Red Skies at Night

August 14, 2008

Selling prints on ebay

Filed under: books, business — ejeschke @ 10:36 pm

I noticed that Brian Auer is selling his prints on ebay.   I’ve seen some other photographers do that too, and I wonder about ebay as a vehicle for selling “fine-art” photography.  Yes, you are auctioning off your work, but ebay is no Sotheby’s.  It rather has a bit of a the feel of a flea market.  The pages are functional, but do not show off the work in a very classy way. And yet, it’s got a lot of eyeballs there, so it’s a more ready made market than hanging out your shingle on a personal web site.  I also know there are lots of people that will pay higher prices on an auction site than they would on a regular e-commerce site because they think they are getting a deal.  (This is how so many copies of the open-source GIMP image editing software are sold, even though it’s freely available elsewhere.)  It’s also all set up for e-commerce, so no hassle setting up your own system.

What are your thoughts about selling photography on ebay?

June 1, 2008

Workshop Book Feedback

Filed under: POD, books, photos, workshops — Tags: , , — ejeschke @ 10:06 pm

Bamboo Grove, originally uploaded by Eric Jeschke.

Key: R20080530-181726

As I reported yesterday, I spent today at a photo workshop by Robbert Flick, who was the fly-in guest juror for a local photo contest.  In conjunction with the contest, they held a workshop.  He showed and talked about his work for about an hour, and then we spent the rest of the morning and early afternoon (with a break for catered lunch) reviewing portfolios of the 20+ photographers present.

In lieu of a portfolio I brought my VioVio-made SoFoBoMo book, showed it around, and had it reviewed.  It got a lot of positive comments, including from Robbert, who gave some nice feedback on it.  The negatives seemed to revolve around my use of a running page header.  The header has the book title and a subtitle running on even pages and my name and web site running on odd pages.  He would have rather seen no text at all on the pages, just images.  Even the page numbers he would have preferred in a smaller font, possibly in a light grey.  He recommended that if image titles were needed, he’d put them in the front or back material, and not under the photos.  The purpose being to let the work speak to the viewer without a lot of interference.  This advice seemed a little counter to some of the dialogue I’ve been seeing in the SoFoBoMo posts and comments, where I was getting the impression that adding some text putting the picture in context for the viewer was a good thing.  I need to think some more about that.

I asked specifically about the image quality of POD publishing.  Robbert suggested that unless you were willing to spend some good money for a really good press and a press run (and even then), you were unlikely to get anything close to what you can do on your own inkjet.  Most of the participants really liked the book, leading me to think that maybe I’m just being unrealistically high in my image quality expectations.  And, as I said, I am completely happy with the aspects that I was most worried about: neutral B&W, the overall tonal range.  Anyway, some good strokes.  And it got me feeling a lot more positive about the VioVio result, especially considering the price.

All in all I had a great time at the workshop.  Just listening in on the critiques of all the photographer’s work, looking at some great images, talking photography–I usually pull some good things out of this kind of event.  I came away with one or two BIG things to think about in my own work, things that I’d never gave much thought to before. I’ll be sharing those in the next couple of days.

And I think I’m going to give Lulu a shot at printing the book.

May 31, 2008

Whither POD?

Filed under: POD, books, noted, photos, workshops — ejeschke @ 9:03 pm

The Perfect Picnic Table, originally uploaded by Eric Jeschke.

Key: R20080530-185224

I’m browsing some of the posts from the SoFoBoMo pipe, and seeing several from people who were not overly happy with their POD results.  Witness parsenome on CreateSpace, and Anita Jesse on Blurb.  Coupled with my own lukewarm reception to the VioVio product, I’m left wondering if there is any POD factory out there that can put out a decent photo book, with good paper and nice photographic reproduction.

The search continues.

On a happier note, I submitted a montage of Kitty #1, 2, 3, & 4 to a local photo contest yesterday.  Tomorrow  I’m attending a workshop given by the judge, Robbert Flick.  He wants to see a portfolio of each participant’s work.  Me?  I’m taking my SoFoMoBo book!

May 26, 2008

SoFoBoMo2008 PDF available

Filed under: books — Tags: — ejeschke @ 10:31 am

I’ve updated my SoFoBoMo page to include a direct link to the PDF.  I don’t know why I forgot to upload that–probably too busy rushing to get the thing done and getting it up on Issuu.  Anyway, I had made two versions with the intention of doing so.  The print version with 300 ppi images clocks in at 40MB, which seemed a tad on the large side for downloads.  The web version PDF weighs in at 11MB.  Now that you are forwarned as to the size, if you’re still interested, here it is.

May 22, 2008

The VioVio Vivisection

Filed under: books, workflow — Tags: , , — ejeschke @ 1:51 am

Ok, I admit I’m starting to obsess over this.  But I had to get to the bottom of it.  I realized that if I was going to compare the output from the inkjet with the various SoFoBoMo POD examples I’d be receiving I’d have to do it with a little more rigor.  So, forget the loupe.  I made an inkjet print on my HP9180 and scanned it at 2400 dpi.  I then scanned the book image also at 2400 dpi.  Both the inkjet print and the book images were printed from the same file at the same size and resolution (300 ppi).  Thus, I’m oversampling at around 8X.  I then took a 1200×1200 crop from each and then downsampled those to 600×600.  This gives a decent size image for the web, while still showing the basic structure of the print at a 50% view.

Here then are the results. [Drum roll ...] First, the HP9180 print:

HP9180 print scanned 8X oversampling, cropped at 50%

Then, the VioVio print:

VioVio book print scanned 8X oversampling, cropped at 50%

I mean, it’s night and day.  I’ll grant you that at this magnification it’s very different from looking at the prints with the naked eye, but this really explains everything about why the VioVio images look so “rough”.  And, yes, I know that I should expect better output from the inkjet.

But, my question still is: did VioVio print this correctly, according to the best resolution that their printer could do?

I would love it if someone could repeat this experiment with their SoFoBoMo book from, say, viovio, mypublisher, blurb, shared ink, etc.

May 20, 2008

VioVio halftoning

Filed under: books, workflow — Tags: , , — ejeschke @ 11:09 pm

VioVio halftoning, originally uploaded by Eric Jeschke.

Key: R20080520-225624-levels

In the comments to my post on the VioVio experience, part deux, Martin Doonan made a couple comments that got me thinking about why the images in the VioVio printed book seem poor.  I said I’d try to post a shot of what I was seeing through a loupe.

Here it is.  Even though it’s a pretty hurried poor macro shot in bad light through a cheap loupe, you can basically see the VioVio printer halftoning pattern very clearly.  And I will note that there is absolutely no color to be seen anywhere.  This yields a very neutral print.  No, color is not really the issue here, methinks, but rather the apparent resolution of the printer screen (in LPI).  It appears to be rather coarse, frankly.  At least compared to my inkjet prints.  Tomorrow I’ll print out a copy of the image on my HP9180 and take the same picture through the loupe so we can compare.  Here is the original.  BTW, the images were prepped in the document for 300 DPI, as their instructions suggested.

Back to the color issue, I’m still left wondering why they printed it in black and white when their web site said that books with images should be printed in color.  I did check the color box.  I know that this may produce unwanted color casts, but isn’t it also that case that sometimes printers do a better job of B&W prints by using color dithering?  Perhaps they made a mistake.  Time to see what their customer service is like.

I’ll keep you posted.

Older Posts »

Blog at WordPress.com.