http://finerworks.com/blog/theo/an-artists-guide-to-digital-printing/photographing-your-artwork.aspx
Photographing Your Artwork
Category: An Artist's Guide to Digital Printing
Posted By: James M. Theopistos 
Created:
Last Updated: 8/17/2011
At some point you will want to have good digital pictures of your artwork. Aside from assisting in preserving your intellectual property rights and also for insurance purposes, it is a necessary step for good giclee reproductions of your artwork. For many artists, with a large gallery of paintings, the cost of having artwork scanned may be somewhat daunting. Try $500 per painting on average with some places charging even much more. One company I spoke to which was owned by a famous contemporary painter charged close to $20,000 per pience for the setup alone. While scanning may yield a little better results, for a little over that cost, you can purchase a good digital SLR camera. This is why many artists find photographing their artwork a good alternative.
Photographing your artwork does not require any great expertise or talent with the camera. It essentially requires a decent SLR (single lens reflex) camera and a lens that can shoot at 50-55mm, the proper lighting conditions, and proper camera positioning.
The first step is to have a decent SLR (single lens reflex) camera with the ability to the ability to zoom to at least 50-55mm lens. If you have a zoom lens that can shoot even higher (200-300mm), then all the better. At that higher lens setting, you will have be move back further from the painting but that is okay since it flattens out the image better. Keep in mind that if you are not using a camera with a 50mm lens or greater you may get barrel-like distortion or a fish eye effect. A lot of people do not realize that this occurs but it is noticeable when you are shooting artwork due to the typical square or rectangular shape.
You may wonder if you should you use a digital or film based camera. While a few traditionalists may disagree, we prefer to use a Digital SLR and recommend it for the non-photo professional. It simplifies the workflow considerably since it allows you to quickly load your photo onto a computer to assess if any changes need to be made. If so, then you can go back and make the corrections necessary. Overall we have also seen better results from photos of artwork submitted from amateur photographers that shoot their own artwork digitally versus them using film.
With digital, the number of mega pixels of the camera does come into play so we recommend at least a 8 mega pixels Digital SRL camera or greater. Both Nikon and Canon make some popular and fairly affordable consumer based Digital SLRs. If using film based SLR, then you should use the slowest film possible. The slower the better since less graininess will occur. Graininess is a common problem we see from film based images. It can also happen in digital when the lighting conditions are very low but it is less likley.
Lighting
Artwork can be shot indoors or outdoors. The main factor to consider is the angle and lighting color. Of course you will want to use a white light source to prevent modifying the color of your artwork but for the low budget photographer, a nice sunny day should work best. Try to photograph in the middle of the day, between 10 AM and 2 PM. Avoid using the flash since it can create hotspots on your painting which appears as light reflecting off your painting. I can't tell you how often we see this and you wonder if the person shooting the photo bothered to review the image before they had us print it. Not to mention it can totally destroy the appearance and the ability of a decent print by hiding details. If you are a little more advanced, experiment with shooting with different settings. I know I mention proper lighting but one thing I have tried and received good results fromn is shooting in RAW mode indoors in a very low light setting and with a longer exposure. Of course you would followup by making adjustments with your camera photo software.
Use a Ruler and a grayscale meter
If you can include a gray scale strip (will have several squares of gray going from white to black) as well as a place ruler above your artwork then you will have some additional referencing tools at your disposal for post photo production. You can create your own grayscale meter or print out this one on a white sheet of paper. Use the ruler for sizing and the grayscale for adjusting your brightness and contrast levels.
 | | | | | |
| A grayscale strip will help you check your pictures balance for brightness and contrast. On your monitor, you should be able to distinguish all the swatches from white to black. Also, the white should all white and black should be all black. | |||||
Taking Photos of Your Paintings
Other factors that you will need to consider and consult your owners manual on is, white balance, aperture and exposure levels since they can affect the quality of the picture. Most new Digital SLR cameras have modes that automatically detect these but it will not hurt to become familiar with them anyway.
Post Photo Production
Once you have photographed your artwork, open up the file with a good image editing program like Photoshop or Paint Shop Pro. If you are using film, you will want to scan the negatives or have a transparency made and scan them. Do not have your local photo processing place make a photo CD unless they can do so at a high resolution - 200 to 300 pixels per inch (PPI) in relation to the size of your artwork is best. Once you have opened your image file you may need to do additional resizing and cropping. Use the ruler and grayscale you included in the photo to make adjustments accordingly.
This is very important. Make sure that you carefully examine every inch of your photograph by zooming in so that the ruler you included matches an actual ruler size when held up to your monitor. Check the quality of your image at this zoomed in level. If you have too much pixelation, graininess or the image is too blurry, reshoot your image at a higher resolution or with different settings. This is where we have seen many artists drop the ball. All too often they do not perform this step and assume because it looks decent on their computer when first loaded, it will print well.
If you are using our printing service and your are photographing your artwork, keep in mind that it is your responsibility to ensure your image file is good for printing. Our system print's what it gets through a remote and automated system. The staff that receives the print may not be able to go back and judge your image file for its quality.
If you are not familiar with this end of things, you may have to seek the assistance of a professional or someone at least well versed in digital imaging. After adjusting color and size you will need to crop excess parts of your photo outside of the range of the artwork so that your final copy is just of the picture. You may need to resize up or down. If resizing up, do so in increments of 110% and in bicubic resample mode. This better preserves the resolution quality then sizing up in one step. Your final resolution should be 200 to 300 PPI. Many professional printers recommend 300 pixels per inch but realistically at 200 PPI there will not be a noticeable difference. If printing on canvas, even 150 PPI yields excellent results. It is very important to note that the more you have to resize up, the greater the loss of quality occurs in the image. Hopefully you will be able to start off with a high resolution image in the first place.
Additional Things to Consider
The big advantage to doing this digitally is that you can get instant results from your photography session. With film you have to have it developed and then see if you did it correctly. This can be frustrating for the amateur photographer since they may find that all their shots were off in some form or fashion. If you do not have a good DSLR then purchasing one may set you back more than a film based camera so it may be more cost effective to use a film based camera. You will need to purchase a scanner that can scan negatives, slides, or transparencies.
Conclusion
Keep in mind these instructions are meant as tips to get you started and the final results may vary from individual to individual. You may find certain things mentioned do not work well for you. If you are just getting started, use this as a starting point then tweak your technique as you go along. Once you are able to start capturing your original works digitally for archiving and printing you will be able to easier print these images on demand.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.dallasartsrevue.com/resources/How-to-Photo-Art.shtml
How to Photograph Art
Kathy Boortz Exacting Fiddler approximately life size
We photographed Kathy's meticulous crab on a white board. Later, using Photoshop I filled every space and deleted every mark that's not crab or shadow and lightened the background till the shadows looked right. Then I inverted the selection to set the crab's Levels. Photographed with a Nikon D300 and Nikon 17~55mm. All Contents of this site are Copyright 2011 and before by J R Compton. All Rights Reserved. No reproduction without specific written permission.
If your art involves color, shape, dimension or texture, direct sunlight is the best light source, and it is widely available on this planet. Not talking about full — or open — shade (illuminated by the overly blue sky above), not dappled light (like from a tree's varying shadows), not overcast sky light (when the sun goes behind a cloud), but direct light beamed down 93 million miles from our local star.
Direct sunlight, however, is not always available, and other natural and unnatural light sources have their qualities, too. (See Other Light, below.) They're just not as good nor cheap nor easy to deal with as the light from the sun.
Whatever size your camera's sensor or film is — or whatever the stated resolution (usually measured in megapixels) — from one of the dinky ones with a fingernail-sized sensor on an under $100 Point & Shoot to the much larger sensors on an expensive full-frame digital Single Lens Reflex (or even larger and much more expensive, larger format cameras), if you fill the frame with your piece of art — get close enough so the art nearly fills the viewfinder — you'll make the best use of whatever resolution your camera has.
The more you crop (remove non-object space around the object in your photographic frame — usually an LCD, sometimes a viewfinder), the more you lose resolution.
Wide-angle Warning
Gordon Young Memento Mori 1, 2 and 3 collage 2010
I shot this wall of art for my own reference to write about it and paid no attention to the lighting or that I shot it at full wide-angle, thus netted these curving "straight" lines. It can be corrected later in Photoshop, but it's better to shoot it right the first time if you are seriously photographing art. Photographed using a Canon S90 camera.
You should not fill the frame if your lens is or is zoomed to wide-angle. From the 35mm-film-equivalent of 50mm ("normal") to the medium telephoto equivalent of 100mm is the right zoom range for copying flat art, although longer zooms or lenses wouldn't hurt, but that requires a greater distance from the camera. Wide-angle lenses can be very effective for sculpture, but in most cases, it's best to stick with "normal" or medium telephoto — or zoom — for two-dimensional art.
