Lincold, New Mexico
On June 6 it was high summer with temperatures over 100°F as I moved across New Mexico, headed for several drive-in theaters in California's central valley. I needed to cover distance to stay on schedule but really wanted to try some color landscape pictures of this beautiful but forbidding territory. The next couple posts will show some of these.
Lincold, New Mexico
5 comments:
I was once told, but have no official confirmation of this, that the reason people were given such large tracks of land by the government in NM was that the the rancher would tell the government how many head of cattle they wanted to raise. Since the land had so little vegetation and water, the government would then calculate the number of acres that would support that many head and that would be the deeded property. Of course, this was just gaming the system as nobody expected to raise that much cattle in these areas. BTW, how is the film developing, cataloging all the images, transcribing notes coming along?
Even the most barren-looking of the land there is fenced, so must be used for grazing, but the number of head per acre has to be incredibly low. It also looks as though the land may need to lie fallow for years at a time between grazing uses.
On editing, I'm at a critical crossover point. I've gotten all the way through the massive take of digital capture, marking the "selects" (could say, "most promising") for each of the 90 theaters. Now I'm working my way through marking *** on just one picture from each theater. This has to be "the best" shot, in terms of the project, which means it must be the shot that best shows what is distinctive about this particular theater and its setting. Often several other shots get ** to indicate a picture that I like as much on its own, but doesn't fill that "distinctive" niche as well as the ***.
Carl,
Is the next step making prints of the *** or ** images? How long do you 'live' with them before you finally decide, if at all? First thought, best thought?....thanks
What I am wondering, is back in the 'old' days of film, you could make a proof sheet before final edits, quick prints of those selected before committing to final prints. In the digital world, is all the editing being done on the screen? How close will the final prints be to what is seen on the screen? thanks.....
Lyle, this is different from usual because I'm first editing for the Kickstarter Rewards. I figured out that, a bit of tail-wags-dog, I *first* need to find the 12 pictures that will make the best color calendar. Then I can decide what the offerings will be for the whole set of Rewards levels and get the fulfillment operation done.
Using color management with profiled monitor and printer/paper, I think the whole edit/select process can be done on screen. Then I usually make small workprints (5x7-ish printed 4-up on 24" roll paper) to see what each picture looks like "in ink." Even with CMS, WYSIWYG is a myth. I like to live with the small prints for a while before deciding how I want to print the pictures at larger size. Another myth is that you can make a digital master file and print it at various sizes--nonsense. Just as in the traditional darkroom, a different size is a different print and needs different tone/contrast.
Post a Comment