As I write, the temperature is in the 20s outside, with some snow flurries. Winter has arrived. I don’t do winters well. Every year, I tell myself I am going to shoot outdoors more often. And I do. But only a couple of times each winter. If there isn’t any snow on the ground, I am not sure that what’s outdoors to shoot is worth braving the cold, at least nature-wise. So, indoor shooting is something my photography friends and I do often in the winter. And one of the places we go to is the University of Pittsburgh’s Cathedral of Learning. There always seems to be something new to photograph there, though going any place multiple times can lead to the feeling that you have shot it all. But frequent visits force you to try to look at things from a new angle. Like this photo looking at stairs from down low.

In addition to trying to get outdoors a bit more, I will definitely also be looking for interesting indoor areas to photograph. I’ll post any interesting locations I find here.

A few weeks ago, I wrote about some work I have been doing using physical textures, as opposed to overlaying and blending digital textures into a photograph. I find myself quite drawn to the technique. I had been wondering if it was just different for the sake of being different, or whether it can stand alone as giving an interesting and appealing look to an image without the viewer knowing how the look was achieved. In other words, is it the look that is interesting and artistic, or simply knowing that something unusual was done? I personally think that it is an appealing look on its own, and not simply different for the sake of being different. What do you think?

I should also mention that I did an experiment by taking a blank sheet of paper and putting the texture (salt, sugar, etc.) on it, and then photographing it in the hope that I could use the resulting photograph as a digital texture overlay on any image. I tried using blending modes and opacity adjustments like any other digital overlay to avoid the need to apply physical texture to every image I wanted to try the technique on. It isn’t the same. The look is different because once blending modes are applied, the overlay blends differently in different areas of the image depending on the luminosity of the underlying photo. It can give an interesting effect, but it is different and, in my opinion, not as effective as applying the actual texture to the image itself.

A few weeks ago, a friend invited me to go on a photography trip to Ricketts Glen State Park, about a four to five hour drive from my home. The park is an amazing location with 24 named waterfalls, rapids, and lots of hiking trails. I would categorize the hiking difficulty as moderate, especially if you are carrying a backpack of photographic equipment, a tripod, and wearing boots to enable you to go into the water to make photographs. You need to be careful, but I find that actually being in the water that is coming towards you results in more dynamic images that give the viewer the feeling that they are right there in the water with you.

I made many photographs and chose about 20-30 that I think, over time, will be worth fully processing. This is the first installment.

The park is particularly beautiful with fall color, and I would imagine the same is true in spring as the trees all start to bloom. The winter melt that occurs in the spring and the fall rainy season contributes to great conditions in terms of the volume of water flow as well. The park is most definitely worth a visit, as long as you are up for some hiking.

Most intermediate-level users of Photoshop are familiar with the idea of adding a texture to an image. You bring the texture in as the top layer over the image, make sure it is properly sized to cover the photo, pick a blending mode that suits, adjust the opacity, and use some masking if needed. But in the course I have been taking, we have had a bit of a different approach. We were given an assignment to use real textures, and I do mean real.

We were to print our image on thin paper, put the image on a light box to provide backlighting, and sprinkle something semi-transparent or translucent on top of the image and then rephotograph it. If we so desired, we could combine that image with our original photo at reduced opacity.

Want to see what a photo looks like with coarse, unground salt or granulated sugar sprinkled on it? Come on, you know you do! Well, this blog post will fulfill that desire. And I like the results.

As part of an art photography course that I am taking to make impressionistic and, at times, hand-embellished artwork from photographs, we were given an assignment to make our own pinhole ‘lens’ for our digital cameras. When I told the instructor that I already had a pinhole lens that I had purchased, his response was that the one I had purchased was undoubtedly too perfect and that we were looking for imperfections. So off I went to manufacture my own pinhole lens per his instructions. The result is seen below.

But, as they say, the proof is in the pudding as to whether my home concoction was going to work, so a short photo walk was in order.

As it turns out for 5 bucks (to purchase a spare camera body cap) I made a pinhole lens which seems to function every bit as well as the one I had purchased for much more. Some interesting experiments may ensue. For example, I am told that a dual pinhole yields a result similar to multiple exposures. That remains to be tried!

I have been experimenting with various ways to, well, I’m not really sure what the correct word is…enhance, display, or alter color to get a somewhat stylized and slightly muted appearance. After experimenting, I came up with a variant of a technique that I had previously seen demonstrated. This is the look:

To achieve this appearance, I made both a color and a black-and-white version of the image and then moved the color version to a layer on top of the black-and-white version. The trick was then to switch the blending mode of the color layer to ‘color’ instead of ‘normal.’ This applies the color in a mathematical algorithm that applies the hue and saturation of the color layer (while ignoring its brightness or luminosity) to the black-and-white layer, preserving the brightness data of the black-and-white layer.