Wide-angle lenses tend to distort images, especially visible at the outer edges. If all you have is a wide-angle lens, fill the frame, then back off, so there's space around the art on the LCD. (It is on a tripod, right?). If you look at your viewfinder or LCD very carefully, you can see just when your flat, rectangular art is rendered flat and rectangular, not distorted. When I do distort paintings this way, I usually crop off the frame to render the image rectangular, even if the photo isn't completely.
Zoom lenses tend to distort at both the wide-angle and telephoto ends of the zoom range. Wide-angle lenses distort rectangles by bulging their middles out (barrel distortion - as in the illustration above), and telephotos tend to bulge them in (pincushion). Minimal distortion is usually obtained by using zoom lenses in the middles of their zoom ranges.
Don't use digital zoom, which only magnifies the pixels. Use optical zoom, which magnifies the image.
If it's not part of the art, the background is usually unimportant. You should minimize the area around the art. Let it go white or black or gray, whichever looks best or you like most. If that area is colorful, it will detract attention from your art. Of course, you can always re-frame the image in Photoshop or other image software, but if you have to enlarge your art's image to do that, you lose resolution.
Five megapixels is plenty. Between about 8 and 12 megapixels, few people can tell the difference. My old Sony F707 has 5 megapixels; my Canon S5IS had 8 and my Nikon D300 has 12 megapixels. I can barely tell the differences, even blown up on a big monitor, though I could probably tell those from a 48-megapixel image, in those few cameras when megapixels aren't just hype.
Julia McLain Howdy Do Ma'am acrylic 24 x 24 inches
Photographed hand-held under tungsten lights on a wall in a gallery with a Canon S90 after setting the precise white balance.
Nothing can save it if you don't get the image in focus. Check and double-check apparent sharpness. If your digital camera will let you, magnify the image on your LCD at least 5 times (5x). Some amateur cameras may not zoom that far, but if it's sharp blown up 3 - 5 times, it'll be probably be sharp enough.
Also realize that some cameras will allow you magnify (zoom into) images so much that everything looks out of focus, even when they are sharp. Experience should be your guide; it helps to know your camera. My dSLR (digital Single Lens Reflex) lets me blow images up to 20 times their size, and at that size, it can be very confusing. If I tap the enlarge-image button only 5, not the full 8 times, I get a better idea of what's actually sharp. Your camera may vary.
Also be aware that the LCDs on the back of most cameras show much higher contrast than the image file really is. The unmagnified image usually looks sharp, and that can mislead you. Zoom in to be sure.
Color
We think of sunlight as yellow, because we think the sun is yellow. But it isn't. The light it shines is blue, because our local star burns blue hot (about 6,000 degrees Kelvin). We usually do not notice the color of sunlight because it is the light we expect. Our brains automatically adjust for the differences from one light source color to another, but film and digital cameras do not.
If you use light other than the mid-day (approximately 10 am till 4 pm) sun, precisely rendered colors are less likely. Early morning, late afternoon and evening sunlight is redder, and as lovely and "romantic" as that may be, it is not much good for accurately photographing art.
Under midday direct sunlight, colors are easy. Most film and nearly all digital cameras (unless set otherwise) expect and assume sunlight. If you use any other variety of light, getting accurate colors is guesswork. Anything but sunlight tends to be confusing to both users and cameras/film.
 |  |
Nancy Cole - Trinity Turtles - earthenware - MAC Member Show 06
I photographed the turtles under incandescent lights at the McKinney Avenue Contemporary in Dallas, Texas, USA — too red. Right: as I Photoshopped it using masking, levels and other techniques. The base and background should be neutral, so I kept tweaking it. It might be that I made it too green, and not yellow enough. My color memory is less than ideal. At Joel Cooner Gallery, I often have the work right there in front of me when I adjust color. Photographed with a Nikon D200 camera.
Adjusting what we see as white
Thank goodness for digital cameras with adjustable White Balance settings.
I won't buy a camera without it, because I shoot under a variety of light sources, only some of which I have control over. In 2001, I waited six months to get my Sony F707, then the only camera with that feature. Now, many do.
Unfortunately, not many digital cameras have manual White Balance, and most automatic White Balance features on digital cameras (including expensive ones) don't work well under all colors of light. Canon cameras, for instance, have notoriously bad White Balance under tungsten lights (or else they believe consumers want to render light bulb light as orange, which does look romantic). You still have to check feature lists and read camera reviews carefully.
My expensive Nikon DX cameras allow me to make color balance adjustments for a variety of light sources, so I can dial the exact color in degrees Kelvin for almost any kind of a source (halogen, fluorescent, tungsten bulbs, lamp, candle or sunlight under differing circumstances), but it's still iffy with mixed light sources — like daylight plus the dreaded fluorescent or other light source combinations, and its automatic white balance fares poorly (goes orange) with ordinary light bulbs.
The D300's White Balance procedure is difficult to remember. On my much smaller and less expensive Panasonic G2 I usually use to photograph art for the Internet, I click a menu option and push two buttons while filling a smaller frame with something I know is white, then the color is immediately adjusted. It's simple, and it's effective.
Mixed lighting — like in galleries with big windows and light bulbs — can vary by the inch from warm to cool. And homes with mixed lighting can be a nightmare to adjust. Sometimes I can set the camera before I shoot. Sometimes, because I shoot Raw, I can change the color in Photoshop later. Sometimes I can't do either.
White Great Egret shot at the color setting for
Tungsten light bulbs I set the night before.
Photographed with a Nikon D300
Mixing light sources is a hassle. If you are shooting "indoor" film or digital with indoor lights, and there is an unblocked window letting in outside light (which is probably brighter than anything indoors) so it shines on or reflects in your art, some or all of your art may be rendered blue instead of the color you expect.
If you shoot art inside or near color objects, those objects' color(s) can reflect in the art. I loved my Parrot Green (It felt warm in winter and cool in summer.) living room, but I knew better than to photograph art there, because when I did, the green walls turned art a sickly shade. Our brains adjust. Cameras don't.
Colored walls and ceilings are prime suspects for color shifts, but if you have a big red couch where it can reflect in your art, it can make your art pink. Even outside, a big green tree, a bright yellow garage or red bricks can subtly or substantially alter color. The blue paint on the ceiling of your porch can ruin warm hues.
Digital Vs. Analog
Before we jump into this century, which will eventually be all digital and is already rushing headlong in that direction, remember: If you need a lot of slides quickly, shoot slide film. It's cheaper and quicker.
But if you want to save your images in their true colors for a long, long time, forget film. Film fades. Film colors change according to temperature, humidity, storage methods and materials, time and the type of light used to view them. Slides can be made from digital images at any time in their long life cycle and still be great (but not cheap).
Fluorescent lights are especially dangerous to photographic prints as well as offset (printing press) ink and ink jet prints. Beware of exhibiting your art in rooms illuminated by fluorescent lights.
Properly stored digital images, however, will last centuries. A copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a digital image file is identical to its original. The first and every subsequent copy of a digital file remains the same.
The first and every subsequent analog copy of a color slide or print or negative will be different. Slightly at first, but after generations of analog copies of copies, your image can become unrecognizable.
The importance of shadows
Janet Chaffee Underneath and In-Between paper cut-outs
on front wall at MFA Gallery in Dallas, Texas, USAPhotographed in subdued sunlight streaming in through a big front gallery window. I like this piece because it has no lines, no real form. Only shapes and shadows. Photographed using a handheld Canon S90.
Shadows are important to our perception of art, and not just for sculpture. Two or three or more lights illuminating artwork tends to either multiply or eliminate the shadows, including shadows that show us brushstrokes, subtle and overt texture, crinkles and creases, tears, cuts, protrusions, layers, etchings and other dimensional aspects.
Orient your art so sunlight falls on the top, at an angle well above straight-on, especially from the left, and your art will likely look like it should and show the textures and colors you put into it, and more closely approximate the actual piece than any other lighting can.
If you use two or more light sources of equal intensity (or distance), texture is more difficult, and all those shadows can confuse viewers, who expect shadows under bumps.
For three-dimensional art, use a stronger light (neither of them has to be very bright if you use longer exposures and keep the camera steady) to illuminate your art and a less intense bulb (or an equal bulb at more distance, or white reflector) to fill in some of the shadows.
Hundreds of books explain the basics of multi-light setups for three-dimensional objects, but I attempt a quick once-over on basic art lighting just below. I learned commercial lighting at East Texas State University (back when it was still called that) in the 1970s, but I usually wing it at Joel Cooner Gallery, moving the one light I have not yet knocked over and destroyed until the shadows look right on the camera's LCD, then add a big, white foam-board reflector on the opposite side to fill in some of the shadows, make several photographs from differing angles and exposures, then adjust the image more in Photoshop later.
