From master image to envisioned image

[Mike Buckley]

When I make monochromes, I am occasionally asked to display the color version by those who understandably don't share my affinity for monochromes. I'm rarely comfortable doing that for the same reason I never display images that are not fully post-processed: for me (and perhaps only for me), I want to display only the best I can do at that time. When envisioning a monochrome, the color version is not the best I can do.

I'm breaking from that tradition here (though, ironically, nobody so far asked to see the color version) because it might be interesting to some to see the huge difference between my master photo and my final photo along with an explanation of my thought process and adjustments that brought about such large differences.

I posted separately in another thread the monochrome shown below so people could discuss it. (Thanks to all who have participated in that thread!) That image is what I envisioned before I began the setup of the tabletop, background and lighting and created the composition. The color version is my master, which is SOOC except that I used a batch process to downsize and sharpen it for display here.

NOTE: See my next post for lots of explanations and clarifications.


Master SOOC Image



Envisioned Image

[Shadowman]

Knowing what the real version should look like is normally enough for me, its when i have to guess; for instance with people and clothing that i get a little curious.

[NorthernFocus]

Great demonstration, Mike. On multiple levels. By the way the loose leaf laying there is genius.

This is why I stick to wildlife. I'm not this creative. More a recorder I suppose

[Polar01]

Like.

Cheers: Allan

[Mike Buckley]

Setup (copied from the other thread verbatim)
The tabletop and background are one piece of gold art board with metallic-like flecks. That somewhat shiny surface produces very soft reflections and a variety of tonalities. The main light is a small continuous-light lamp fitted with a custom snoot. It is positioned on the bottom right corner of the scene and shining upward to light the separated leaf and mostly the tip of the artichoke. Light from a medium continuous-light lamp on the left and facing away from the camera spills onto the scene just enough to brighten that side of the artichoke and background just a tad. Another medium continuous-light lamp similarly positioned on the right side balances that side of the background with the other side. Both medium lamps are fitted with diffusion material to reduce the brightness.

Exposure and Initial Histogram
I exposed the master image to take full advantage of the full range of tonalities the camera's sensor could capture without losing detail in the highlights. The histogram of the master image is displayed immediately below.




Adjusting the tone curve of the color master
I wanted to retain mostly the highlights but, as the envisioned image clearly indicates, I wanted to convey a very different mood. So, I adjusted the tone curve to accommodate that mood. The screenshot of the adjusted tone curve is shown immediately below. (Ignore the histogram displayed along with the tone curve, as it is only a composite histogram of the image prior to changing the curve.)

NOTE: That adjustment, indeed, every adjustment could have been made after converting from color to monochrome. I use the described workflow because that's how I initially learned to do it and find it easy to do. Others would very successfully convert to monochrome as their first post-processing step.




Histogram after adjusting the tone curve of the color master
That histogram is shown immediately below. Notice the difference between it and the histogram of the master image (prior to making any adjustments).




Converting to Monochrome
I converted using a blue filter set at maximum strength. After trying other options, that process got the image closer in one quick step to my envisioned image than any other option.

It's important to note that when changing a typical image from color to monochrome, it's far better to convert using a color filter rather than desaturating everything. That's because a converted image retains all data, whereas a desaturated image loses two-thirds of the data. The more the data, the more control we have over nuances.


Adjusting the Monochrome Tone Curve
I first achieved the overall mood in the monochrome version that I intended for the artichoke itself by ever so slightly adjusting the tone curve of the entire image. (Now that I think about it, selecting the artichoke and then adjusting the tone curve only of that selected area would have been more effective in my overall workflow.) The adjustment was slight, as evidenced by the screen shot shown below.



Dodging and Burning
I then made final adjustments to the tonalities in the whole vegetable and the separate leaf by selectively dodging and burning. After that, I darkened the background to fit the mood I envisioned.


Why not make the background dark before releasing the shutter?
It would be understandable for people to wonder why I didn't use a lighting setup that made the background darker in the first place. I would have preferred to have done that. However, I work in the tiny constraints of my makeshift studio. The background is so close to the scene because there is insufficient space in my studio to create the ideal distance between the scene and the background. There is so little space that for all practical purposes it's physically impossible to light the subjects without also lighting the background more brightly than I would have preferred.

The one advantage of being hampered by such a tiny working space is that my tabletop and background materials can be relatively small, never larger than 24" x 36" (about 60 x 90 cm) and usually smaller.


Histogram of the Envisioned Image
That histogram is shown immediately below. It's difficult to appreciate from that display that I took the brightest tones to about as bright as I could get them without losing detail. My post-processing software indicates five imperceptible dots that actually are blown. If I move the pertinent slider to adjust the white point, I only have to move it from a value of 255 to 240 for the histogram to also indicate blown highlights.




Could I have made other artistic choices?
Absolutely! And you might have wished I had made them. That's fine with me. As an example, some people might have preferred the mood of the master image. Indeed, on a different day I might have preferred that mood.