What I then experimented with was putting various types of adjustment layers between the black-and-white and color layers. These adjustment layers affect the result of the color blend mode since they are underneath that layer. It was a bit hard to predict exactly how it would affect the color, though I am sure there is a way to do so. It seemed more fun to experiment with what could be placed under the color layer and see if the results were satisfying or not. Of course, further typical adjustments can also be made in the more traditional fashion using adjustment layers on top of the color layer.

Give it a whirl and see if you like the result. I may make a video about the process at some point.

Have you noticed that if you try to expand the size of your high-resolution image (and it doesn’t have to be very high res at all) using Adobe’s new Generative Fill/Generative Expand functions, the results are horrible? Oh, it looks good when the image is small in size, but enlarge it to 100%, and you will see just how blurry the results are (see below). Well, there is a way to completely avoid this and get excellent results. I’ve made a video (below) that demonstrates the problem, discusses why it occurs, and explains a workaround that enables excellent results to be had. I hope you find it useful!

The Problem:

The Solution Explained:

For quite some time, I have had an ongoing photographic project making images of very small sections of urban murals that appear as if they could stand on their own as abstract art. I offer as an example this photo, which I took just last week (my photo friends laugh because they know that I just can’t resist a mural).

Recently. however, I saw a very small mural that I quite enjoyed as a whole, as opposed to wanting to photograph just an abstract section of it.

I love the way the Caucasian and the African-American women have their hearts attached to each other. However, I do sort of wish that it didn’t quite look like they were both being shot in the chest. It surprised me that the artist hadn’t considered that. Or maybe it’s just me?

I belong to a photo community that has monthly challenges. The challenge this month is to photograph something red, blue, or yellow (or a combination of those colors). I thought I would post the image I intend to submit. The nice thing is that it is a challenge and not a contest. There is a moderator that discusses all the submissions, but no ‘winner’ is chosen. It is all intended to ignite the creative process.

Recently, my photo-blogger friend Ken posted a series of photos on his blog that featured words. I had commented to him that the timing of his post was ironic, as I had just recently started photographing various words and numbers that I noticed while walking about. I had started doing so because I thought there might ultimately be some way to integrate them into other pieces that I might make. So here is a sampling of those words and numbers (and check out Ken’s blog as well - it is linked above).

As many readers know, I photograph quite a bit at Phipps Conservatory. Particularly in winter, it’s a great place to go to photograph flowers and other botanicals when there aren’t any in the great outdoors. But Phipps isn’t only about flowers. There are several old and weathered statues there that I enjoy photographing. I am a fan of particularly expressive statues, and these two from Phipps fill the bill. This first one is actually in the correct orientation and is what you would see if you were standing right in front of the statue.

This second one is sculpted in a more standard orientation.

Just joining the experiment? Perhaps you might like to start with Part 1 of this 4 part series.

Well, the rain finally stopped, and I applied three coats of the Hahnemuhle Protective Spray. It takes only a few seconds for each application and about 15 minutes to dry between coats. Easy. It is much simpler and easier to control than applying a liquid.

Now comes what is really the only slightly tricky part of this whole process that I have been describing. Attaching the print to the panel. First, let’s talk about what I personally use to mount the print. Some might advocate using something like YES Paste, and that will work, but I think the process is made much easier with what I prefer, which is 3M 568 Repositionable Mounting Adhesive.

3M 568 Repositionable Mounting Adhesive is, in my opinion, a great product that I have already been using for a year or so in my photo-encaustic work. It comes as a long roll from which you cut off the appropriate length (a bit longer than the actual panel). It looks like glossy paper and, in fact, one side is just that…. a shiny paper. But the other side is coated with a very thin layer of adhesive. You lay the adhesive side (there will be no doubt which side that is, as it is tacky to the touch) down on the surface of the panel. There is no centering since the piece you cut off should be larger than the panel and will cover the whole thing. The roll of adhesive I have is 12 inches wide, so I needed to cut two pieces and place them side by side in order to cover the whole panel.

Once you have placed the adhesive paper pieces over the panel (tacky side down), you vigorously rub the non-adhesive surface of the paper with a rubber burnishing tool that comes with the roll. Really spend a few minutes firmly burnishing it, especially at the edges of the panel. You can’t overdo it. That firm burnishing makes the adhesive layer bind to the wood more firmly than to the paper.