If you are new to this, don't try to judge the light with your eyes. Look at the camera's LCD, which shows much higher contrast. LCDs make judging light evenness easy.
Bali, Indonesia Buffalo Mask circa 1900 wood and paint 16 inches wide
I photographed this on Dallas' Valley House Gallery wall during an opening reception using available gallery lighting. I had either photographed this same mask or one like it at Joel Cooner Gallery previously and have an affection for this vivid, perhaps demonic animal with rotting wooden teeth.
I used my pocket camera, the Canon SD780, clicked it once to use in a review, then shot the ID, so I could correctly identify it. Later, in Photoshop I lightened the shadow and background, so the piece visually popped off the wall.
Note: The shadow on the wall is only one of the important shadows. The shadows formed by the protruding parts are at least as important. Move the lights around if you can, so you see just how three-dimensional you are rendering the art.
If your work is in a frame or mat, be careful. Those protrusions may create shadows down and into your art. If your work is already framed or matted, tilt it back toward the sun and shoot down on it from an angle, so that the back of the camera parallels the artwork to render it rectilinearly correct. A little mat or frame shadow can be helpful (to show that it is matted or framed), but a lot can get in the way.
If you take your art to a Service Provider, they will probably use more than one light — maybe four — to evenly illuminate it. Very nice for art that is high-contrast and physically flat, but problematic for creating a precise likeness of art that involves color, shape, dimension or texture.
Here on Earth we have one local star (the sun), so we are used to seeing things with only one set of shadows. Our brains expect it that way. We accept as realistic, objects that cast their shadows down and slightly to the right. Slightly to the left doesn't thwart that expectation much and may be unavoidable. But shadows cast to the right (not down), left or (shudder) upward, confuses our sense of depth.
Shadows and subtle tonalities are especially important when photographing sculpture, which needs to be immediately seen as three-dimensional. You do not have to use direct sunlight to show shadows and ranges of tonalities, but it helps.
Dayak Dragon wood carving with natural pigment by the Dayak people of Borneo
This shot was illuminated with one household bulb in a reflector on a stand and one large white foam packing board to reflect that light back into the shadows. The main light is almost directly above and slightly to the left. The background was darkened in Photoshop, so the piece looked more dramatic. Photographed with a Canon Powershot S5-IS on a tripod for Joel Cooner Gallery. I produce that site and shot most of its images.
new Other light
Sunlight is not a perfect lighting solution.
Sometimes it rains or snows or is overcast or mostly cloudy. Sometimes the sky turns green and the sun disappears into tornado-like clouds. Usually it's more comfortable or convenient to photograph art indoors.
Two same-color lights are usually sufficient to illuminate flat art like paintings and drawings on textured canvas or paper — and almost anything else. Use light stands so you can easily adjust their height, and metal reflectors so the light can be concentrated in one direction and precisely aimed. Many camera stores will sell you a set of two or three reflector lights on stands from $100 - $150, often with white, shoot-through umbrellas.
Actually, umbrellas are great for diffusing or softening light, especially for portraits and reflective objects, but the ones in inexpensive lighting sets are translucent, so much of the ight goes through them instead of being reflected back, and they don't always work the way you expect, so they need experimentation. See a quick introduction to How to Use Umbrellas on YouTube or read Photography Tips and Tricks.
One light should be placed above and to the left of the art, so it can be aimed down at about a 30-45-degree angle to cover the piece evenly, while casting enough shadows to show the art's depth and texture.
Then set up another light with the same or lower wattage behind, but at about the same height as or a little higher and on the other side of the camera from the main light. Adjust its distance or angle so it only partially fills shadows cast by the main light. Place your hand with fingers flat close to the art, then readjust the lights' angle or distance to make sure your hand-shadows are even on the top, bottom, left, right and center of the art. Make sure neither light creates bright reflections in the art or casts shadows on it, and be careful that no other color of light shines on it (from other rooms, windows or lamps).
This creates the kind of lighting our eyes expect, so your art will look normal and correct — with slight internal shadows.
Most cameras can be adjusted to render different colors of light (called White Balance) normally. Household / tungsten bulbs are usually symbolized by a light bulb in your camera's menus. Daylight fluorescent - sunshine icon, or fluorescent - usually a tube-like icon. I stick with low wattages (100 or less), so they don't heat up the room. If you're not sure about all this light color business, use daylight fluorescent bulbs and set the camera to daylight (sunshine icon). Avoid using either tungsten or Daylight (blue) photoflood lights; they're hot, expensive and break easily.
For sculpture, I use that one, main light, with a big, white cardboard or rough-surfaced foam sheet (commonly used for packing) angled so it reflects the main light back into the subject, but you could also use another light to fill in some of the shadows, so they don't photograph as black pits. But the reflector is really easier to get the light right. When I'm photographing small items, I sometimes use a hand-held piece of typing paper to provide fill when using the camera's self-timer to go click.
Unless you really know what you are doing, don't get involved with multiple flash units as light sources. They are complex electronic devices and can either put you in the poor house or confuse you indefinitely. Simpler is better, and I've never used them. Strobes are great for throwing tons of light in professional studios, but all you need is enough light to expose your art at low ISO. Long exposures are not a problem if you have your camera on a tripod. It is not uncommon to use exposures of many seconds. If my camera shoots at a fraction of a second, I know I have left the ISO too high.
Once you get your lights set up so they produce decent photographs, it might be helpful if you either keep them up or tape Xs on the floor where they go, so next time you have to photograph art, setup will be quicker and easier.
Alex Troup Zooamorph 1988 mixed media with butterfly, beetle,
wasp nest, cork, feathers and newsprint 10 x 32 x 4 inches
Photographed with a Nikon D300
Glass is not clear.
Photographing art behind glass can be a challenge. Glass reflects light like a mirror. Sunlight outdoors or gallery lights indoors or your own cockamamie lighting setup anywhere in between, may well reflect in the glass you put over your art. I have often accidentally included me in photographs of art behind glass or art that is glass.
The best way to photograph art behind glass is to take off the glass. If you can't get rid of the glass, light the art through the glass obliquely from the side and shoot straight into the image while hiding the camera (everything but the lens) behind something soft, non-reflective and black. I sometimes use a large piece of black mat board with a circle cut out for my lens — or a dark towel or whatever else is available to hide reflections of me, my camera or my bright metal tripod.
Using more than one light source tends to flatten out texture, shape and shadows, but you gotta do what you gotta do.
Glass steals focus and distorts your images. It is not clear. Sometimes — especially when it is lighted at angles — glass adds its own blue-green color and rippled texture. Worse, many cameras focus on the first thing they're aimed at, not necessarily what you want in focus behind the glass.
If your glass is any distance from the surface of your art (and it often is) and your camera focuses on the glass, your art may may be rendered out of focus.
Sonia King - Pathfinder - 24 karat gold pieces
Because this piece is so reflective, I had to shoot it with a flash at an angle, then re-square it in Photoshop. Photographed with a Nikon D200
A quicker, easier shooting technique is to photograph the piece from an angle using direct flash. No tripod required. In general, however, it's best not to use flash when photographing art.
Make sure no flash glare gets in the glass and that the entire piece is evenly illuminated and in sharp focus, then square the work up in Photoshop or other software that allows you to "distort" the image back to square. It is helpful to make a reference photo by shooting directly into the piece (probably with the flash reflecting in it), so its correct proportions are known, because the relative dimensions may not be obvious from the angled photo.
Glass flattens. If you take glass off thin or flimsy art, and you don't secure the art to something to flatten it, the piece can bend or warp or ripple. Warped base mediums show shadows that probably should not be visible.
The colors we see and what a digital camera sees — the difference
Something else you need to be aware of is the difference between what digital cameras "see" and what humans without color blindness see. This image is from an online ad for FullSpectrumRGB, software that supposedly made digital images more color correct. (I suspect it didn't work well, because the site is gone.) There's an elderly discussion of the product on Luminous Landscape.
Apparently, what's missing in most digital images are subtle variations in red, orange, purple and violet. I didn't try the software, but I'm curious about it, because some artists complain that digital photographs do not accurately reproduce the colors in their art. On some ocassions, I have had them look over my shoulder as I adjusted it in Photoshop.
Of course, you probably already know that the same piece of art looks different in different qualities of light. Cloudy skies render color differently than bright sunlight. Daylight is blue. Shade is bluer. Tungsten is red. Fluorescent's are green and sometimes blue. Etc. If you shoot the same piece in differing light without adjusting your camera — or if a mix of light types illuminate the same piece of art, the resulting digital images will not match the colors as we usually perceive them in the original — it won't look "right."
