• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Last Word / A book report: some advice from a reader

A book report: some advice from a reader

May 4, 2015 JimK 1 Comment

This is post five in a series about my experiences in publishing a book. The series starts here.

From the mail bag:

Dear Jim,

Having followed your blog for quite some time, this is a topic I might actually be able to contribute something for the first time. I’ve been producing art books as a (now freelance) designer for the last 8 years or so.

First: Basically every printing company can produce wonderful results. What’s key is the person you have at the printing machine the day that your book is printed. If he (rather seldom she) loves his/her job, is patient with a layman, and has no boss standing behind him/her counting the seconds that the machine is not running, you have all the chances to get the results you want. Be prepared to spend some extra money on re-making some plates, though. Make sure not all plates are done at once. Start with one set, get it right, then let them make the rest of the plates.

Second: Chose your paper wisely. It’s single most important choice in regard to what the results can possibly look like. Have a look at a lot of samples. Not plain sheets, but ones printed on – with similar subjects as you will print.

Third: Know about the pros and cons of the screen pitches and methods of rasterization. I understand that you want to print colored images. Stochastic is not the best for every subject, small pitches are not the best for all subjects. There are mixed rasters which can bring the best of both worlds to your highlights, mid-tones and deep shadows. There are wonderful books printed with wide rasters. Small pixel pitches tend to flatten your images, you will not be able to get a substantial d-max. The printer might be able to work against this with non-standard high density pigmented inks, but the company must be experienced with such a workflow. Again: Find examples that please your eye and ask the printer to make it exactly like that.

Fourth: Be careful with varnishes. Some get yellowish rather soon. Sometimes it’s best to have a mix of varnish and ink in the black ink compartment of the machine only. Again: Look out for examples you like.

Fifth: Let go your proofing and color management ideals. Printing machines are living subjects. They react to temperature and humidity. The age of every single part has an impact on the result. The inks and papers are natural substances in the way that they resist standardization like the shapes of trees an the colors of flowers do. Anyhow, the defined limits, by which something in the printing industry can be »according to the standard« are really (really!) wide. Be sure to come to the press with a vision of the desired result, a proof print is not enough.

Sixth: Always print stronger than what you actually aim for. The ink will settle, the paper will soak up some, the colors will soften and the blacks will lighten up within 24–48 hours after printing. If you print »exactly« to match the proof, you might well be disappointed afterwards.

Good luck! It’s a pleasure to follow your adventures.

Best regards,

Gunnar

The Last Word

← A book report: stochastic screen pitch A book report: hard copy proofing →

Comments

  1. Chris Livsey says

    May 5, 2015 at 1:12 pm

    Gunnar, it was real pleasure to read your contribution, my admiration for the end results I buy has been enhanced, thank you.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.