After burnishing, you gently lift up the paper, and that thin layer of adhesive transfers from the paper to the entire surface of the panel, all the way out to the edges. You know you are successful because the paper is no longer tacky, and you can see the thin adhesive layer adherent to the surface of the panel.

Now comes the only slightly tricky part to this whole process. You want to GENTLY place the print onto the panel, trying to center it. You can check your placement from the front of the panel, to make sure the print is straight, and you can lift the panel up and look at it from below or even flip it over to make sure that the borders that overhang the panel (this is why we made the print slightly larger than the panel itself) are generally equal. Just make sure that you don’t lay it down on a table or other surface with the print side down. Why? Because it is REPOSITIONABLE! That’s the beauty of this adhesive. As long as you don’t apply any pressure to the print surface, the adhesive is strong enough to hold the print on the surface, allowing you to flip the panel over, but weak enough to allow you to flip it right side up again and gently lift the print off the adhesive and reposition it if it is not centered to your liking.

Once it is properly centered (I had to reposition it several times), you cover the print with a sheet of burnishing paper (to protect the surface of the print) that comes with the roll and use the burnishing tool to apply pressure over the entire surface of the print. Make sure to burnish those edges well. This makes the adhesive permanent, and that print is NOT going to come off the panel. Ever.

By the way, make sure that when you are placing the print down onto the panel that the correct side is at the top based on how you mounted the hanging hardware (whoops). If you discover you screwed that up after you’ve burnshed (it happens :), you can always unscrew the hardware and carefully remount it correctly later.

That’s the only tricky (but not hard) part. Now, simply put a piece of some type of protective paper down on a surface to protect the print, flip the panel upside down onto the protective paper, and trim away the excess overhanging paper using some type of hobby knife. It helps to have a cutting mat, though it isn’t absolutely necessary.

Here is my finished piece hanging on a wall. It came out really well. I particularly like how the absence of glass in the presentation allows the viewer to experience the artwork more intimately.

Does it hang flush with the wall based on the way we mounted the hardware? You bet it does!

I hope you found this brief tutorial useful. If you like the look of the finished piece, why not give it a try yourself? If you do, I would love to hear how it turned out.

Printing And Protecting The Artwork

With the panel completed, it is time to print (and protect - more on that later in this post) the artwork. The image I wanted to use for this project is an alcohol gel transfer (discussed here). I enjoy the simplicity of the image, which was photographed in a Japanese garden, and the organic look of the gel transfer result. The actual gel transfer was photographed in order to enlarge it, as the original transfer (as seen below) is only about 7x7 inches.

I am something of a paper freak and love experimenting with different types of paper. However, once you put a print behind glass, the paper itself becomes less prominent. One of the benefits of presenting an image in the way I plan to is that removing the glass barrier that separates the print from the viewer allows the actual paper to become a more prominent component of the artwork.

So, I wanted to pick a beautiful paper that had some texture and on which the image also looked good. Of course, I made some small prints first and decided on using Hahnemuhle Museum Etching paper. This paper is quite thick (350 gsm) and has a natural creamy color, which complements both the tree bark and the yellow/gold background in the image. It also has a subtle and seemingly random texture to it that I find very pleasing. The next step was to print it out at a large size on roll paper.

I wanted to have some nice borders around the image to show off the edges of the transfer and in which I could sign the image. I decided that the actual transfer portion of the image should be about 15 inches, which would leave about a 1 1/2 inch border around it, filling the 18x18 inch panel.

This printed output from the roll paper was 24x24 inches and would need to be cut down to size. When trimming the paper to size, there are two issues. The first is a relatively minor one, which is that very often the stated measurements of these panels are not exact. In this case, it was a couple 16th’s of an inch short on one side. No big deal because of the way we will trim the paper. The second issue is that we want the paper to be perfectly flush with the sides of the panel. How do we accomplish that?

What we do NOT want to do is cut the paper to the exact size of the panel. We will never get it exact and, besides, even if we did, we would never be able to lay it down and attach it to the panel absolutely perfectly centered. The answer is to cut the paper so that it is 1/2 inch larger than the panel, attach it to the panel (more on that in the next post), and then trim it flush after it is secured to the panel. Here is a cell phone photo of the print with the paper trimmed to 18.5x18.5 inches. I have also taken the opportunity to sign the print in the lower right-hand corner. The slightly warm tone of the paper and its texture doesn’t really show on the photo.