But please remember that I was trying to achieve a particular vision. So, in my mind the critique at least for the purposes of the discussion in this thread (as opposed to the other thread) should be all about whether I could have used better or easier processes to achieve that vision.

[Didace]

Thank you.

I am very unlikely to shoot this kind of photo, but this is exactly the kind of thing I wish were posted more - talented photographers (and there are many here) walking through how they did something. A kind of "Make a Photo With Me" series. This is how I learn the best and, even if it's not the type of picture I would do, I find very engaging.

[Mike Buckley]

I'm glad the information is enjoyable, Didace.

this is exactly the kind of thing I wish were posted more...A kind of "Make a Photo With Me" series.

If there are specific situations that you would like to learn about, perhaps you could ask about that at the time by establishing a new thread. People can often recommend specific books or tutorials, or at least sources where you might find them.

I mention that because it's understandably doubtful that many people will take the time to create a thread such as this one. It took almost two hours for me to put everything together, though surely almost everyone will be faster than me at doing that.

[Bobobird]

Great demonstration, Mike. On multiple levels. By the way the loose leaf laying there is genius.

This is why I stick to wildlife. I'm not this creative. More a recorder I suppose

Make that 2.

[AlwaysOnAuto]

I too, appreciate your efforts Mike.
Maybe a photo of the setup would help with making it a tad easier to describe. You know, they do say a picture is worth a thousand words, although, in today's economy I'm sure that's not really the case. Not all of us know what a 'snoot' is or how big a 'medium light' is vs a 'small' one. I find visual education works wonders sometimes.
Again, thanks for taking the time to post this thread.

[Mike Buckley]

Maybe a photo of the setup would help with making it a tad easier to describe.

That would surely be true. Unfortunately, it's not practical to provide a photo. First, my makeshift studio is really small, which makes it difficult to photograph the setup. Second, the space by design is all black including the walls, floor and ceiling and most photographic equipment is black. That's because I use the space to photograph transparent glass. Photographing that space would be difficult even if it was larger.

A snoot is a particular type of modifier attached to any light source. The modifier extends beyond the light source's reflector and prevents the light from spreading as it would without the snoot attached; it reduces the size of the beam of light.

There is no official designation of the size of small, medium and large continuous light sources. I use those three terms because I have three sizes. Even now that you are armed with that knowledge, knowing the exact sizes of the light sources would not help anyone more fully comprehend the fundamental lighting setup.

[Hans]

Thank you.

I am very unlikely to shoot this kind of photo, but this is exactly the kind of thing I wish were posted more - talented photographers (and there are many here) walking through how they did something. A kind of "Make a Photo With Me" series. This is how I learn the best and, even if it's not the type of picture I would do, I find very engaging.

You might be on to something here???

[Brev00]

Interesting demonstration. I have no suggestions as the finished piece speaks for itself. I find the impetus for this demonstration curious: your response to others asking for color versions. Now, I sometimes ask or want to ask for color versions. But, more as criticism. I feel the person may have erred in making a black and white as my feeling is a desire to see the missing colors. The blue in the eye or red in a blouse. When a black and white works for me, I am content and have no desire to see the color version.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[Mike Buckley]

I sometimes ask or want to ask for color versions. But, more as criticism. I feel the person may have erred in making a black and white as my feeling is a desire to see the missing colors.

In my mind, that's a valid and I think comparatively unusual reason for asking to see the color version. Most people instead seem to want to see the color version simply because, with very few exceptions, all people see in color. Similarly, most people seem to want sepia photos to be about so-called timeless subjects mostly because they aren't used to seeing sepia photos of anything else.

[Dave Humphries]

~ because it's understandably doubtful that many people will take the time to create a thread such as this one. It took almost two hours for me to put everything together, though surely almost everyone will be faster than me at doing that.

I agree, I like writing my "How I did this" threads (e.g. Baby pic shoots - links from the P52 Index), but I don't do it very often because of the (feels inordinate) time it takes. I have one more of those I must post, but it won't be this week I suspect (even though the subject was a Halloween shoot and I should do it today).

I think I must be slower than you Mike!
(probably no surprise there)

So; did you grab all those screen shots as you processed 'the envisioned image', or did you have to recreate the PP to get them? (perhaps a bit of both)

Another question (if I may); if I have understood correctly; all tonal processing was applied to the entire image, rather than some with masks to limit their effects to certain areas of the image, is that true?

Thanks Mike, this is a very helpful thread.

[Mike Buckley]

did you grab all those screen shots as you processed 'the envisioned image', or did you have to recreate the PP to get them?

The raw file had all of the image adjustments saved in the file. So, I merely had to open that file, select the pertinent adjustment and make the corresponding screenshot.

if I have understood correctly; all tonal processing was applied to the entire image, rather than some with masks to limit their effects to certain areas of the image, is that true?

All of the dodging and burning of the vegetable and leaf and the darkening of the background were done selectively to affect only parts of the image.