At Joel Cooner Gallery, I usually have the piece I've shot right there for reference when I work the images up. When I work up most artist's work later, I have to guess.
ISO and Visual Noise
Film and other materials are rated by the International Standards Organization (ISO) according to their relative sensitivity to light. If you use film, use slow film to photograph art. If you use digital, set the camera to a low ISO setting. Probably the best setting is the lowest ISO you can set on your camera. It will render your work with the best tonalities, color and contrast.
We used to call this sensitivity "film speed" or "ASA" (American Standards Association), and it is still expressed as those same numbers, with lower numbers indicating less sensitivity.
With either film or digital, the lower the sensitivity, the lower the visual noise and the higher the contrast. Conversely, the higher the ISO, the higher the noise and the lower the apparent contrast. Noise looks like grain in the image. Fine grain usually looks better than coarse grain, but both have their uses and necessities, though usually not for photographing art.
In film, visible grain was a clumping of light-sensitive silver halides suspended in the hardened gelatin of the film.
In digital, a very similar effect is caused by other factors, which can be somewhat controlled in PP (Post Production) via image-editing software or a plug-in noise-remover that can be adjusted. In digital that "graininess" is called visual noise, which comes in two varieties — color noise and contrast noise — with essentially similar results that look and act a lot like film grain.
Low (80) and high (1600) ISO
This is an extreme example to make a point. Spider & Skeleton art by my friend Tre Roberts, photographed in my front window with lots of sunlight on the other side and not much on this. Note the characteristic low noise and high contrast in the low ISO shot on the left, and the high noise and low contrast characteristic of high ISO in the right image. Photographed with a Nikon D300.
I often use Nik's DFine plug-in for the full-blown (and expensive) version of Photoshop, but there are other noise-reduction plug-ins that work with that and other programs. Photoshop Elements is a good, inexpensive — about $70 — program that will probably suit your art-photographing needs at first. Using digital photographs without editing tends to look amateurish and does not show your art to its best advantage.
At the least, you should correct the tonal range, contrast, color saturation and composition of your images, although more discussion of those techniques is beyond the scope of this article. (See Levels, below.)
80 or 100 is the lowest ISO available on most digital cameras, although 200 is the base ISO of my dSLR. Some even very expensive digital cameras render images that are so noisy at any rating higher than 100, that they are unusable for photographing art. Newer, better and only sometimes more expensive digicams can render images at higher ISO ratings very well. Most professional camera reviews show sample photographs at different ISO settings. Some even allow us to directly compare the same ISO settings on different cameras.
Probably the best explanation of Image Noise is on Wikipedia.
Some cameras are much better than others at controlling noise in high-ISO photographs.
I'll repeat: in general, it is best to set your camera to low ISO when photographing art. Put the camera on a firm, secure tripod so you can more easily use slow ISO.
Don't ask me to recommend a camera or lens for you.
The Alpa Reflex was introduced in 1944. Photograph by Rama.
That decision is entirely up to you and your budget and your skill level and what else you plan to do with your camera. There are dozens of inexpensive digital cameras whose features fit neatly into the categories I've outlined on this page (See below).
My favorite photo site is Digital Photography Review, which has photo news, forums, reviews and many other features. Second is Ken Rockwell dot com. Ken is a curmudgeon, but he likes what he likes regardless of fad or fashion, and he uses the cameras he recommends and explains how to use them to their best potential. I learned more about my big, expensive digital Single Lens Reflex from him than I did from its manufacturer or books and DVDs I bought. His explanations are easier to understand, too. Although more recently I've been reading the slightly more abstruse and accurate explanations by Thom Hogan to learn more recent Nikon cameras.
I have no financial stake in Digital Photography Review (although Amazon does), but it's the only online photography site I check every day — even if it does not change that often — although the discussions on its photo forums do. I go through a lot of other websites about photography. The latest and greatest of those are linked on my personal Links page.
Their reviews are professional and objective. Their other great feature are the camera, lens and other photography-related forums on which real people talk about their cameras, lenses and other photo equipment in no-holds barred personal evaluation. You can read all you want for free. That's what I usually do, but you have to register to respond, but that's free, too, once you sign up.
Cecilia Thurman Fish Gotta Swim, 2009
oil on paper collage diptych 34 x 32 inches
We didn't want to take her big collages out from their glass frames, so we photographed each piece standing in the grass of her brightly-sunlit backyard. One-by-one, we tilted them, aiming the glass so it would reflect only the dark shadows of a nearby garage. Photographed with the Nikon D300.
Camera and Lens Tests
The most credible digicam review sites include: Digital Photography Review Imaging Resource Luminous Landscape Steve's Digicams Camera Labs Ken Rockwell Photography BLOG DigitalCameraResource PhotoRadar and Thom Hogan — though there are many others. Some are good; some just want to sell you something and others will just waste your time. It helps some of us to read lots of tests, so we begin to understand what all can be right and wrong with a camera or lens.
Ken Rockwell has a semi-credible page of Recommended Cameras that include a variety of cameras and budget ranges, although he sometimes gets carried away about new ones, especially from Canon, and he tends to ignore many excellent camera brands. When he's wrong, he rarely admits it.
Camera Labs has multiple pages of Best Cameras, although the cams listed on that first page are the newest, not the best. Imaging Resource has Dave's Picks which are deceptively listed below his Most Popular Cameras list. Steve's Digicams has Steve's Best Cameras in various categories. And Digital Photography Review doesn't really have a best cameras page, but it does have a Buying Guide: Digital Cameras Side-by-Side feature that lets you match features with two or more cameras.
The most credible and objective lens review sites are Photozone. Lenstip is also good, but you have to all but ignore their reader reviews. Ken Rockwell has a great page that explains most lens test terminology and the various types of lens aberrations, and he has another page that helps in Correcting Lens Distortion. Most lens tests — especially readers' tests, are opinion. Photozone's are based on science.
Beware of supposed reviews that use the words: Preview, First Impressions, First Look or mention that they used a Prototype camera. Those are not reviews, those are previews. A lot changes between the prototype and the cameras actually available for purchase. It's a way websites can fool you into believing they have actually tried the same camera you will be able to purchase, which may not even be available yet. They use the word review, because they know that's what you are seeking, even if it's not what they are providing.
Those stories tend to be full of manufacturers' hype and pie-in-the-sky possibilities, not facts. Actual reviews include more than specifications. They discus issues, problems and inconsistencies. If everything about any one camera is described as perfect, you are being scammed.
Pay attention to professional review sites [Links just above.] more than personal reviews. Non-expert camera testers (UTube and Amazon are full of them) often love their new cameras and rave about them in an attempt to justify their cash outlays. Until they discover those cameras' failings. Then they may complain bitterly about them. Nobody's perfect or perfectly objective, but professional camera reviewers are careful to give a balanced view.
Digital Photography Review also includes very popular Forums, which include a wide variety of camera types, where many photographers and pixel-peepers (who do not necessarily actually make photographs but are keen on reporting new camera issues, which is a valuable service) discuss photographic equipment.
When I am thinking of buying a new camera, it's DPR's forums where I spend most of my research time. Those people pay minute attention to every aspect of cameras, and they can be your first line of defense against getting taken. Be warned, however, that as my new Nikon hero Thom Hogan has said, "They get caught up in the details and miss the big picture." Still they ferret out a lot of issues those of us who just take pictures, might otherwise miss.
Consumer Reports tests a variety of types of digital cameras. Sometimes I agree with their evaluations. Often not. But I subscribe and pay attention to what they say, and not just about cameras. Often the cameras I eventually choose end up near the tops of their recommended camera lists.
Refurbished
Some of the more amazing bargains available include cameras that have been replaced or refurbished by the company. If the ad doesn't mention that the refurbishng was done by the company that manufactured the camera, don't buy it. Buy used lenses, not used cameras, unless you know the seller.
Lenstip.com chart for Nikon Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 lens
As a general rule, most lenses give their best quality when stopped down two stops from wide open (maximum aperture).
Above is a chart from Lenstip.com, a fairly credible lens test site. It shows the resolution in lines per millimeter (lpmm) rendered at that lens' various apertures. I chose this lens among all their tests, because it's cheap, is very useful for photographing art, and because I have one that Anna gave me, and I was curious.
Any resolution above 30 lpmm (lines per millimeter) is considered professional quality. It is normal for lenses to be "sharper" in the frame's center than at the edges. Most of the lens resolution charts I checked either come very close or actually did show two stops down was best, although on this one, three stops down had the best resolution.
Read camera and lens tests to learn your lens' optimum apertures, so you can use them to get the best quality images.