But before we mount the print, there is one last issue to deal with. Since there will be no barrier between the artwork and the viewer, we really should have some way to protect the surface from accidental touches, fingerprints, or other damage. Luckily, there is a way to do so with any of several protective sprays. I have previously used Hahnemuhle Protective Spray and have been very happy with the results in that it is completely invisible and does not change the appearance of the artwork or the paper at all. The spray is apparently not carried by B&H anymore, but you can find it on Amazon (affiliate link below)

The spray will protect against fingerprints, smudges, and any flaking from the surface. But it’s not a miracle. If someone attacks the artwork with a scissor, the surface will be ruined! The spraying really should be done outdoors and since it is raining here today, I will need to put it off for a day or so.

In the next and final installment, I will talk about how to properly mount the print to the panel and trim away the excess paper, finishing the project. I think it is going to end up looking quite good!

To be continued…….

Finishing The Panel

If you are just joining me for this ‘real time’ experiment to display a photograph in a non-traditional way, Part I can be found here.

The cradled wood panel was taped off, the edges were primed, and the edges were then painted with two coats of flat black paint. The painting itself only took about two minutes for each coat, but I had to let the paint dry between the coats. I have removed the painter’s tape that was used to protect the front and back of the panel and this is the result. It looks great!

There is one more thing I will do to the panel before calling it ready to accept the photograph, which is to mount the hanging hardware. I don’t want to have to be drilling holes and screwing in hardware after the photo has been mounted to the panel, as it might lead to damaging the surface of the image.

One of the nice things about these panels is that they can be mounted flush and flat to a wall. The trick to doing that is to put the mounting hardware in the correct location. Eyelets or other hanging hardware should not be mounted on the back of the cradled panel in the same way that you might mount the hardware for a traditional frame. In other words, do NOT do this:

If you mount the hardware in that location, the panel will not sit flush against the wall. The bottom of the frame will touch the wall but the upper portion will lean forward. Instead, measure about 1/3 of the way down the frame and drill two small holes within the width of the frame and mount the hardware like this:

Now, when you later string hanging wire between the eyelets, the hook on which you hang the frame will pull the entire frame flush against the wall. Even if you end up deciding to place the panel in a floater frame (still much less expensive than a traditional frame and also without glass forming a barrier between the artwork and the viewer), the eyelets in this location will not interfere with anything.

Now that the panel is ready, it’s time to make a print and discuss how to protect it.

To Be Continued…..

Preparing A Cradled Wood Panel: Part 1

As many readers of this blog already know, I have been experimenting with various techniques using a photograph as a starting point for hand-embellished artwork. In addition to that, I have also been doing a good deal of thinking about how to present more traditional photography in non-standard ways. Traditional matting and framing is very expensive, creates a barrier (the glass) between the artwork and the viewer, and, some might say, appears a bit dated. My encaustic work often starts with attaching a photograph to a cradled wood panel before I apply the wax medium. I recently began to wonder what would happen if wax weren’t applied and the photograph was simply presented on a three-dimensional board without a barrier. This, then, is that experiment.

I have not tried this presentation before, so don’t know how appealing the final result will be, but, obviously, I have high hopes. I thought it might be interesting to bring you through the process with me in more or less real-time and, if the results are appealing, you will also have an instruction manual on how to do this yourself. So expect a few posts this week about this subject as we see how this comes together.

Let’s get started!

I have talked about cradled wood panels in prior posts, but I’m not sure how many readers know what they are. I decided to do this experiment in a reasonably large size (I’m all in) and bought an 18x18-inch cradled wood panel. These can be purchased from any of many online art store websites, but I like to support my local art store (Artists & Craftsman Supply) and therefore bought it there.

There are many brands of these panels available. I happen to like the American Easel brand because they are a bit heftier than some of the others, and they are manufactured in the USA. This particular panel, which can be displayed without any further framing, costs approximately $20. That is a lot less than a comparably sized traditional frame, which I estimate would cost three times as much, and perhaps more once the matting and glass are included.

The top view doesn’t reveal why this is actually a three-dimensional object and not a flat panel, so let’s remove the packaging and flip it over.

Now you can see how this is a three-dimensional object. The flat panel portion is mounted on a wooden frame. The depth from the front panel to the back of the wooden frame is 7/8 inch, though these types of panels are available in several widths, ranging from 1/2 to 1 1/2 inches wide.

Though one aesthetic is to leave the panel in its raw, unfinished state, I prefer a different look and like painting the sides of the panel black. Some artists paint the sides after the artwork is complete, but I would never personally try that for fear of ruining the artwork on the front. I paint prior to doing anything with the panel.

