The Process!
Let's be blunt -- plain is boring. I like images that are a different and are unafraid to be shown. This page is mostly for photographers, a page that details the technicalities and general processes of photography. In other words, the following page will outline the life of a typical "Paul Sebesta, Great Basin Wilds photograph" -- a process that begins in my head to its final end as a common print. I created this page to provide a technical insight on my photography process(es), as well answering a few questions regarding the "behind the scenes" jargon of my work. In addition, there is another thing to know ...
...To be completely honest, it is this aspect of "photography" that I find mostly uninteresting. I receive emails on an almost daily basis from people interested in the technical details behind my images. I guess like anything, a road doesn't build itself. In essence, this page was created to satisfy that group of individuals. So, please bear with me as I catalog this information for you. Thoughts aside, I hope you as a viewer can take something away from this page, whether it be learning how to produce your own quality photographs, or simply getting to know me and my uncomplicated way of doing things, a little bit better! In a nutshell, this page showcases the following information:
1) The motivation behind each and every "Great Basin Wilds" image
2) The technical process of getting an image to the printer
3) The technical aspects of image editing through Photograph to final print output
4) A brief word of note regarding mattes and frames. Lastly, I open my camera bag to show all of you the equipment I use to produce a "Great Basin Wilds" photograph.
Before I get started, allow me to begin with a frequently asked question:Why does all this "backroom drama" bore you?
Here is the answer in one minute or less ... I believe every picture begins and ends with inspiration. Without this common ingredient, a photograph is worth nothing. Without inspiration, or some sort of drive to capture the world before you, "photos" become little more than mere collections of light, or compositions of pixels printed onto a piece of paper. Without inspiration, this stale conclusion, along with everything else added to the product, become nothing more than tools to get the job done. Without inspiration, there is little meaning. Think about this. What would Ansel's "Tunnel View" be worth without inspiration? Despite what some photographers like to believe, a picture can only sometimes benefit from fancy and expensive gear. This is so long as the photographer behind them believes it so. The same principle goes for a picture that "benefits" from celebrity status. Often times, said inspiration is quickly lost behind a dollar bill ... the cent value, if you will. Sometimes the end product stimulates inspiration. For other people, it is the challenge behind light's manipulation that renders motivation. While these are will and good, and to each their own, sometimes the meaning behind their images are lost. The possible dollar value can be quite consuming for some "photographers." I have seen quite a few images that are damn good, and I have also met quite a few snapshots that have been pushed using wallets full of cash to impress naive curators and spectators. While photographs will always be subjective, it is in this case that inspiration may no longer be needed if cash is involved! In these instances, it seems like the photograph, the effort, the scene, and the subject receives the proverbial rear-end. Simply put, without a "drive" or a motivation, an inspiration, a photograph can render nothing for the viewer. People cannot force people to see pictures a certain way, but people see another person's passion brighter than day. I don't have to work overly hard to find and capture the images I do. I do not push myself to be higher than the rest of the photographic chain. I do not think of myself as a higher grade of human simply because I know how to navigate a few buttons, see light in a certain way, or the tough ability to adjust a tripod stand. I do, however, love my subjects more than life itself. I am confident that you will see my love for Nevada through my photographs. Sometimes, that is reward enough.
(1) Drive Behind the Photo
Storytelling is what I do best! The following story spans a time frame of about fifteen years, a time when I first discovered how to view the world behind a camera. As a kid, I traveled extensively with my father; at the age of ten, I had camped in sub-zero temperatures beneath mighty mountain peaks and found great pleasure in day hikes throughout the Basin. At the age of fourteen I could have likely survived on my own on raw meat and fish. Broken bones and canker sores equalled the pursuit of wild trout, or a set of remote petroglyphs! My father was surprised I could navigate the terrain without having seen it before. Getting lost was not an insult. It was pure joy. Deserts, mountains, coastlines ... it didn't matter. From the day I was born, I was granted a privilege to splendor in the great wonders our earth has granted us. So far in my 29 year lifetime, I've been to 32 states, 14 National Parks, traveled hundreds of thousands of miles of highway with many more to come! As a teen, I found refuge, a catalyst, and strong medium in photography that gave me great satisfaction. I began my endeavors with a simple disposable camera and soon upgraded to real gear. The very K1000 I began my days with sits in the closet framed by dust and lint. I greatly believe that my exposure to the outdoors at such a young age provided me with a "drive" that extends to each and every one of my images today. A typical "GBW image" ALWAYS begins with a drive of inspiration. Every photo on this website was taken with this drive. There've been many a times when I've been at home, looking out my window to the mountains, only to witness the sky bursting into color; the heavens light up and although the color is brilliant, the scene unmistakably welcome and breathtaking, it remains just that. A pretty scene, but nothing more. The point? For me to go and capture that life's moment, I must be inspired. A drive has to fill me to pack my camera bag and head for my subject. If I feel nothing for the subject, or am in the wrong state of mind, the scene is left to history. As is the case with many photographers, I hate to see such light and moments escape from me. However, I NEVER go just for the sake of adding to my collections. I NEVER go just to please a certain audience. Most importantly, I NEVER go "just to capture that light," or as a fellow shooting buddy would say ... "just to fill my gallery." Truth be told, I can't count the number of times I've kicked myself for not going to capture some very breathtaking light shows. However, my intuitions and my own personal process if you will, has never steered me wrong (yet!).
In all honesty, the experience of enjoying those life's moments are worth more to me than the images themselves. A quality picture is simply a bonus. I am fortunate to live in one of the most beautiful and underappreciated regions in the world; for this, I am granted with a blank slate, a new perspective on beauty, life, and its bringings. Through these experiences, not only have I learned about the areas I love the most, but I am able to share these same happenings with all of you, my viewers. Truly, this is the aspect of "photography" I enjoy the most.
(2) Processing of the Image
Once the fun is over, the "dark side" of photography begins. Most photographers state that photography only involves taking pictures 20% of the time. Well, that's about right. I spend close to 60% of my time in the editing process. What does that mean? Unfortunately, there's no other way to put it ... I spend 60% of my time in front of a computer. (For those of you wondering, the remaining 20% is spent uploading, promoting, and sharing images over the web and at my outdoors venues.) Before I set out, I usually have an idea of where and what I want to do. If I don't, I spend some time to scout light, clouds, and weather patterns for pleasant composition. Because I hate computers, I try to expose my photos as best as I can in the field so I spend as little time as possible behind a monitor at home. This includes color accuracy through white balance, contrast, saturation, and correct exposure. Truth be told, the digital age has revolutionized photography for everyone. Shooting a great picture is much easier with digital cameras because a user can control such factors listed above; the digital age grants leniency and provokes imagination using filters and other built-in features that can be beneficial to the photographic process! Needless to say, this is a great thing for all photographers. Regardless if I shoot film or digital, the end reward is the experience of the shoot. A winning-"saleable" photo is merely a bonus.
Film and Digital Processing
Once my photo is captured to my liking, it goes straight to processing. If I am shooting film, nine times out of ten you will find me exposing slide film in grains of no more than 100 ISO. The top three films I use in order are as follows: Kodachrome E100G VS (or KX), Velvia 100F, and Velvia 50. When it comes to film, I am very particular about what I purchase. On a few occasions, I'll pop in a roll of other films: Velvia 400F for extremely tough night shoots, Elitechrome 100 which is similar to the old Kodachrome 25 & 64 and a few monochrome print films, preferably Acros 100, Ilford Pan F 50 or T-MAX 100. Every once in a blue moon, I'll even pop in Agfa Scala 200, the only monochrome slide film on the market! Why do I have so many film choices? The bulk of my film work has been shot on the first three films listed above with the others rarely seeing the inside of my camera bag. Once I expose my rolls, I use Fuji film mailers, which I buy upon purchase of my film. With the new digital age, finding labs that process film has become increasingly difficult. Also, the mailers insure that my film is processed by the best namebrand processers notably companies that have been in the business for awhile. As a side note, if I an image is exposed on a monochrome print film, it requires a special processing that can only be done via these companies.
