"Make it look good": An Architectural Assignment

"Make it Look Good": An Architectural Assignment

When I first picked up a camera, I thought it would be incredibly easy to get great results. After all, we are inundated with compelling images, commercial and otherwise, everywhere we look and we tend to take it for granted that they just happen that way. For a while, I thought I was right. Really, I was just lucky, and used Velvia. If it weren’t for my early “successes,” I doubt I would have given my camera, and photography in general, much further attention.

My realization came with black and white (landscape) photography, where the tones present in the developed film are rarely where the photographer wants them to be in the final print. I was so disheartened by what I got from my first few B+W sheets, I nearly gave it up completely. Then, I opened up Ansel Adams’ “The Print” and found a “before” shot that looked much like what I was getting. If Adams wasn’t getting it right out of the camera, how the heck should I? Later, I found the same sort of thing in Bruce Barnbaum’s “The Art of Photography.” So, my approach to photography ever since has been: get it close, and try not to lose anything on the film/chip.

Without a doubt, I would not be where I am today, photographically, if it weren’t for my understanding that photographs rarely come out looking “perfect,” or the way I envision them. So long as I have all the tonal information I want, I’m happy. The (digital) darkroom is as important as the film I choose and the time I shoot. This brings me to the actual photograph for discussion:

Were it not for my experiences with black and white, it probably would have gone in the trash, and I would have been in a tough situation. I had other shots, but this one, at least in my head, had the most potential! As it was, I didn’t even hesitate. I scanned it, and set to work… and there was a lot of it. My initial plan was to photograph the building in evening side light and catch the trees out front in full leaf. But, seeing that the sun would be totally blocked by sky scrapers across the street, I decided on a night shot. Not only would this create a moody atmosphere, it would also play down the dull leafless trees that are the norm in April, when the client needed the shot. I needed something else though, something that would instantly attract attention like a good commercial image should. The solution: Fuji T64, perfect for punchy midnight blue hues when used in natural waning light.  I was also lucky that there were clounds that evening to give some density to the sky.              

Usually, the client is looking for something specific when they hire a photographer,but in this situation, I had free reign. I had NEVER used tungsten film before, and did not know exactly what to expect. Caveat #1: I certainly do not recommend this approach to anyone shooting anything important. The more you know and can control in a shoot, the better it will be. But like I said, there were no stipulations, and I had other shots. Caveat #2: always challenge yourself and experiment, good things happen.

The battle plan:

 The color was pretty much spot on. The biggest hurdle would be cloning and cleaning. While the building certainly has potential, there is a lot of garbage that distracts. The building, in the heart of downtown Edmonton, had been derelict for a number of years, and the client moving in wanted to revitalize it. 

The result after many hours of editing:

At this point, the client is pleased, and the large inkjet print is radiant. The job, however, is not complete.

A new owner, means  new signage for the building.  Unfortunately, it isn't ready in time for the shoot, but I indicated that I could add it in digitally.  With three point sources of light, it wouldn't be an easy task to make it look realistic.

Step 1: clone out the old sign.  I thought it would be easy, but lining up the bricks made it more difficult.
Step 2: insert logo graphic (this is were layers play a huge role). Prior to this I had been working directly on the image, saving copies as I go.  Text and logo are inserted as two separate layers.
Step 3: create shadows and "sign" look.  Each shadow was created as an independent layer to get the precise interaction for all three light sources.
Step 4: The logo needs to be lit from beneath.  Just dodging and burning.

Pretty good, in fact, the client liked it so much, that they decided to have me create a new logo for them as well.  Everything was great, until it got sent to the (offset) printer.  

What I learned, and what I didn't know about commercial printing

I learned quite a lot with this project.  Never before had I used this kind of film, cleaned an image so heavily, and worked with layer properties so extensively, but reproducing this image (~15,000 copies) would be up to the commercial printing press contracted by the client.  I knew what my inkjet was capabale of, but did not know what the offset printer could handle.  Fortunately, Adobe Photoshop has a handy tool built right in for proofing offset pinters:

View-->Proof-->Working CMYK + Gamut Warning  

YIKES! As you can see, the results are startling. What about a high volume Chromira or Lightjet?  Same thing.  No matter where I took the image, those shades of blue could not be reproduced.  While the commercial image looked OK (though green shifted) it had lost the impact of the original.  Luckily, because of the heavy blue color cast created by the T64 film, few people would know what it "should" look like, anyway.