More info is available on Lenstip.com, but my favorite lens test site is Photozone, because they don't confuse us with reader lens tests. Both give detailed reports using objective findings for the lenses they test.
Lens test sites that use personal experience instead of objective measurements vary widely, because people tend to use their own subjective opinions instead of accurate measurements. User "tests" are almost always a waste of time, because so few lens users know what to look for, and they get carried away when they get something in focus.
If you close down more than two stops, you may begin to run into Diffraction (the softening of apparent focus and scattering of light when it passes through a narrow aperture or across a hard edge), which issue Ken Rockwell explains on his Diffraction page. I should note that compared to reduced resolution, diffraction is a minor issue.
Exposure
This was the last of about 30 experimental shots I took after I'd done the views Joel wanted. I hoped to render the human being behind the mask, and had finally found just where to hold my white foam reflector so it barely illuminated the dark side. I hadn't planned to illuminate each of the facial planes separately, but considering I was just playing with the light, it turned out amazing.
Unlike focus, getting exposure wrong can often be corrected, but it's easier and better to get it right in the camera, so you use as much as possible of your sensor's ability to reproduce a full range of dark to bright tones. According to Wikipedia's Exposure (photography) page,
"A photograph may be described as overexposed when it has a loss of highlight detail, that is, when the bright parts of an image are effectively all white, known as 'blown out highlights' (or 'clipped whites'). A photograph may be described as underexposed when it has a loss of shadow detail, that is, the dark areas indistinguishable from black, known as 'blocked up shadows.' "
highlights medium tones shadows
You want to reproduce your artwork's full range of tones from white, down through all the intermediary gray tones to full black, so the photographic image of your art looks as much as possible like your art.
Exposure is a deep issue that others have written superbly about, and I don't have the time, space nor inclination to duplicate here.
Neil Creek's Photography 101.4 Exposure and Stops has the best illustration of over and under-exposure I have seen online — in a vertical array involving pink flowers. He also has an great, informative (once you figure it out) gray triangle graphic of the inter-related aspects of exposure.
DPReview offers a series of short articles on exposure and Camera Labs' DSLR Tips has more than a dozen video workshops and tutorials. LuminousLandscape.com's Understanding Exposure offers start, although it was written for film and hand-held exposure meters. Other, less detailed online stories include Suzanne Williams' The Rules of Photography and Learning Light on Steve's Digicams and Fred Parker's Ultimate Exposure Computer.
A book that is often recommended in online forums is Bryan Peterson's Understanding Exposure — for digital, be sure to get the 2010 third edition.
Some Exposure Basics
If you aim a camera or other exposure meter at something, it will attempt to render that something as medium gray. If the object is white — like paper for example, or a relatively small area of lines or textures of art on white — that art will be underexposed, allowing you to see details in the paper but not necessarily in the art. If you aim at something black — like your Elvis on black velvet, it will still attempt to render it as gray, and everything will be overexposed.
The trick is to overexpose light art and underexpose dark art. How much depends on the tones of your art, your medium and your preferences. You have to experiment. Remember the difference between what the camera wanted to do and what actually worked, so if you maintain consistent tonality in your art, you can use your adjustment again.
Cheap compact cameras usually only adjust to plus or minus 2 or, very rarely, 3 EV (Exposure Value), meaning they can only over- or under-expose images up to two or three stops. That may not be enough. Which is why Manual mode is important. With manual, you can over- or under-expose as much as your camera and lens is capable of. If your camera is stuck on automatic, you may not be able to render the lightest lights and the darkest darks accurately.
There's a List of Cameras with Manual Exposure Modes on my Cameras & Lenses: Past & Future page.
Two Photoshop Tips
There are whole giant books and multi-semester classes on Photoshop — either the cheap Elements version or the big, expensive, professional, full-blown Photoshop. I'm going to assume you know what you need to know about whichever version (or whatever other software) you use, and I won't talk about all that other stuff.
But one thing I know is that you probably do not employ the correct settings to adjust Levels (command l [for Levels] in Mac; control l in PC — and yes, those are lower case Ls.), because most of the images I get from artists are incorrectly adjusted — with the black triangle at the left edge of the foothills to that first peak. I know professional photographers who do not know how to align the Levels dialog, and their images lack deep blacks and details in bright highlights.
The correct way to adjust Levels in Photoshop
Correct Level Adjustment in Photoshop
This is the ideal setting for images with a full tonal range, though you still have a lot of leeway. The idea is to get that left, black triangle as close as possible to pointing up into the highest peak on the left of the graph.
That triangle adjusts the shadow/darks of your image. Remember, however, that there are many images for which this setting will render your image too dark. Be careful. Use those artist's eyes of yours. Carefully observe the image on the screen as you move the triangles.
If the image is too dark, adjust the black triangle back toward the left until you see exactly what you want in the image on the monitor (which we'll assume is correctly optimized. More information about optimizing monitors is just below). What your image looks like is more important than where the triangles are. But this is the correct starting point if you want your image to have dark darks and light lights.
You should know that it is impossible to include all the intermediate tones of a work of art in an image of it. We can only hope to make a reasonably accurate portrayal of your art. No digital copy of analog art is ever perfect. Neither is any analog (film) copy.
According to the sign on my kitchen door, "Perfection is unlikely."
If you want lighter grays (middle tones), move the middle, gray triangle toward the left. Darker to the right. Usually, however, you should leave it where Photoshop puts it. Moving the middle triangle makes subtler changes than the other two triangles.
Note, too, that the closer the black and white triangles are together, the higher the contrast in the scene. If you want lots of medium tones, don't squeeze those triangles close.
There are other miracles that the Levels adjustment provides, some of which involve those droppers. Click the white one on what you know is white (not buff or cream or beige or yellowish or tan, etc.) regardless of what color it seems to be, in your image, and it will be rendered pure white, adjusting everything else in the pic. I never use the black dipper, and the gray one only rarely, though it has been helpful when I'm paying close attention. More than that you'll have to find information about elsewhere.
My favorite on-line training site is Lynda.com, although I haven't visited in a long time. Their online videos teach a wide variety of software, including both versions of Photoshop, with unlimited access to any classes for $25 a month. Some tutorials are free, so you can try before you buy. Like many artists, I learn better and faster by watching it happen than by reading about it.
Many community and other colleges offer classes in digital photography and image manipulation.
Elisabeth Schalij Red Cactus 2008
oil on canvas 11 x 14 inches
Photographed under tungsten lights on a wall in a gallery with a Nikon D300
Many of the images I get from artists are over-sharpened. The expensive version of Photoshop offers five different sharpening filters, of which most professionals only use two — Smart Sharpen and Unsharp Mask, both of which can be adjusted before and after application in full-bull Photoshop. Photoshop Elements only has Unsharp Mask, although it, too, can be adjusted with a sliding scale, but only before, not after sharpening the image, although you can always go back if you've only made that one change.
A little sharpening goes a long way. A light touch is far preferable to a heavy hand. If you are submitting a full-size or high-resolution image file for judging or use online or in a publication, it is better to leave sharpening to whoever does that. If you are lucky, they will know what they are doing, and be smart enough not to sharpen anything until the image is in its final size and form. In general, leave sharpening up to whoever puts images wherever they go.
A pre- or over- sharpened image is a booger to adjust back to normal. Un-sharpening those images takes a subtle and delicate touch, and it helps if you know what you are doing. But over-sharpened images can never be entirely fixed.
If you don't know what you are doing, don't do it.
Maximum sharpness for the great majority of images should never exceed about 140% (in full-bull Photoshop). I had long ago discovered 139% was as much as I wanted to sharpen anything for the web — and often way too much. Then I read that Ken Rockwell recommended a max of 141%. Those are close enough to standardize on a max sharpness of 140% in Smart Sharpen in full-bull Photoshop.
I have used the cheaper, easier-to-learn Elements version, but I do not like it. With Elements, I usually start at 103% and often less. Only rarely more. If you already have Elements, I strongly urge you to learn as much about it as you can before going on to what I am calling full-bull Photoshop, which is considerably more expensive and vastly more complicated with a much sharper learning curve. Unless you're a whiz at learning visual software, take a class in a community college or online or acquire a teacher.
So I don't have to keep changing the settings, I leave Smart Sharpen in Photoshop (not Elements) set for 139%, apply it to the vast majority of final-sized images, then I hit command (control for PC) f to alter the effect with a sliding scale. I usually rack it back to from 44% to 85% of the original 139%, often less. For the few images that need much more than that, I rack the percentage scale in Smart Sharpen as high as it needs to be. But those times are rare, and you'll have to discover on your own which images need it.
Apply sharpening only to the final version in the final size, especially for JPEGs to be used on the web.