In order to do this, I need to tape off the front:

Don’t worry about the tape gping over the edges. We can take care of that with a small hobby blade.

And now for the back.

Why tape off the back? The answer is that when hanging this type of panel, it looks best flush against the wall (I will show you how to do that) and if there is any black paint on the back it can rub off on the wall when hanging, even if the paint is dry. Not a good look! So let’s be neat.

In this instance, the back edges of the frame are a bit rounded, and that portion might be able to be seen from the side. The rounded portion also does not touch the wall when hung. That is the reason for the small gap between the edge and the tape that you can see in this rear view. Remember, we want to be neat, but none of this needs to be perfect.

OK, I am now going to bring the panel to the basement to paint the exposed sides. I am going to use a coat of primer and two coats of flat black latex house paint. It will take a day or so to get done, allowing the sides of the panel to dry between coats. The actual work time is only perhaps ten or fifteen minutes. It is the drying time between coats that takes a while. I will show you the results in the next installment!

Feel free to comment or ask any questions you might have about this process.

Another new technique that I have been exploring is photomontage. To construct a photomontage, you make several different versions of a photograph and then either digitally or physically cut sections out of each photo and arrange and combine them to generate a completely new one.

While this is likely the easiest of the techniques I have been learning to do in terms of the actual construction, it is also the most difficult (at least for me) to get an appealing artistic result. I am posting my first digital attempt below. And while I don’t think it is a particularly compelling result, it is a starting point. My first attempt at doing this manually was a complete disaster, not from the standpoint of cutting up the images but in getting an appealing result. This is definitely a technique that requires the right image and the right amount of tearing or digital cutting, but based on what I have seen when done well can really create unique pieces of artwork.

I posted the photo from which this work is derived some time ago. However, I have been revisiting some images in light of the various techniques I have recently been learning. At this point, I am trying to combine multiple techniques to see what results can be achieved.

In this case, I printed the photograph in black and white on watercolor paper and then hand-pained it with watercolor paints while using pencils to ensure the eye and hair were brought out. I then photographed the result. I also took the original photograph and did an alcohol gel transfer onto watercolor paper and then photographed that result.

Finally, I brought the two photographs of the hand-pained and alcohol gel artworks into Photoshop as layers and combined them to yield this image.

The various techniques I have been utilizing can combine quite nicely with each other. I am finding there are many, many treatments you can use with your photographs.

Another alcohol gel transfer. This one with a message. Though I took this image in 2014, almost a decade ago, its message still rings true. Perhaps now more than ever.

I have been learning and trying out new techniques in my pursuit of mixed media art that utilizes a photograph as a starting point. Today’s image was made using a technique called alcohol gel transfer. This is based on the fact that most inkjet printer inks dissolve in alcohol, assuming you can get the ink onto an alcohol-coated substrate before the ink dries or the alcohol evaporates.

In this particular case, the substrate was watercolor paper, the alcohol was in the form of hand sanitizer gel which I coated onto the paper with a brush, and the image itself was printed on a plastic transparency sheet. It comes out of the printer and is rapidly flipped onto the gel and gently pressed. There are some tricks in terms of when to coat the paper, how hard to press, and how to get ink that doesn’t seem to want to transfer to come off, but it really isn’t too hard to learn once you work through these issues.

No two transfers of the same image will ever be the same. That is part of the beauty of these hand techniques. And, of course, the result can be photographed, adjusted as you see fit in Photoshop, and reproductions printed in any size. But I always save the original piece as well.

Dry powder what??

So here’s what it is. If you print a black-and-white image on a really old, crappy, cheap laser printer (most modern, good quality laser printers won’t work), there is a good chance the cheap toner won't be fixed well or stably onto the bond paper. If you lay that laser print face down on another piece of smooth paper (bond or smooth watercolor) and paint the top (which is the back of that lousy laser print) with acetone and rub, the toner ends up partially coming off and yielding a deconstructed image on the second piece of paper. That resultant deconstructed image can be the final piece or, as in this case, it can be photographed, brought into Photoshop as a layer, and blended into the original image. It is also possible to embellish the deconstructed print with paint, pencil, etc, before photographing it.

For interest, this is the actual transferred image before blending it back into the original photo. Depending on how the transfer looks, the transfer itself can be a stand-alone piece.

This photo is one I posted recently, though flipped horizontally. It is also a blended transfer, and the original image was taken with a Helios lens, causing the soft focus in the periphery of the image.

This is another technique I plan on pursuing further.