) and his SpiderPro calibrated LCD is bright blue while his canvas substrate looks very dull yellow under the soft white flotubes he works under.

I don't advise anyone to attempt this kind of reproduction under such conditions and equipment. This is where you REALLY have to know what you're doing and have the money to back it.

[Neal Shields]

I would suggest that she start insisting that a standard color chart and gray scale be included in the scene. Then who ever she hires knows that they are not done until they reproduce the entire gray scale and get reasonably close to the colors.

Having said that: I suspect the easiest way to accomplish that goal digitally is with a Betterlight back.

The more expensive gray scales have a lot more steps than the cheaper ones so you not only know you get both ends but can also capture mid range subtilities.

[adrian tyler]

thanks for all the helpful advice, struan, i was wondering about the hasselblad backs, but i have just spent the morning in the thyssen-bornemisza restoration studio (see attatched van gough and popova) and was deepley impressed by the scanback setup that they have, so i think that that would really be the way to go, unfortunatley... i was hoping for something magic, portable, not too expensive. but alas, i think that it's not going to enter in the budget this year...