Re: fine art reproduction questions
Re: fine art reproduction questions
- Subject: Re: fine art reproduction questions
- From: Ben Goren <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 15:00:10 -0700
On 2010 May 2, at 2:50 PM, neil snape wrote:
> Yet what was surprising was the ability to move the lights around to leave
> some texture in which is entirely subjective but desirable for such
> paintings , even those with apparent canvas.
This is intriguing, as it's something I've struggled with even on watercolors. Watercolor paper has a texture that the camera captures -- at least, with my lighting setup, it captures it. One can then, obviously, choose to preserve or clip that texture. But the printer paper has its own texture, almost always different from the original. I generally do the obvious fiddling of white points so that the texture essentially vanishes, and that has produced the best results so far.
Were the HP prints being made on canvas? If so, how did the original texture captured by the camera interact with the texture of the canvas it was printed on?
That's ignoring, of course, the fact that so many oils are really three-dimensional works, sculptures in paint, really. Nothing short of one of those 3-D plastic fabrication printers could do one justice, and I have no idea how one would apply ink on top of such a surface. I'm sure that's when I'd break out the long glass and just pretend the texture doesn't exist.
Cheers,
b& _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden