the last word

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

  • site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge
You are here: Home / The Last Word / A break from the a7R

A break from the a7R

December 13, 2013 By JimK 2 Comments

I’ll get right back to it, but something came up today that’s taking time away from testing the a7R.

First, some background. I entered the Center for Photographic Art’s 2014 Juried Exhibition a few months ago. I’m not usually one for entering these kinds of contests, but I find it easy to make an exception for the CPA. Besides, for the last five years I’ve been working on the Juried Exhibition, and therefore ineligible to enter it. Wanting to get some feedback on the new stuff, I sent them all new work; nothing that had been exhibited, or, with one exception, even sold.

The notices went out earlier this week, and two of my images made the web gallery, but nothing was in the physical exhibition. However, I got a call today saying that the curator had decided that she wanted six more images in the show, and that one of the new ones was mine.

In fact, it was this one:

Betterlight_00066 sq noiset

from the Timescapes series.

Was I pleased? Yes, indeed. Was I miffed that I was not one of the first kids chosen? Not at all. It’s not that I have no pride, it’s just that I’ve been on the other side of these exhibitions, and I know how subjective, argumentative, and arbitrary the selection process can be. Actually, this one may not have been argumentative, since there was only one juror this year. Having seen the sausage being made, it’s hard to take the result as a validation of my essential worth as a human being.

I needed to hop to and make some prints. At least two, in case I blow the signature. The prints are on Exhibition Fiber, so you can’t sign in pencil, and it sucks up the ink so fast that it’s tricky to sign with a pen. For my last exhibition, I just punted and signed the prints on the back — in verso, as the folks in the galleries say.

I found the file, and printed a test image on the 4900. I hadn’t used the printer for a week, and there were many nozzle clogs. Fortunately, a single pass of low-intensity cleaning did the job. I used the Advanced B&W mode, and picked a slightly magenta color cast, trying to get the print to look a little like a lightly selenium-toned darkroom print.

Then I turned on the 9800 and ran a nozzle check. I hadn’t used it for three or four months, and I was dreading the result. I screwed up my courage and looked. Not one clog. What a printer! I don’t know what I’m going to do when it finally dies; I sure don’t want to deal with the 9900, a printer that has the same clogging propensities as my persnickety 4900.

Then I opened up a new box of 24×30 Exhibition Fiber. The paper wasn’t flat; there were two ripples running most of the extent of the short direction. I grumbled a bit, and decided to make it the framer’s problem.

_DSC2022

I don’t know what’s going on; Exhibition Fiber in the smaller sizes has always been remarkably flat when I’ve opened the box, and had stayed flat behind the mat, unlike a lot of baryta-coated papers. There is that tear in the cardboard protective support, which might indicate that the paper fell onto the short side during its travels from the shipper to me. By the way, the picture of the ripply paper was made with the first camera that fell to hand, which turned out to be the a7R and the Leica 24mm f/3.8.

I made the first print, and was please to see that the trip through the printer had flattened the paper out quite a bit. However, it was somewhat darker than I expected. I’d never printed the image this big, and I was surprised to find that the size made such a difference. The more I looked at it, the more I liked it dark. I made a lighter print to see if my original conception of the look of the image was better than the new tonality that I’d found by accident.

I like the new look. I’ll use the lighter print to practice my signature.

← Leica 18 & 24 on a7R & M240 E mount lens on an FE camera →

Comments

  1. Dan Dill says

    December 13, 2013 at 3:08 pm

    Well, congratulations!

    Reply
  2. Pieter Kers says

    December 13, 2013 at 3:21 pm

    Well, I find your work exceptional… and that happens not often.
    So keep up the good work –
    also your blog is very informative…

    cheers

    PK

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Pieter Kers Cancel reply

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

January 2021
S M T W T F S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  
« Dec    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
  • 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 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

  • Anthony New on Camera resolution and 4K viewing — summary
  • JimK on Detectability of visual signals below the noise
  • Bill Claff on Detectability of visual signals below the noise
  • Robert Frangioso on Leica 280/4 Apo-Telyt R on GFX 50R in infrared
  • Robert Frangioso on Why so few posts?
  • Ken on Noise reduction and downsampling
  • Robert Kuechle on Chronography video up
  • JimK on Leica 90/2 Apo-Summicron ASPH-M on GFX 50S
  • DanB on Leica 90/2 Apo-Summicron ASPH-M on GFX 50S
  • gideon on How fast is the Sony a7RIV silent shutter?

Archives

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.