• 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 / “Staccato” exhibition, part 2

“Staccato” exhibition, part 2

July 9, 2012 JimK Leave a Comment

Yesterday I had three visitors: the two curators of the CPA In Motion Exhibition and the Champion for the show. The Champion is the manager of an exhibition, and is responsible for making sure everybody knows what they have to do, and that they do it.

I showed my guests work prints from the Staccato series. There were two piles. The largest were 22×30 Epson 9800 prints on Arches Infinity paper, which has a smooth matte surface. That’s the paper I used when I first started the series, and it’s a good paper for showing work where the lighting is not optimum and reflections can be a problem. However, I’m now printing the series on C-sized (17×22) Epson Exhibition Fiber paper with an Epson 4900. The paper gives me a Dmax north of 2.3 as compared to the matte paper’s 1.7, and the deep blacks work well with the night images. The downside is reflections; although the Exhibition Fiber surface is not quite glossy – it’s akin to unferrotyped F-finish silver gelatin paper – it’s pretty reflective. In the exhibition, the gloss won’t be a problem since the lighting is well away from the viewing axis.

It took about half an hour to go through 30 or 40 prints. We talked about what size would be right. The CPA has 22×28 plex, and, with 4 inches of mat board and half an inch of reveal on each side of the image, that would mean making the image area 19 inches wide. This is will fit on the C-sized paper with an inch and a half of margin. We’ll probably have one large print, and maybe several smaller ones. I’ve had enough experience hanging other artists’ shows in the CPA gallery to know that we can get 40 or 50 22×28 mats on the walls before it starts to look crowded. Since I’ll be sharing the gallery with Hal Eastman, I should be thinking in terms of half that many.

At the end of the meeting I agreed to send the curators a CD with medium-resolution JPEGs of about 60 images, and they’d pick from that group.

Today, I fired up Lightroom, and started to whittle down the series so I could make the CD. I’ve composited and saved about 600 images in the three years I’ve been working on this series. 117 of them I’ve given three or more stars to. I started by looking at all the two-star images to make sure I hadn’t missed something great. I hadn’t.

Then I went through all the three-star pictures, and gave the ones I thought might be good for the show four stars. When I was done, I had 80 four and five-star photographs. I worked that down to 64 by giving some of them 3 stars. I checked the number of five-star images, and counted 16.

I did an export from Lightroom with 2100 pixels the largest dimension, burned the images onto CDs, sent them off, and emailed the curators, asking them to look at the stars to see which images are my favorites.

 

The Last Word

← “Staccato” to show at the CPA Tillman Crane on film vs digital →

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

  • 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
  • Ivo de Man 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.