2009 YIR, Blurb Books
rutt
Registered Users Posts: 6,511 Major grins
I received my copy of B.D.'s Blurb Book. It's really nice to have these images in a book!
The book was relatively expensive given the production quality. I wonder if there is a better publisher we could use?
I dug around in this thread and found this excellent post. In short, affordable low volume book publishing uses a less-than-wonderful process. I wonder how many of us would actually buy this book? The answer is relevant to whether there are better options.
I'm interested in people's thoughts about a few other book publishing issues:
The book was relatively expensive given the production quality. I wonder if there is a better publisher we could use?
I dug around in this thread and found this excellent post. In short, affordable low volume book publishing uses a less-than-wonderful process. I wonder how many of us would actually buy this book? The answer is relevant to whether there are better options.
I'm interested in people's thoughts about a few other book publishing issues:
- I am interested in taking on the project of producing the book, but
- only if I have the final say on prepress issues. I promise not to "repair" Richard's selective color shot, but I don't promise not to make changes that I know will look good in print even though the artist can't see this on his/her monitor.
- Should we include all the images?
- What about text/captions? I was thinking about biographical blurbs or something.
If not now, when?
0
Comments
The Leica Users Group just published our third Blurb book. The quality only gets better every year. The price seems reasonable for an on-demand book. Some have found printing quality varies depending on where it is printed, but Blurb has always reprinted if there are complaints.
http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/1120157
Tina
www.tinamanley.com
Hi Rutt,
If you make the book happen, I will buy it.
I have no problems with you making some adjustments to the photos regarding the print quality--Had I submitted a color shot and you changed it to b&w, I might though--so I guess it would depend on just how much editing you would make (It is my guess that the adjustments would be minor no?). I ordered one photo from smugmug, the first shot I was ever proud of, and I loved it on the monitor--however the b&w came out pretty bad on print, the darks were waaaaay darker than I had imaged they would be. You have more experience with this, so I trust your judgment.
I don't know how you are going to decide what gets in or out--this was clearly supposed to be a PJ/street style book and some of the shots are "people" shots, posed and highly processed--while beautiful, I don't think they fit the intention of the book though. Obviously the person who submitted the photos knew the criteria and wanted these photos included, so.....but who decides what gets in or out? Are we to take a vote?
I love the idea of a biographical blurb and texts and captions.
I hope this doesn't turn into an ongoing everlasting argument in which no conclusions are reached--I think we have become famous for that in PJ
I would be honored to buy this book and to have some of my images in it. I'll just say that, so I hope it happens. Concessions will have to be made by all if it is to happen though.
_________
As to what to include, it seems to me (and it was my understanding in the beginning) that all photos submitted should be included, subject to the limit of three per person. If we need to cut back in the number of photos, I think the cuts should go across the board.
Virginia
"A photograph is a secret about a secret. The more it tells you, the less you know." Diane Arbus
Email
With regard to inclusions and exclusions, since there were no terms of reference set, and it isn't a competition, I think all photos should be included. Personally I want to avoid the debate about what is and isn't 'street' as I feel this will detract from the spirit of the venture and whilst I have no idea what the total cost will be, I doubt that the incremental cost of an extra 5, 10 or 15 photos will be a make or break issue.
On a practical note I'm UK based and wonder how this would work for me.....?
The virtue of the camera is not the power it has to transform the photographer into an artist, but the impulse it gives him to keep on looking. - Brook Atkinson- 1951
We went to a fair amount of trouble to keep any hint of competition out of this venture. While I wouldn't put every single shot in the gallery on my wall, I don't really see any problem with including them all in the book. We're doing well here, so let's not quibble.
As for pre-press adjustments, I don't think there's anyone on the forum more qualified than Rutt to handle this difficult chore and I think we're incredibly lucky that he seems willing to do so.
It's not really "improvements", but rather making prints that look like what you think you saw on the monitor. Your eyes and brain will partially correct cast and contrast issues on the monitor but far less so for prints. So even when when an image is meant to show yellow light, for example, a good print will have to cooled more than an image only viewed on the screen. Prints without real dark/light points just don't look as good as those that do. So in general, some artistic effects that work for some viewers on the monitor will just look wrong in print. Good prepress work preserves the intent of the photographer's version while making professional believable looking prints.
