PhaseOne 645DF Medium Format System

Some months ago I made a major change in equipment, going from Nikon 35mm Digital Cameras, to a Phase One Medium Format System. (645DF and P65+ Digital Back) While I stay mostly clear of gear on this blog, I can’t help talking about this, as this change has a big impact on my portfolio by allowing for much larger prints at a very high quality. In Landscape Photography it’s important to be able to print large, as otherwise it’s difficult to convey scale. While an 11×14 print of Rock Art can look fine, a Canyon printed at the same size loses it’s sense of grandeur.

Print Size

The larger print sizes are possible due to the very high resolution of the Medium Format System. Phase One and Hasselblad are the major names in Medium Format Digital Photography. While this camera uses the same kind of technology that all Digital Cameras use, the sensor is much larger, allowing for much higher resolution. (and making it quite expensive).

The Phase One System has a 60 MegaPixel Digital Sensor, so without tweaking anything, the print size is 22 x 30 inches. For most prints that is large enough. However, when larger Panoramas are needed, stitching four photos together gets me a super high-quality 40 x 60 print.

Digital Sensor Quality

The Medium Format System does more than just print larger. It seems to capture a wider or finer tonal range of color. For Landscape Photography this is very important. I don’t just want detail. I want the full range and nuance of color that I see in nature.

Print Quality

Here’s what I use to make these large prints. I’ve been working with Inkjet printing since the early days of color proofers in the 1980′s. Today these Epson printers produce among the highest quality Fine Art Prints you can buy. With the right quality papers and inks, the prints I produce will last over a hundred years. Longevity would rightly be a concern to anyone that has seen old photos turn yellow. The materials we use are nothing like the common paper old time photos were printed on. The color photos have Permanence Ratings of over 100 years, and the Black & White photos over 200 years. The Epson inks will also hold up to fading this long. Along with most Fine Art Photographers, I have a Lifetime Warranty against fading. The technology has really made a difference, especially with color printing.

Coming up, lots of new work on the web page along with some beautiful new custom frames.

Epson 7900 Printer

Or, here are two direct links:

http://www.glorious-landscape.com
http://www.markesposito.com

There is a link for the Blog in my Web Page so it’s easy to go back and forth.

There are all kinds of Photography – Portrait, Photojournalism, Wedding, Sports, Nature, Landscape, etc… Each of these areas are so specialized, and the skills so different that most photographers work in only one of these disciplines. They may change lanes every once in a while just for fun, but they’ll need to get back to their area of expertise to be successful. It’s just too difficult to be a jack of all trades. (and master of none is not good on the resume)

Quality vs Quantity

My objectives and interests in life led me to Landscape Photography, and Landscapes must eventually be expressed as Fine Art, and the Fine Art Print. We have no avenue for selling quantity, nor would we want to, for that emphasis would usually mean that Quality must be sacrificed. As I mentioned in my article entitled What is Fine Art, it is important that the work truly is Fine. Mass producing on cheap paper is out, as is cutting corners on any materials used in Printing, Matting, or Framing. There is something unique about art made by hand, and only available in limited quantities. I’m not just talking about collectibility as an investment. There is also the feeling you get knowing that you own something that wasn’t mass produced. For those with enough disposable income that might be an exotic car, or rare antique. For others it is some kind of Art. Fortunately today we can own Art that is unique due to the nature of Fine Art, and it’s limited reproduction, be it a painting or Fine Art print.

If you’ve never purchased a Fine Art Print, or don’t have an idea of what goes into producing it, let me elaborate from my own experience.

The Painter of Light

While there are all kinds of reasons that people take photographs, the most unique aspect of producing Art in Photography is the agonizing dedication to a single work, or print. I recall reading comments made by Ansel Adams to the effect that he was happy to produce twelve museum quality prints in a year. Compare that to a gentlemen on the Internet that wants to shoot a million photographs, (more power to him!) and the nature of Fine Art Landscape Photography becomes more clear. In this respect what I do is more closely related to the experience of a painter than it is to other avenues of photography. This idea is less understood than I had imagined. All photography tends to get lumped together in some ways, and yet, what could be more different than photographing a basketball game and being out in the wilderness for 3 days trying to produce one great photo. Cameras are used for Passport photos too. :^})

The Fine Art print is the best work of an Artist, and is usually the product of weeks and sometimes months of work. It is produced in somewhat limited quantities due to the fact that it is done by hand, and each print must be perfect.

As I’m writing this, it dawned on me that this kind of article would not be needed if we were discussing a Painter with brush and canvas. My Mother is a Painter and I’ve seen for many years the time it takes to complete a painting. This seems to be common knowledge with painting. Not so with Photography.

At the end of the day, Fine Art Photography is much more akin to Fine Art Painting than it is to any other kind of Photography.

For me, old shacks or barns carry a sense of history, or a story, and that’s what makes them interesting. Old things seem to inspire the mind more than new things do. I find a broken down wooden shack far more interesting than a new one. Instead of getting ugly they actually get personality. It can go too far of course, and they can go back to ugly. I’ve seen plenty of those as well.

North Carolina, with its greenery, is uniquely different from the Southwest. I may like the Southwest color palette a bit more, but this one in Chimney Rock definitely has some personality, and shows the look of the Great Smokey Mountains.

(Phase One/P65+)

While the tools and gear that dominate the Internet are important, they are just a means to an end for Fine Art. When I play music, no one cares what brand of trumpet I have. They just want to know if I can make music, and whether they’ll enjoy it or not. They want to feel something – joy, excitement, humor, sadness, whatever. It has to succeed on an emotional level, and for some, on an intellectual level as well.

In the pursuit of Art in Photography, success happens (or not) in the Fine Art Print. It is the final presentation or the performance of the piece.

Each step in the process of creating the Fine Art Print is essential. I have a whole system developed around those steps. At the end of the day though, if the Print doesn’t excite, it’s not a success.

There are all kinds of photography, and while most would certainly want their work in print of some kind, most photographs won’t end up matted and framed, or as Art in the tradition sense. It may still be Art of course. When I worked in the printing business, hardly anything was matted or framed. Most all images were destined for a magazine, book, or some kind of advertising. They would never be a Fine Art Print, which is Ok.

The Creation of a Fine Art Print

Having worked with photoshop for many years, it’s easy to think that once final editing is complete, everything else is a piece of cake. As I found out some years ago, this couldn’t be further from the truth. Here are some of the many issues that I consider when the printing starts.

1. Paper/Canvas selection (Textures, Whiteness, Coatings and Permanence ratings)
2. Printer accuracy – will the printer produce an accurate representation.
3. Matting – Cutting mats and assembly
4. Archival issues with all materials (Mats, Foamboard, Tapes, Corners, Dust Cover)
5. Framing (every print doesn’t necessarily work with every frame)
6. Glazing/Glass issues (coatings, Plexiglass, shipping issues)

If you’re thinking that this is a whole other ball game, you would be correct. These are actually two separate disciplines that must be mastered – Printing and Framing.

These days I do all of these myself, and the road was not easy. They both have their pitfalls, and frustrations.

In Conclusion

1. I have a feeling this is why most photography doesn’t become Fine Art. It has a very high level of difficulty, and the learning curve is huge.

2. This is why a Fine Art print normally can’t be sold inexpensively. Devoting this much time to the print means that high volume is not possible. (Unless the Artist can afford to hire lots of staff to help)

3. Limited Editions – At least for me, everything I do will be limited based on the points made here. I’ll never have the time to Print, Mat, and Frame hundreds of each Portfolio piece I have.

There are lots of average prints. There are far fewer Fine Art Prints.

Lake Lure - Fall scene - D3x | Micro Nikkor 105mm

In the online photography community there is a serious hang-up over the term Professional, which I’ll not get into, because there is no right answer. Some define the term as someone that makes their living with Photography, and others use it as a term to indicate a level of experience.

I’m more interested in the term Fine Art, and this is even tougher to define. Right from the start, having -Fine- in the term causes problems, because of the qualitative connotations. After-all, it’s Fine Art, not pretty good Art. So it sounds like it’s all about how good it is, but that path is wrought with problems as the tendency will be to formularize every aspect of photography.

Which qualities are the ones I need in Photography to be able to call a print Fine Art? Sharpness, composition, perfect color palette, a certain depth of field, paper type, the mat or frame, etc. Maybe five hours of color correction in Photoshop will make it Fine Art. If we go down this road, when is enough enough?

Actually I don’t believe that Fine Art refers to some formula of perfect photographic mechanics. If you can stand a Jazz analogy – some tone purists criticized Miles Davis for the quality of his sound. It was airy at times. (Think noisy in terms of photography.) However, once you got over your hangup about his non-orchestral sound, you could start to see that the airy sound introduced an artistic element, or a unique quality that made Miles Davis something special. The air in his tone became part of his art.

He broke the so-called rules and made art.

Dictionary.com has this to say about Fine Art: a visual art considered to have been created primarily for aesthetic purposes and judged for its beauty and meaningfulness

That definition partially works for me, and I find the idea of Intent especially important. Beyond Intent, which I already have, my current and personal criteria for my own work:

1. It must have a spark of life. If the paper opened and the photo took a breath, I wouldn’t be surprised. Startled maybe :^}
2. It must have the highest quality presentation

Ok, so I introduced a personal rule of quality here, but of course there is nothing wrong with quality. What Fine Art is NOT is a list of rules defining quality in all aspects of photography. (as in noise-free, perfectly sharp, etc)

Alain Briot’s comments on this subject are insightful. I mentioned to him that his definition should really be in the dictionary. Not that everyone will agree, but even the dictionary shows multiple usages for words and terms.

For me a fine art photograph is one that is done with the goal of creating a work of art. It is an image that is done with a high level of craftmanship and care. It has to be mounted and matted to museum standards, in an archival manner.

Above all the cost should take a second seat to the concern for quality. Fine art is about quality, not about quantity. It is not about trying to save money by buying lower-priced inks, paper, matboard and other supplies. It is about creating the finest piece you can create, regardless of cost.

The goal is an artistic rendering of a subject in the finest manner possible.

Regardless of price and cost, a fine art print should sing. It should have a lyrical quality. It should transport you to a different place. It should open a window on another world, the world the artist is inviting the audience into.

This strikes a balance that I like, and puts the idea of Quality in the right perspective. Please leave your own comments on this subject.

- Mark Esposito (Oct 2009)
-

Technical Challenges

if you’re not interested in a technical discussion, skip down to the next section

Camera technology has always offered latitude when it comes to reproducing the colors that we see. At the same time that means there is imprecision. With film, one type produces more highly saturated colors while another does better with skin tones. Digital photography has even more latitude up front by allowing for quick adjustments in how the camera will record color. With either technology colors can be adjusted on the computer. So the color in a Fine Art print is NOT simply a WYSIWYG process. The challenge of producing an emotional connection with color starts out as a technical one, and then becomes an artistic one.

Why is color such a technical challenge? You can’t find a camera that perfectly handles white balance in every situation, and has a perfectly calibrated sensor or film, and never under or overexposes. So it’s still up to the Artist to figure out how to represent or reproduce color, whether the goal is to be completely accurate, or to represent a personal vision. In the case of the photo shown above, you’re seeing what I saw as closely as I could represent it. In this case, for me, no personal vision could compete with what was already there, at least from the perspective of color.

To add to the difficulties, JPEG, the most common file format for photography, by design throws away some of the color information in a photo in order to compress the file to make it smaller. It therefore can’t perfectly represent nuances in color. In some cases it can’t represent the color at all, because it threw away the hue of a color by averaging other colors in the same area during compression. In Fine Art color photography, where color is one of the key components, we can’t afford to throw anything away. (By the way, the RAW file format does NOT throw anything away, so that is the preferred format for Fine Art Photography) I’m not bad-mouthing JPEG though. It works just fine for other print media, like most magazines and Wedding albums.

What about the paper? Even the highest quality paper has it’s unique attributes, which means that it’s going to take the ink differently. Some papers are matte, some glossy, and others in-between, and the same print on each of these will look very different. These all have an impact on the colors.

The Emotion of color

Now to the artistic side of this discussion. Black & White photography produces a range of emotional responses, sometimes very powerful. I’m not sure that they are the same responses that color might produce. That’s hard to figure out. For me there is something different with color. Of course it’s silly to think that all emotional responses are measurable or exactly reproducible between people. Obviously emotions belong to the viewer, and they are highly personal, and often based on experience. However, there must be some commonality as lots of people tend to respond in similar ways to certain attributes of art that is well-done, especially color.

I can’t put my finger on why the Tulips photo shown above evokes such an intense feeling (in me), but I know for sure that it’s the colors that are doing it. How about the composition? There is definitely a composition, and I’m sure it plays an important role, but I’d like that to be invisible. The foreground tulip has been isolated in a background bed of supporting colors, rather than a staged black background. Just as important, there is no outside world, just color. The composition doesn’t lead me to consider the outside world. No sky, no people, no environment. Maybe that’s why I like it. Rather than looking at it compositionally, I only want to enjoy the colors and the feeling that I could live inside that scene forever. I’ll need a waiter though!

To the Designer of all designers, and the creator of color and light – Thank you!

- Mark Esposito

Comments welcome

If you’re shooting Macro, these clouds are just what you needed as they diffuse the light leaving no harsh shadows and good saturation. Usually with Macro photography we aren’t including the sky in the photo anyway.

On the other hand, not all Landscape photos need the sky. Take a look at the photo of Spiderock in my earlier blog post here. The overcast sky took away from the mood I wanted to portray, so I left it out. I had to clone in some dark grasses (in Photoshop) in a small strip at the top. (not shown)

Finally, here’s an example from my recent trip to Arizona. The site is called Church Rock. As great as Church Rock is, the clouds made the composition. I used Nikon’s super wide-angle lens Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 to exaggerate the clouds. I’m printing this on Epson Exhibition Fiber paper, which has super bright whites. Printed at 16×24, or even cropped at 16×20 it’s really beautiful.

More Info on Clouds

Wikipedia has a short article on clouds that might be helpful here.

I just ordered the following book on Amazon since it had some good reviews, and it’s inexpensive.

Click on the image to order it.

Spiderock turned out to be the most dramatic (for me) due to some great light just before sunset one night. I’m not kidding when I say that this light lasted 10 seconds. Once again it shows that the first hurdle in Landscape photography is just being there. Sounds easy, but being there at the right time often means 6:00am and 8:00pm, when most folks are sleeping or resting after dinner. Add to that a hike to get to the best location and you can see the commitment that it takes.

Let me know what you think of it by leaving a comment! Soon I’ll have a link to purchase a high quality print of this image.

Technical Details: Nikon D3, Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8, 1/30 sec, ISO 200 @f16

(if you don’t see the option to leave a comment, click on Read More)

The reason it works (for me) is that the tree and clouds fill the top half of the photo, so there isn’t much dead space in the sky.

I was thinking about a title for this scene, and what came to mind was “Canyon Seating”. It looks like a great spot for a sleeping bag as well. That would be some scene to wake up to – if you could get past the fear of something licking your ear, or rolling down the hill into the canyon.

Interestingly this was shot with the Nikon 10.5mm Fisheye lens, which you would never guess. It’s a fantastic lens that I would recommend highly for most Nikon bodies. (except the D3/D700) In the uncropped version you can see some curvature in the horizon, but cropped I don’t see it.

Nikon 10.5mm f/2.8G ED AF DX Fisheye – Buy on Amazon

Technical Details: Nikon D200/10.5mm, 180/sec @f9
My current gear: See the Bio page

(if you don’t see the option to leave a comment, click on Read More)