On the digital side, all of my corrections are usually made in the field. This includes any filtering if needed, along with color adjustments and white balance issues prior to the shoot. This insures the original file, whether it be JPEG, TIF, or RAW, keeps their adjustments as they appear accurately in Photoshop. Cropping and resizing on the other hand, is always done in Photoshop. File types are completely dependant on the photo's perpetuated use; 80% of the time, my photos stay as TIF or RAW images - a type I regularly use for fine prints larger than 8x10. I use JPEGs for smaller images no larger than an 8x10, or for use in magazines, calendars, or stock photography to save memory.
I find the "weeding process" the most fun aspect of my photographic process! Both digital and film require different lengths of time depending on how many images I come home with. For film, my average time in front of the lightbox can take in excess of 2 hours, time well-spent examining which photos are worth presenting as an end product. During this "weeding process," I use an 8X loupe to examine any flaws caused by the labs. Such flaws include lens flare, unwanted spots, chemical blotches, and machine lines, for example. In this process, I am my own worst enemy! Truth be told, I am extremely picky and overly critical in terms of which images become winners. I never use the what I call "the ugly duckling process," or, trying to save a hopeless image. In other words, if I have a bad image, it's scrapped right then and there. Please know that I never change or "manipulate" an "ugly duckling" into that beautiful swan. An image destined for the trash can must meet one of my following criteria, or flaws...
If any of my images comes away with at least ONE of these flaws, it goes into the garbage can or gets deleted without second thought. They say a photographer's most useful tool is his wastebasket. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Out of a full day's shooting, or a standard 36 exposure roll, I usually average 6-7 "saleable" images after this "weeding process" is through. In other words, less than ten actually make it to this website. Sounds expensive? Sounds time-consuming? Trust me, it is, but it is worth it. Every photo you see on this site was done using this careful evaluation process. In addition, I also keep in mind the potential improvements Photoshop could make to a particular image. Color casts and bad contrast are notoriously hard to fix, if not impossible, without ruining the images. To make it crystal clear: if I don't get it right the first time, it goes in the trash. Other times I will put Photoshop to work using another idea for an image. Although rare, it does happen.
{3) Input to Output
When I'm ready to "bite the bullet" so to speak, I am ready for all-day date with my computer. If I have film, I start the digitizing process by devoting completely and fully to getting those less-than-ten film images, or hordes of bracketing files, as close as possible on the computer screen. For my slides, I use a Nikon Coolscan V to scan in my transparencies, importing them onto the latest version of Photoshop CS. If I have monochrome negatives, I send them in for special digital processing at my local photo lab, high-end drum scanners that can output an image as a 40x60 print. Slide or negative, each image is scanned in at 4000DPI and left at that resolution for printing, insuring every image offers as much detail as possible on the output. All of my images are kept as uncompressed 55MB TIFs, and all image sizes are adjusted individually according to height and width dimesions without ever changing the resolution. Again, this insures a quality print and absolutely no loss of data. My regular scanning process usually takes up to two hours to make absolutely sure I didn't miss any images in the forementioned weeding process. Rarely are any images scrapped at this point. Unfortunately, even with the best film scanners, information is still lost through the digital change, which means even more work for most film photographers.
On the other hand, my digital files rarely need fixing. The brunt of the work done to my digital files are things I cannot do with my camera, such as levels adjustments, dodge & burn, and layer work. Saturation changes and the occasional clone stamping take up the majority of my time. Although I can adjust saturation, cropping, and sharpness on my camera, I find these features much more easier to do on Photoshop. Once my scanning and image upload is complete, utter devotion begins in the final editing process or what I call... "the torture rack."
Boys and girls, I am about to outline how every GBW image comes to life! (Yes, I'm not afraid to share my procedures.) Keep in mind that not all of my images go through this exact order. For example, sometimes, I may need a dodge & burn or a clone stamp session in between. Please know that all my changes are made before the final print size!
NOTE: I will not go over how I make my images "web-ready." If you'd like to how I get my images razor-sharp for web viewing, I prefer that you email me. (After all, a guy's gotta have some secrets!)
While these steps seem a bit short, it often takes about a half-hour to finish one photo. As mentioned earlier, I like to spend as little time as possible in front of a monitor, hence the reason I strive so hard in the field to get the file right the first time. Despite this, there is always work to be done back at home in the editing process. All in all, this entire session takes up an average of twenty hours. Some images individually (depending on the complexity of the image) may take up to three hours to digitally finalize, or, ready for output. However, most of my images take an average of one hour each. Perhaps, the only drawback to today's fast evolving digital world of photography is that it's difficult to display work over the web due to the limitations of the Internet and many types of monitors. Despite hours of work involved, color is still slightly altered what you may say on your screen, may not be exactly what appears on mine. This leads me to the Photoshop debate. Let's detour for a moment ...
I've met many a creative person who use Photoshop to its absolute limits. They utilize as many tools as possible to create beautiful, if not genius works of art! I respect that. On the other hand, I've met many true "purists" who have sworn to banish Photoshop in its entirety; these purists fathom the concept of manipulating an image as "faking a photograph," or, bringing a bad photo to life. The end product is not the "true" and "pure" image from the negative. Again, I respect that. As for myself, I'm a realist and a bit of traditionalist at the same time. I strive to use natural light and to keep that natural light in that image. As such, the brunt of my manipulations never influence that concept. Most importantly, I never advertise a photograph that is not true! This perhaps is the most important factor one must ask himself. What you see in my images are my personal stories and knowledge behind the camera. Truth remains untampered in my images no matter how much Photoshop can offer today's shootist. I personally try my best to produce an image that is clever, beautiful, and strikes a key with others, or better yet - a combination of all of those things! Whatever one decides to do with Photoshop is one's own business. However, let honesty ring true above all in every photograph!
(4) Final Output of the Image
When editing is complete, the time comes for image output. This is a tricky topic and a topic that will likely never be solved as long as there are photographers left in the world. Why? Before I answer why in about thirty seconds, people need to understand why digital input butts heads with digital output. Information, no matter how extensive, is still lost due to a little thing called calibration. It all boils down to this:The color and image you see on your monitor may be different from what your printer sees without calibration. Calibrating your monitor accurately is a timely process, but one of the most important processes you can do. After spending hours to weeks readying my images for output, it's downright heartwrenching to see all that accurate work lost because my printer calibrations were different from something as simple as what I see on my monitor. Printing calibrations are completely out of our control. After all, every printer is calibrated to its own uncontrollable setting. Calibrating a monitor, however, is strictly up to you. My monitor is calibrated extremely close with my printer to insure the color I see on the monitor is the color my printer will register on the photograph. This is a sticky situation, because even the best monitor calibrations still won't exactly match a printer's calibrations. However, the closer you get, the better and more accurate your photographs will print. I've spent a little over a year off-and-on calibrating settings to my printer, and although I am close, I still haven't quite solved this little dilemma. Honestly, my prints are as close as possible to matching what you see on the screen and calibration is an issue that I will probably still continue with to tackle for as long as I shoot a camera. The concept is like trying to touch every cloud in the sky at once. Even though it's physically impossible, you still try and try again.
Now, onto that answer. The files you input into your computer will usually differ with what your printer wants to see. The standard output resolution on a printer is 300DPI. This means to produce a quality photograph on a printer from your digital file, 300DPI is the minimum required value on your photo editor. Most printers work on 300DPI, therefore when you're ready to print, punching in '300 DPI' on your editor will satisfy most printers, regardless of calibration. Therefore for most shooters, resizing images to produce a sharp, quality print is often tedious and to some, a bit confusing. There are hundreds of books on this very topic, and while I could elaborate further about how to produce a print, my viewers only need to know what I do to produce a print ready for your home.
- To do this job, I use is a Canon i9900 Photo Printer; this printer is reliant on eight ink tanks, necessary to produce a brilliant, long-lasting print on the right paper. (We'll get to paper in a minute) The largest output on this equipment is 13 x 19.