I want to do this project, so I'd like this thread to come to conclusion pretty quickly. I also don't want to step on anybody's toes, so I'm waiting for comments first.
When I get going, I'll contact all the photographers to get permission and the images I need. I guess that I'll leave out images if I can't get this and otherwise not.
What about comments from the gallery?
And so far, there is only one customer (besides me) for this book. If you really want this project to happen and result in a really nice book, please commit to buy one.
Now to get my three pictures posted.
Va
"A photograph is a secret about a secret. The more it tells you, the less you know." Diane Arbus
Email
If I have a pic. that doesn't work let me know and I will replace it.
If you need to fix one.... feel free to have at it......:D azzaro
I don't think you need to hear from everyone...the text of the entry thread means we have implied permission. One person has asked that one of the pics be excluded and we will make another public announcement about it after the gallery closes. I can set it up so that you have access to the originals for a limited time. Do you need anything more than that?
Personally, I wouldn't include them in the book, but let's hear what the others have to say.
Count me in as well.
What about the cover art? One pic? Just text? A collage of one thumb from each contributor?
Yes. I'll have at least a casual collaboration with each contributor. In particular, I'll want buy-in for the prepress work and if there is a biographical caption, I'll need that.
Look, it's easy for someone to feel that they weren't properly consulted in a project like this. I'd rather err on the side of safety.
Cool. Sounds great.
Virginia
"A photograph is a secret about a secret. The more it tells you, the less you know." Diane Arbus
Email
First off let me say how much I appreciate your efforts
Count me in. Let me know how much and when.
As far as comments are concerned, I also agree that they shouldn't be included, especially as some shots have several and others have none. I think this would look odd and unbalanced.
With regard to the cover - how about we vote on the shot that we think best represents the genre ? It's not as contentious as voting on what's in and what's out and provides some form of recognition.
Quick question on layout - is the plan to group each contributors shots together and to preface them with a short biography/description ?
The virtue of the camera is not the power it has to transform the photographer into an artist, but the impulse it gives him to keep on looking. - Brook Atkinson- 1951
Here are my thoughts:
I think your having control of pre-press is fine - if the goal is to get a printed image that looks as close as is possible to the image we see on the screen. I'm not comfortable with it if we'll end up with a book of images that reflect your vision of what people's images should look like;
This having been 'my' exercise, I'll get back to you on the question of whether we should include all the images. My initial thought is 'yes,' as long as the images belong on the forum. As people know, there are a couple that I think are technically nice images, but they wouldn't meet anyone's definition of street/pj/or documentary, and therefore don't belong on the forum or in the book. Also, I would suggest that if we decide we're going to have a book, we give people a chance to go back and reconsider their submissions, and whether they want them in the book.
Text/captions - I know everyone seems to like captions, so I'd suggest captions and credit. I would think blurbs may be going a titch far for something like this, but this isn't a do-or-die for me.
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
This just plain more complicated than you think. "What we see", "What we saw", aren't really objective. My goal would be to make people say, "yes, that's what I saw on the monitor" when they look at the print. But there's lots of magic to make that happen and often people will disagree if they see the image on their monitor first.
When people want a magenta cast in color to show late afternoon color, they make very magenta images because it takes a lot of color to overcome people's inherent auto white balance for images displayed on the monitor. Dial that magenta back a bit and the photographer will complain about a blue or yellow cast in spite of retaining a measurable (though reduced) magenta cast. But print it the photographer's original and s/he'll complain about the magenta cast, saying that's not what "we saw." A subtle magenta cast is all you can stand in print.
There are similar issues with B&W.
Anyway, as you see, I have some strong opinions about what works in print. If I do the prepress, people have to accept my good faith in trying to translate their images to print.
Ask people I've printed for. My favorite client is dead, unfortunately, but she used to argue horribly with me until she saw the prints. Ask Andy.
If any of mine don't fit the genre, BD, I won't be offended if they're left out. I'd be thrilled to even be considered for inclusion in this talented group.
I'll buy at least one copy, with or without my photos in it.
... I'm still peeling potatoes.
patti hinton photography
My thought on this is let Rutt put one of his on the cover. After all if he is willing to do the pre-press and production work, not to mention any financial risk from ordering these then having people back out, well...
it only seems fair to give Rutt the cover.
Excellent solution, Toshido. Having just uploaded and ordered my first blurb book, I know that putting one together is not a trivial pursuit. I am hoping that I prepared my black and whites properly, but I won't know until I see the book.