Lens and camera sharpening are different from Photoshop sharpness discussed above. Ken Rockwell has two pages, called Fixing Unsharp Images and Lens Sharpness, which are very informative
Camera LCDs (liquid crystal displays) can mislead.
Because of their small size, low resolution, angle of view and construction, most digital camera LCDs show images that are very contrasty (so images look sharp and in focus, even when they are not), and it is often difficult to see detail.
Worse, many camera LCDs show colors or tonal ranges substantially different from how you will see the same images on your monitor or printed from your printer.
If you can just barely see the edges between the darker colors — especially in the black and magenta, your monitor is adjusted about as well as mine is, and mine is set pretty good, now, finally ... Don't worry about the yellows.
Your monitor is calibrated, isn't it?
That's probably the only way you can half-way guarantee that what you see on your monitor is essentially similar to what others will see on theirs.
This color chart can help you begin to calibrate your monitor by setting the brightness to its maximum, then adjusting the contrast till you see the tonal range of all the colors, especially the magentas. Don't worry about the yellow.
To accurately calibrate your monitor, you can use the software or the instructions that came with your monitor; Adobe Gamma with its built-in step-by-step instructions; Macintosh's system software (under the Apple Menu, click "Displays," then "Color," then "Calibrate," and follow the instructions precisely. (I don't know about that other system.) or the controls built into your monitor (Dell, among others) — all of which can help you achieve the best and most accurate view on your monitor.
It helps if there's no ambient light in the room where your monitor is, although some monitors can be optimized for use in specific light sources. That's way too complicated to get into there.
I collect these tone and color scales. My collection is gathered on the bottom of this site's Contact Us page.
To my understanding, there are two basic ways to calibrate a monitor: One is to use a computer utility like Macintosh's or Dell's built-in utilities and visually follow all the steps to match each succeeding element of the color and density system via diagrams adjustments. The other way is to use a calibration device. So far, I've used only the software utilities, but the results from both vary with the light in the room, so I tend to do my best work at night.In the end, I usually adjust my monitors to a setting somewhere between Macintosh (whose computers I use exclusively) and PC, which far more people on the Internet use to see my pages and images.
I used to use a 13-inch Apple CRT (cathode-ray tube) to adjust images I wanted to print. What that printer printed always looked almost exactly like the image on that monitor. No other monitor I've ever had did, although I've set up custom settings that matched as close as I could the correct setting to print. For that, optical devices work better.
I no longer make my own prints. My early-model Epson Archival inkjet printer died in mid-2010, and when I make prints for exhibitions, I have either Expert Images in Deep Elm make them.
I have noticed a slight difference in the highlight qualities of some contributor's images, but I have checked my images online with a variety of other people's computers — Mac and PCs — and they look good. 70% of the readers of this site use PCs, 25% Mac, so I adjust my images slightly toward PC density, to make them look best on both machines. Otherwise Mac images look too dark on PCs and PC images look too light on Macs.
Fannie Brito Atardecer
pigment and acrylic 12 x 36 inches
I like photographing art on a truly white wall (although there are always shadows and tones. With a white reference, I can easily adjust the colors with the Level Command white dropper in Photoshop. Of course, I usually crop the wall and shadow parts out. This method is especially good for rendering subtle colors like these. Photographed with a Nikon D300.
Copyright Notices + Image File Names
If you are certain your image file will never, ever be used on the Internet or by anybody but yourself, you can get away with naming it anything that suits your fancy, and you may not need to protect it with copyright.
But if anyone else might ever use your image file(s), or if there is any chance whatsoever that they will be published, especially online — either with or without your permission, you should have your name and the title included in the file name, and you should probably park a copyright notice on the image.
Supposedly your image is copyrighted to you soon as you publish it on your site or blog, but if you don't have proof of that happening or have not shown your ownership of your image by overtly copyrighting it, it will be more difficult to prove.
File Name: JRCompton-Bright-Dark-Sky_1442.jpg
The correct format/syntax for a legal U.S. Copyright notice is the word "Copyright," followed by the year date, the first and last name of the image's creator or owner, followed by "All Rights Reserved." The word copyright may be substituted by the circled C (©) symbol, although that symbol is missing from many keyboards and may not show on all computers. On a Mac keyboard, it is option-g. The number at the end of the file name above is the number assigned by my camera. This was the 1,442nd shot created on my then-new Canon s90.
I usually add the dot com, etc. after my name on the image, so people can find me.
Legally, the "All Rights Reserved" only officially extends copyright protection to include Honduras and Bolivia. But for practical purposes, that notice keeps those ignorant of our copyright laws — almost everybody online — from using the image, because it so clearly states that all rights are reserved. All the copyright infringements of my own images I've discovered (and got removed) were only labeled with the copyright notice.
Getting stolen material removed from sites or blogs
- Google's Digital Millennium Copyright Act - Blogger page.
- Removing Content from Google - a fairly simple form that continues through several pages. You will need the URL (web address) of the web page your image was stolen from; the URL for the page it is used without your permission on; and a digital signature, which is your name typed as you entered it in on the early pages of that form.
- Two easy steps for using a DMCA takedown notice to battle copyright infringement
Information about Copyright and Photographers' Rights
- The Law - Building a Copyright Notice
- Photographers, Know Your Rights
- Bob Atkins' Photography, the Law and Photographers Rights - very helpful
- Common Questions & Answers About Copyrights by Andrew D. Epstein - A Simple Guide for Photographers, Artists, Illustrators, Writers, Musicians and Other Creative Individuals - very helpful, interesting and informative
- The Law (in Plain English) for Photographers, a book by Leonard D. Duboff, $16 at Amazon - sounds good but read the reviews
- Eye on Image-Making: Photographers and the Law, Part 1 by David Weintraub - aggressively philosophical with political anecdotes
- Can I Use Someone Else's Work? Can Someone Else Use Mine? - explanations of Fair Use from the U.S. Copyright Office
- Links to U.S. Copyright Office Information and Records
In addition to copyright information in the EXIF (EXposure Information File) in the meta-data of the code that comprises the original photoshop image, my camera automatically includes a properly formatted copyright notice on every image. Unfortunately, neither of those automatic notices translate to the much smaller JPG file created from the camera or Photoshop original.
Once the notice is placed on the image itself, however, it stays there unless cropped out.
On your image: YourName-Title.jpg
Image File Names
DallasArtsRevue receives many images from artists. If I can immediately see who the artist is, and what the title is, I can caption the image with that information. A properly credited photo can be an important, way to promote artists. Often, when neither the name of the artist nor the title of the piece is obvious from the file name, there's no way I can track down who did the piece or what its title is, so nobody gets credited or promoted.
Also — and importantly — because Google Images uses data in the file name to build their image searchable database, it is helpful to have your name in the image file name. Much more information about what Google looks for is at Google Webmaster Central.
Your name and the work title is all that's needed in an image file name.
Do not include punctuation. That means no space-bar spaces ( ), no number signs (#), commas (,), inch marks ("), foot marks or apostrophes ('), equal signs (=), percentages (%), exclamations (!), parentheses )( or question marks (?), and use only one period just before the suffix. I.e., .jpg or, if you must, .tif.
Symbols make it difficult to use files — image files with spacebar spaces or # signs won't even show up in web pages delivered by one of my web hosts — I have to go in and edit the file name, which effort earns the artist my enmity.
Any other information should be in a text-only file (so any computer can open it) saved onto your CD. If there is a specific order, list them in that order (putting numbers on the file names that somebody then has to edit out, is a nuisance).
Make sure the file type suffix (.jpg or, shudder, .tif) is included in each image's file name. Without it, computers will not know what to do with your files, and somebody will have to add the suffix — every time they open your CD.
On your CD: Your Name - Show Title
Make your name the file name of your image CD. You can have other info there (maybe a shortened version of the show title and a year and month date, for your use), but be sure the info is pertinent to the person you are sending to. Using that space to identify the name of the show may be important to you, but the people who will be looking at your images will probably already know what event they are considering your images for.
Letter (print) it neatly on the face of the CD. Do not write (scrawl) it. Nobody wants to have to decipher your penmanship.
We desperately need your name. If your name is not part of the title of the CD, someone will have to track it down, and that will not make them happy about your entry. Make it easy. Make your name the main component of your CD's file name. And when you write on your CD, include your name.
Use an archival marker especially formulated for writing on CDs and DVDs, so it doesn't destroy the data on the disk.
How many images?
Head Detail
Feet and Base Detail
Kathy Boortz Stilt (Black-necked Stilt)
approximately three feet high
sculpted steel, found wood and paint
Full View
When artists enter images for competitions, they are usually allowed one image to show flat work or three for three-dimensional art. Anytime you photograph sculpture, you should shoot each piece from a variety of angles and distances — even if you are not entering a competition.The first image should be an overall front or front quarter view (if you can figure out what that is) showing the full height, width and as much of the depth as possible. Choose the piece's best angle, and light it so it genuinely looks three-dimensional. [See lighting suggestion below]. You could simply shoot more full shots from different angles, but many sculptors opt instead for detail views.
Details show important parts or detailed textures or give more of a sense of the quality throughout the work. When I shoot Kathy Boortz art, I shoot full shots from various angles, then close-ups of feet, face and other noticeable details. At Joel Cooner Gallery, I look for details that show condition, patina, figuration or texture. If someone important has signed or stamped it, the signature may be important. I rarely limit myself to just three or four or five shots of a piece.
Some photographic rules
Yes, rules are made to be broken, but it's easier to break them, if you know what they are, so you can break them intelligently
When photographing 3-D work, use a neutral gray or white background. Almost all of Kathy Boortz' work as long as I've been shooting it, has been photographed on a hinged white folding panel that I white out the slots and edges of, making her sculpture — like the Fiddler Crab on the top of this page — seem to float.
19th Century Tibetan Tea Bowl for a former page on Joel Cooner dot com
Avoid bright colors or black when shooting light, metallic or reflective art. This rule is about reflections — black reflects black (often too dark). This object on a white platform, would have avoided the tone merge that is obvious at the cup's right shoulder. I probably should have lightened that area in Photoshop. But the black background also concentrates out attention on the cup.
I used a foam board to aim reflected light from the single reflector into the bowl. I upended it, because there was more detail on the bottom. You can see the foam board's reflected light in most of the silver parts. I used an elliptical selection on the top (bottom) to lighten it.
If I had a white photo tent, that would give me the light without the specular highlights.
The above version is better than the one on the web page, because I took it home and worked on the original shot with Photoshop proper, using my own keyboard and mouse, which I have customized for my hand and brain, and that I know and understand better than the unsubtle Photoshop Elements.
Stephen Knapp Seven Muses light painting installation in the Leftwich Grand Foyer of the Charles W. Eisemann Center for Performing Arts and Corporate Presentations in Richardson, Texas. Photographed with a Nikon D300 camera and 17-55mm lens.
If art is made of light or the colors of light, or its primary impact is light or color generated by the art itself, let that light set your exposure. Don't add light of your own — no flash or fill lighting. Let its own light shine.
If art is translucent (light passes through it) — like glass, stained glass, film or sheer material, photograph it with light passing through it. The light source should be behind the art, perhaps aimed up or down into the art, but the source should probably not be visible. The light should be the same color as the light illuminating the rest of the art, and don't let anything else show through the translucent parts, unless you really want them visible.
Diana Chase Jump Right In cast and fused glass 16 inches diameter
I was photographing work in The Back-room Invitational trying to avoid a large bright area of sunlight from one of the high windows when I realized the light was coming through this piece as I had recommended just above.
Using my Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 lens with the camera on a tripod, I moved in on the piece, composing so it showed about this much background and the sunlight glowing through the glass. I cropped most of the black area at the top of the original shot. Later in Photoshop, I darkened the bottom left corner to match the bottom right, cropped out most of the wood stand and darkened the rest of it. Photographed using a Nikon D300 camera.
For 2-D work, it's better if the background (behind the art) is black, so there are no details to distract viewers. Unless, of course, the art is black. Then you have to use a different color or texture for the background.
With film, you'll either have to use felt or a velvet-like material that does not reflect light or paint a wall or large-enough piece of wood black (or carefully not light it). With digital you can add or correct the background in software, if you know how and are carefull. You can crop a slide image with metallic tape (that you've scrupulously kept clean, so dust or hair doesn't intrude into your image), but it's always messy.
Do not include the mat or frame in the image, so the image appears relatively larger, and those brighter elements do not distract. Framing tastes vary widely and can adversely affect the quality of your work in others' minds.
Make sure the camera is steady.
If you don't have a tripod, borrow one. This is important. Tripods' most important job is to hold the camera steady, but they also hold it in the same place, which can be helpful when shooting more than one piece of art that's the same or similar size.
Use a self-timer, if your camera has one. Probably it does. Use it.
Don't touch the camera while it's self-timing.
Don't walk around if your floors shake.
F/stops are fractions, so bigger f/ numbers mean smaller apertures (holes) and less light.The major f-stops, from large to small, are f/ 1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22 and 32.
Each succeeding smaller aperture allows half the light of the previous one.
Each succeeding faster shutter speed lets in half the light of the previous one.
Shutter speeds are also fractions, so bigger numbers mean faster shutter speeds, so less light that passes through.
Unless you have discovered your lens' optimum aperture in a lens test, close it down two stops from wide open. If you have an f/3.5 lens, click two clicks down to between 5.6 and 8, unless your art is three-dimensional and more than a few inches deep, so it will need more depth of field. Since each whole f/stop lets in half the last one, two stops = 2x your lens' maximum aperture. You have an f2 lens? 2 x 2 = 4. Set f/4 on an f/2 lens, f2.8 on an f1.4 lens, etc.
Find the correct exposure
The best / easiest / quickest way to find the correct exposure is to take a shot, look at it on the LCD, then change aperture, shutter speed, lighting, angle of view or something. Then take another shot and look at it. You'll figure it out quicker that way than if you attempt to follow rules or slavishly follow the exposure meter. After you've been doing it for awhile, you'll know when to adjust exposure compensation. Everybody's correct exposure is different.
Avoid mixing colors of light
If you are shooting Outdoor film (Daylight) or have your camera set for Daylight, don't let any other kind of light shine on your art. You may not be able to tell the difference, but your film or digital camera will. Study your previously shot images often.
Make sure your camera is set for the kind of light you are using. If your camera is set for Tungsten (Indoor or "Type B" lighting), don't let daylight reflect into the subject.
To make 3-D work look dimensional, light it from behind then fill in some of the shadows with a bright white reflector.
The Caldwell Chunk — very probably designed by the late Dallas Photographer Tom Jenkins
Not, perhaps, the greatest art object, but its other part is more intriguing. This was quickly and informally photographed on my living room floor using what I call my Utterly Simple Lighting Setup for Sculpture, which comprises a light bulb in a reflector on a light stand, a bright white reflector (styrofoam-like packing material that came with something I mail-ordered or a white mat board) and not much more.
Lighting Suggestion: Lighting a three-dimensional object from behind lends it more apparent depth because its shadows are more obvious. I chose this angle, because it showed all the important moving parts of the chunk. I probably could have cleared the area of dark shapes, but here, they seem to give the object more space and dimension.
This is the entire setup. I sat on the love seat at left, held the camera still on the arm, and shot down on the object — instant studio lighting. It could as easily have been set up on a tabletop using a less interesting background, and I thought about eliminating the cords, but they are part of the piece. Later, someone cleaning my house threw the foam board out, because they thought it was trash.
Check exposure on the art itself by zooming or moving the camera closer, to fill the LCD or viewfinder with the image. Dark objects need more light (longer shutter speeds or bigger apertures) and lighter objects need less.
Make sure the meter doesn't "see" the white mat or dark background, which can throw off the correct exposure.
If you have a gray card (18% reflectance) or or something in a medium green (grass outside), use that to make a substitute reading, but be sure it is in the same light and facing the camera the same way your art does.
To determine correct exposure, point your camera or light meter at a medium gray object.
If you point a camera or light meter at a white object, the object will be underexposed
If you point a camera or light meter at a dark object, the object will be overexposed.
Move the camera closer to the work to check the exposure.
Make sure rectangular work is straight and the whole surface is in focus. Don't let it tilt.
Photoshop and some other software can correct for un-straight, even tilted art, but if part of the image is out of focus, it cannot be saved.
Focus, focus, focus.
In some digital cameras, the image on the LCD can be zoomed or magnified, so we can check focus and details, but the LCDs on many cameras are too small for much precision or they do not accurately reflect tonal ranges. LCDs show images with a lot of contrast that makes even out of focus shots look good. If you can magnify the image, you'll see what the image is really like.
Marty Ray Photographed with a Nikon D300 camera using a 17~55mm lens
My photographic procedure
Make certain only one color of light source illuminates the art. If you are using fluorescent tubes, which are often curved into smaller 'bulb' looking devices, make sure they are all the same color. They come in several varieties, each of which emit different colors of light. If you are using incandescent lighting with a window open to daylight, you are still mixing light colors. Shut the window.
eHow's Fluorescent Tube Colors page explains and describes which fluorescents emit which colors.
If you use all the same color of light, it is comparatively easier to correct your image colors later in software. If you mix light colors, you may never get the resulting image to look real or correct. Our eyes adjust. Cameras do not. You can see the color effects in some LCDs/viewfinders, but they tend to be subtle till later.
Set the White Balance for the light source by filling the image view with white (I usually use a piece of typing paper.) and pushing the right buttons in the right sequence for the camera, or by setting the correct color balance via menu or dial. Or simply stick with daylight.
DPReview.com has a White Balance page that must explain something.
Wikipedia's starts out good then, after scaling monitors, gets seriously OT (off topic) and complex.Set the camera to the right mode. I used to always use Manual. I still use it when nothing else seems to work, but my normal mode for tripod photographing is Aperture mode. Because shutter speeds are not very important when a camera is on a tripod, I set the aperture so the lens/camera will capture enough depth-of-field to render the entire object in sharp focus. This is easier for flat artworks and more difficult with three-dimensional art.
Secure the camera to a sturdy tripod, so it is level and aimed at the center of whatever flat art or whatever angle looks best for 3-D art.
Set zoom lenses to middle range, so the spatial distortion (usually barrel at wide angle; pincushion at telephoto) created by zoom lenses is minimized. Reading lens tests will help you learn the best zoom setting for your lens. It's not always in the middle.
DPReview.com has a Barrel Distortion page and a Pincushion Distortion page that explains the terms simply and visually. Other Optical terms are linked from their Optical Glossary page or their photo Glossary index.
Carefully align each image in the camera, so the sides appear straight and tops and bottoms are level in your viewfinder or LCD. Even if you cannot square all the edges, if the entire piece of art is in sharp focus, the image can be squared later in image software using "distort."
Activate the self-timer, so any motion from pushing the shutter button, touching the camera or walking in that room is dissipated by the time the shutter actually goes off.
Look at the image you just shot on the LCD. Enlarge it several times if you can. Make sure it's in sharp focus and that the colors look exactly like the art, and hat the exposure shows the lights as lights and the darks as darks.
Take more images than you need, just in case.
If I only need one shot, I try to get the best possible angle. Turn it around or walk around it to find the angle that is most attractive or representative of the piece. Maybe find several possibilities and shoot them all. Then choose among them later.
If I need several shots, I shoot a straight front view even with the piece, a one-quarter view, three-quarter view, side or profile view, even a back or bottom view if there's something there that's interesting. Shoot details of noticeable features. For most flat work, of course, you probably only need one front shot.
When I shoot objects at Joel Cooner Gallery, I shoot detail views of anything that seems interesting. Faces, flaws, interesting details, even tags that show provenance or signatures, because many of those specifics are of great interest to collectors.
I used to shoot at least three shots of every piece — one at what the camera/meter indicated was the correct exposure; one one-stop over; and one under-exposed — even if it looks great on the LCD. At least until you figure out the differences between your LCD's view and the resulting images. Most art shot in bright sunlight looks better with slight underexposure. (Most everything else does, too, but that universal rule doesn't apply to anything indoors, especially people.)
Make sure your exposure is correct.
Light art will probably need less exposure (smaller apertures — bigger f numbers at the same shutter speed), and dark art probably needs more exposure (wider apertures — smaller f numbers). Pointing the camera at gray art will probably net the best exposure most of the time.
If you are unsure — or even if you are not — take shots at different exposure settings until you learn your camera. You can always delete the extras.
Place each new piece in the same place as the last, so the camera does not have to be moved around or re-aimed. An easel can be helpful, but a neutral background (a nail in a plain wall where you can hang art) is best. None of the works on this page were shot in a studio. All used improvised lighting.
* = And, of course, Photoshop.The Camera
Comparative Sensor Sizes — On the left is an average Point & Shoot sensor, and on the right is the micro 4/3rds sensor. DX (Nikon) and APS-C sensors are half again as large as the m43.
There is no one camera perfect for all jobs, but even one of the really imperfect ones can photograph art very well, if you're careful.
The camera you use to photograph art really does matter, but it probably doesn't matter as much as you might think. Read Ken Rockwell's impassioned Your Camera Doesn't Matter and check out my discussion of my Canon SD780-IS on my Cameras & Lenses I Have Known or Lusted After page. Ken's page of Recommended Cameras will surely have something that's perfect for you, for art that doesn't move, and everything else, that does.
Various concepts about sensors, sensor sizes, formats and pixel densities are discussed throughout my Cameras & Lenses: Past & Future page, which also includes basic information about cameras, lenses and how various sensor sizes affect image quality.
Cameras that combine lower pixel density
and larger sensor size with more megapixels
offer the best image quality.
A rating closely related to sensor size is its pixel density rating, which was once found in Digital Photography Review's Specifications menu where it was usually expressed as "MP/cm² pixel density." But DPR dropped the specification — perhaps because, with it, it was too easy to determine which cameras had the best image quality. The change happened after Amazon bought DPR, and of course Amazon wants to sell cameras of differing image qualities, while trying to fool you into thinking all their cameras have the best image quality.Megapixels are easy to find for cameras. Sensor sizes may be slightly more difficult to acertain. Translate sensor size into square centimeters, and divide MP by cm2, and you have the pixel density.
If all you make are snapshot sized prints, almost any camera will do. When pixel density ratings and megapixels really come into usefulness is when we make large prints. My recently deceased printer made 13 x 19-inch prints. At first I thought that was big.
Relative Sizes of Digital Camera Sensors
This diagram is from Wikipedia. I have deleted the one format larger than 35mm, because I've never heard of it, and it only adds to the confusion. 35mm format has become the standard against which every camera is compared.
PLEASE NOTE: The above image is much larger than reality, which means the smaller formats are actually much smaller. In fact, tiny. The standard 35mm "full frame" size (FX) is slightly smaller than 1 inch tall x 1.5 inches wide. Its exact apparent size here depends on the resolution of your screen.
My Nikons are APS-C size (DX). The Canon G11 uses the 1/1.7" sensor, which are tiny. The Canon S5-IS's 1/2.5" sensor is even smaller, and the Canon SD780-IS has a 1/2.3" sensor that's only slightly larger than the smallest size shown in this graphic.
Meanwhile, back in the art photo biz:
If you are buying a camera to photograph art,
you can get away with pretty cheap.
Cheap Good: Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH5 $130
These change so often I no longer have time to keep up, but from my experience with other tiny Canons and reviews from reputable sites like CameraLabs DCR Amazon Steve's and sometimes even Ken Rockwell, whose Recommended Cameras links are way out of date, I'd visit some of those to find a good, cheap camera.
The dancer picture below and several photographs I've showed as art in galleries were taken with my SD780 IS, which is probably less good than is now available for lower prices. The 1300 that was $130 when I first posted this now costs $170, so it's not so cheap anymore.
Imaging-Resource.com has a curious list of cameras for less than $150. I wouldn't expect anything serious for less than a hundred, and I simply would not buy a new caqmera that only costs $36.
Point+Shoot (P+S) cameras are comparatively inexpensive, usually costing less than $300 — sometimes a lot less. dSLRs and Micro-Four-Thirds (m43) cameras cost from three hundred to thousands of dollars — and offer significantly better IQ (Image Quality), ease of use, speed and customization. dSLRs and m4/3s cameras are also great for photographing moving subjects and just about everything else. But both are usually larger and heavier than P+Ss and more expensive, though the differences are diminishing.
Many cameras are recommended by professional camera reviewers online.
P+Ss are all but useless for things that move fast — kids, pets, birds, sports, etc. Luckily, most art just sits there waiting for you to take its picture. Now, places that need photographs of your art — your own archives, publishers, exhibition curators, competitions and job opportunities — insist on digital images. Without film, you can do almost everything by yourself — if you have the skills and have been practicing.
For making lots of slides, however, film is almost always quicker and cheaper.
Random helpful links
Tiana Wages - Was It Here or Was It There? 2009
gouache and acrylic on paper 30 x 23 inches
Photographed handheld in a gallery with the Canon sd780 IS
Setting up a backdrop for product photography (art is a product) on Steve's Digicams
Alltop - list of Photography-related sites
Photo Rumors Nikon Rumors m43 Rumors Canon Rumors Mirrorless Rumors
Recommended Reading: Books and eBooks for Digicam Users
Many more, helpful photographic links are scattered throughout my Cameras & Lenses: Past & Future, Cameras & Lenses I Have Known or Lusted After and my personal Links page.
My latest email address is always on the Contact us page.
Support this site. Become a Supporting Member to get your own
web page, entry in DARts shows & other benefits,
Review of this page
Martha Marshall's Thoughts on Photographing Your Art (August 11, 2010) in her new link/ the correct page An Artist's Journal. If it stays on that same page, it's the second story down.
Copyright 2012 and before by J R Compton.com. All Rights Reserved. Please do not reproduce any words or images from this page without specific written permission from J R Compton. See the Contact Us page for my most recent email address.