- Images larger than this size are taken to a professional photo lab thirty miles outside of where I live. This is a reasonable trade-off considering most of the images I sell are 13 X 19 or below. Any images taken to taken to the lab yield image sizes up to 40 X 60. Of course, to produce a razor-sharp photograph at these sizes require files that have been carefully adjusted for large output. If I need to produce a photo of these sizes, I spend upwards of an hour adjusting my files to match this criteria. As insurance, I also adjust saturation and sharpness to insure maximum quality!
- All of the prints outputted onto my photo printer are produced on Canon Photo Paper Pro, one of three top-tier photo papers on the market. This paper produces an image with outstanding tonal range and color depth. And relax ... in case you're wondering about fading, any print made on Photo Paper Pro has a permenance up to 120 years and fade-proof rating up to 70 years. Although a few photo papers on the market can render fade-proof images upwards of 300 years, such papers also require a printer that needs to be adjusted regularly, set in a temperature controlled room, and cost about the same as a new Jaguar. Obviously as a home based photographer, this is out of the question; the cost of sending my images off to such a company that has one of these printers is foolish. Therefore, I consider 120 years a reasonable permanence! After all, if your photo will outlive you, then I've done alright. All of my prints are made using this paper in either glossy or matte lusters. I can print three sizes: "Tiny" size (4 x 6), "Medium" size (8 x 10), and my largest "Double" size at 13 x 19.
Special Image Sizes
During the editing process, I am careful to produce images that will fit a standard-sized frame. Common frame sizes include: 5x7, 8x10, 12x16, 13x19 and 18x24. Also, my special Panoramas are also made to fit long-Panoramic frames. Most of these include a 9-12" height and an 18-26" width sold by a few select frame shops. The bad news is that most frame shops will need to specially-make panoramic frames. This is why my Panoramic shots are individually priced so they fit your budget.
(5) Finalize with Matting and Framing In the past, I sold all of my work as matted prints offering various framing options. Unfortunately, this service was discontinued on the website, but remains fully operational at my outdoor photo venues! I carry upwards of fifty matted prints at my photo venues. All of these mattes come in various shades of white such as, Ghost, Smoke, Spanish, Royal and Plain Matte White. Most of the mattes that come with my venue prints are standard cardboards at a a thickness of .035" and textile mattes at a usual thickness of .046". I even offer a few select prints with cotton 'RagMats.' Matted prints with 'ragmats' are considerably higher-prices because of the cost of the matte. 'Ragmats' are double-sided 100% cotton boards with a fade-proof up to eighty years; these mattes are museum-grade and acid & lignin-free products. Needless to say, finding them is not easy. If you happen across one of my venues and see a print with a 'Ragmat' attached, it's probably a good idea to purchase it! Please note: matted prints are only available at my photo venues.
Also, even though I no longer offer framing as a service, I always have at least six framed photographs available for purchase at my photo venues only. All of these framed photos are wooden-black 16x20 and 18x24 frame sizes and on occasion, 2.5" cherry wood in 18x24. The glass used on my frames are museum grade and UV protected insuring that the print does not fade whatsoever throughout its life. If you are interested in a framed photo but cannot attend one of my selling venues, please email me. As a general rule, I've found that standard black frames look the best with any of my pieces. Most of the frames I use are black wood and only on occasion, black metal with a frame width of no more than 2". Widths larger than 2" become intrusive and only work on certain subjects, such as my abstracts or Bodie Collection prints. My landscape images are only framed with thin widths and if I can find them, walnut or cherry woods. Please note: Custom framing is only done if specified on the photo's page! Otherwise, all prints sold at Great Basin Wilds come in standard sizes. This makes it easier on you and gives you the liberty of finding standard sizes at any frame shop! Finally, here is the last question to wrap things up: "Why don't you sell framed prints on the website?" The truth is simply due to cost efficiency. There is a difference between a "good" framer and a "great" framer! Great framers in my area are not only hard to find but are also located a long distance away. The cost of sending them out becomes a factor. In addition, I believe the process of choosing the right frame, whether it be color, texture, or choice of wood, should be yours. Although I can provide you a few ideas, the end decision and how you wish to display my work should be entirely at your discretion. Thanks for reading!