I am extremely grateful that Rutt is willing to undertake the task of putting our book together. I can't think of anyone I would trust more to do the prepress work. As an extra bonus, I suspect that we will all learn from the experience.
I think I know the dGrinner to whom Rutt refers. She was indeed opinionated a blunt critic and an excellent photographer, passionate about her work. I miss her very much. She took excellent street shots and would almost certainly have been an active contributor to this forum, even though she is perhaps best known for her landscapes and bird photos - and for her participation in the dGrin challenges, which she won more than once. If she liked Rutt's results with prints, then I am confident we will all be satisfied.
Virginia
"A photograph is a secret about a secret. The more it tells you, the less you know." Diane Arbus
Email
Virginia,
Smugmug's print shops have ICC profiles so that you can work in a color managed space. You can apply this to your printer at home and you'll produce the colors very similar to what the print shops will produce.
Nikon Shooter
It's all about the moment...
Thanks, Trevlan. I use ICC profiles with my 2280 depending on the paper I am using except for Epson papers where I select AdobeRGB and let the printer manage the color. The results have been good.
I will check to see what, if anything, Blurb offers for profiles before I do a book of color prints. My guess is that they will want them in sRGB.
Va
"A photograph is a secret about a secret. The more it tells you, the less you know." Diane Arbus
Email
A former sports shooter
Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
Jim suggests erring on the side of slightly cool images. If they come out a little red, well that's good since it makes them more neutral. If they come out slightly cool, well that's looks a lot better than slightly red.
Jim, I hope this roughly captures your experience.
Which image looks more neutral (don't cheat and measure):
However, there is one thing to watch out for if you do your own conversion from sRGB to CMYK, using Photoshop. Doing your own conversion doesn’t really eliminate the step, as I know you know, it simply transfers the step to you, which would be fine if PS did a good conversion, which it does not.
When you use PS to convert, PS generates what printers call a “short black”, that is, black in a short range, say from 20% to 90%, with very little density along the way. A long black with more density is much preferable, and can get all the way down to highlight dots (1% to 20%). We just noticed this on a job. The customer was converting the files themselves and getting a very short black, which was causing us problems on press. We noticed it and from now on the printer, with an excellent prep department, will be using their profile instead, which generates a long black.
On press, black has more than one job. It provides detail and shape of course, and it keeps shadows neutral. But it also “holds down” the color. So, if one color, let’s say red, runs too strong, with a short black certain areas are not “held down” by black and they get colorful, which is bad. With a long black, these areas stay more neutral even when the ink balance goes kerflooey, and at some point the ink on these presses will go kerflooey. There are so many reasons why it can happen.
So, John, if you are doing the conversions, you might check it out on some good image that’s representative (lots of tonal range with good shadows). After conversion, you might want to switch to channel view and check the black channel by itself. If the black, in your judgment, should go down into the highlights and it doesn’t, or if it ends up with a 30% black in an area where you know it should be much more, that’s a problem.
I have no idea how Blurb, or more likely the printers to whom Blurb sends the job, are going to do it. But I would expect them to use a profile, which should do a substantially better job than PS. It is much more likely that the printers profile will generate a higher density long black separation than it is that PS will.
Also, your idea of a proof book would be a great idea, if you knew that the press variable would not change. Unfortunately, you can’t know that. It’s tempting, but probably would only tease you and waste your time. You won’t even know if your book will print at the same printer next time, never mind the same press.
<<< Jim suggests erring on the side of slightly cool images.>>
Yes. Blue blacks are safer, in that they’re not as noticeable as a black which is too red. Also, from the many Blurb books I’ve inspected, red was by far the worst offender.
Cheers,
Jim
I don't want the cheese, I just want to get out of the trap.
http://www.jimwhitakerphotography.com/
Onward.
I have never used the custom routine in PS John, so I don’t know what their “heavy black” will give, but it sounds like a good starting point. As before, my suggestion is to try to make the cyan 8 to 10 points higher than M and Y in the blacks.
However, we're swinging the bat with our eyes closed here. The ideal situation would be simply to have a profile of the actual press. I suppose we’re doing our best without that, but why do I keep hearing that way madness lies?
Jim
I don't want the cheese, I just want to get out of the trap.
http://www.jimwhitakerphotography.com/
A former sports shooter
Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu