Over the course of the last month, I have had a very unique experience with two huge catalog clients both of whom deal with digital in completely different ways that ultimately leads to the same end – maximizing the immediacy that digital provides. All this immediacy seems to overshadow something that is much more important in terms of quality and cost on the backend. Many would argue that film is dead and digital is the new messiah for everyone in the publishing industry, with the assumption that quality control is at its highest and cost at its lowest. This can hold true until the retouching bill comes and account execs are scrambling to explain why it costs more to retouch a digital image than it does to: shoot film, process, and scan an image that requires much less retouching on the backend. What we should be saying is that the TIFF is dead and RAW is the new savoir where we can help to improve upon image manipulation without affecting image quality and color accuracy, all the while improving productivity.
First and foremost the image must be shot at the proper exposure. We all know this. This is nothing new to the science of photography. We all know that with Color negative and Color reversal films we had the latitude to push or pull to a certain degree and knew the level of quality that we could expect as a result of that manipulation. With digital there is less latitude; which results in the very real problem of noise. This becomes more apparent if the image file has been underexposed. We then have a problem with the file being far too thin to accurately reproduce the colors in print, which requires that additional work must be done in post production to accurately match the colors to the client’s product. When the image is slightly overexposed there may be problems with skin tone, but it is likely that there is enough information in the mid-tone region to have a little more flexibility with the file than if it were underexposed.
It is a big obstacle, being on the artistic end of a very technical process that requires a conversion to a format that we have very little knowledge of – CMYK. The closest we come technically is RGB but the conversion has a very big impact on how the file is rendered and exposure plays a very important role in making sure that the conversion process goes smoothly. Typically we don’t have to worry about that end of the process because it was always handled in the dark corners of some prepress facility. But photographers are relying more on a false sense of flexibility with digital and the bills are getting higher, and the execs are asking for answers, and the prepress operators are pointing fingers at the origin. The photographer just got a hold of a bad tech who thinks that adding a stop and a half to the EC (exposure compensation) ticker in Capture One Pro makes that under exposed image OK and from that moment on the photographer now believes that he can underexpose all of his images and his Digital Tech can fix it. “Crap In = Crap Out”. If it looks bad going in, it’s going to look bad going out.
So now the publisher flies a guy out to the location to have him oversee the files for a few days. On the second leg of our shoot we had one such guy who brought up all the old problems of digital. He brings up the same issues that we’ve known about and have dealt with for many years as if they are newly found quirks – Moiré, contrast and saturation. And then it all becomes painfully clear that the publishers are very new to digital as well. In fact it is only their second time doing digital.
Of course, it comes as no surprise that they are asking for processed TIFFS. There are two reasons behind this. First and foremost, they don’t have a clue about RAW. They have used Adobe’s RAW converter but were not at all impressed with what it looked like just out of the box. But what they don’t understand is that it is not a program that should be used by solely relying on the programs presets. Secondly, on the first test they did with digital, the photographer would only deliver processed files. Why? Because the photographer was trying to control his artistic vision – on catalog images. So this became their rationale for not wanting RAW files.
I have no qualms about bruising egos. The prepress guys need training on working with
RAW. They live in the stone-age of digital and are overwhelmed with how it all works. Furthermore, this makes them all very hesitant and resistant to working with new formats. But provide them with the training and knowledge that they lack and you may find that they can hit the ground running with the new technology. Retouchers working with RAW can process three separate images with three separate exposures – one for skin, one for background, one for product and then merge them all in post-production with half the effort required when doing it in Photoshop. 1st round color can work on getting the RAW file to near perfect exposure, contrast and color temperature in order to bring out the most detail in the colors that they are responsible for matching. Every phase of the post-production process becomes simplified and finally they achieve a greater degree of control over the final product, without losing the photographers vision in the process. Not only are settings maintained in Capture One Pro, but we can also include a JPG as a reference guide for how the images should look in exposure and color temperature.
Back in the good old days of film, the photographers would send their film to a lab. The lab handled the processing, usually with the help of the first assistant who had clip tested all the film during the shoot. After processing, the film went to the client and the photographer was more often than not, out of the picture at this point. We’ve cut out the middle-man and have taken the processing straight to the press. The false sense of security that the photographers have with digital and the lack of training on the prepress end has lead to widespread confusion as to how this all works. Someone needs to bridge that gap between photographer and prepress.
This is where a good Digital Tech comes in – someone who understands what goes on at the press. They have to be able to help provide feedback about how an image is going to look in print. But not in a way that is going to be impede that artistic process. In the end you have to let the photographer shoot what he wants but the Digital Tech needs to make the photographer aware of the problems that he could be facing. This does not have to be a highly technical process where the tech signs off on each image as they are shot. What it really comes down to is adhering to the same professional sensibilities and guidelines that worked with traditional film photography: Watch the histogram. Know how to read a histogram! Keep the highlights and shadows within a reasonable gamut.
Every company is looking at digital to help save money. Art Directors who love the immediacy and hear that it’s cheaper are quick to jump on it without concrete understanding of the media. All they know is that they can do their job easier and quicker, but fail to understand that what you see on screen is not necessarily what you get in print. Soon they find themselves in trouble with their bosses trying to explain why the costs for digital, in the long-run, have not gone down at all and in some cases have been more costly than film. Digital, if done right, can be more cost effective and productive than film ever was, but we as an industry have to recognize the importance of a good Digital Technician and the role that he plays in the process.
