the Editor’s Proof Sheet · After our competition meetings, I’ve frequently looked ... picture...

October 2015 Volume 66 #1 http://www.greatneckcameraclub.org

Manhasset-Great Neck Color Wheel October 2015

Message from the President

The Board and Officers of The Manhasset-Great Neck Camera Club would like to welcome all mem-bers, old and new to the 64th “running” of our club. Over those many years the club has trans-formed from slide photos only to the latest tech-nology, digital. Prints too remain a large part of what we do.

Our objective for the coming year is to advance member knowledge of photography as well as in-crease member participation in the various func-tions and operations of the club. If anyone is truly interested in helping out, please let me know at [email protected]. This year, in addition to competitions, we plan to have field trips that actually work, in terms of happening. Haig Hacha-doorian, Vice President is in charge of this feature and if anyone has any ideas, please see Haig (or me if he is unavailable).

We plan a full year of interesting and helpful activi-ties. Please join in and help.

George Novello

MGNCC President

Dates for 2015 2016 Club Year

October 16th Wednesday – Year in review show.

October 28 Competition

October 12th Competition

October 26th Program

November 9th Competition (2nd Monday)

November 23rd Program (4th Monday)

December 14th Competition

December 28th Program

January 11th Competition

January 25th Program

February 8th Competition

February 22nd Program

March 14th Competition

March 28th Program

April 11th Competition

April 25th Program

May 9th Competition

May 23rd Best of Year Competition.

the Editor’s Proof Sheet

Printing and Display

After our competition meetings, I’ve frequently looked

at our prints and noticed a couple of things about them.

First, very many are impressive, I might say gorgeous,

particularly compared to digital projections. They are

clear, detailed, with subtle tone and color. But also, a

number of otherwise very fine prints looked better after

the meeting than when displayed and judged. I’ve

asked myself and some of our fine MGNCC photogra-

phers, as well as one of our judges—why? My discus-

sions have led me to the following thoughts about print-

ing, and more generally display technology.

Photography is about the perception of light; how it’s

structured, formed and displayed. From an artistic point

of view you can’t separate a picture from its display—

they’re synonymous.

(continued on page 2)

click here for our web site at

http://www.greatneckcameraclub.org


(continued from page 1)

The apparent quality difference between printed and dig-

itally projected images can be attributed to the resolution

of the display and to ‘pixel dumping’. The resolution for

the projected images (number of pixels per inch, PPI) is

about 72 PPI, while for prints it’s about 300 PPI—or 0.5

million versus 7 million pixels for an 8” x 10” picture—

a 1,400% difference! While it’s true that we’re at a

greater viewing distance from the large, projected im-

age, there is still a sizable disparity to overcome. The

structure of light from the projected pictures is lumpy or

more granular compared to prints.

My current cameras are 16 MP and 20 MP. I can only

digitally project a fraction of these pixels—most are

thrown away. This is pixel dumping. The technical name

for simply throwing away extra pixels and creating new,

compromised pixels, is called interpolation, and bicubic

convolution, used in our various photo editing programs,

does this somewhat smoothly and elegantly. But some

detail and subtlety of tonal and color variation is re-

duced. When combined with its lower resolution it’s not

surprising that a digitally projected picture lacks the

‘punch’ of a print.

Of course as a benefit, a lower resolution display offers

the photographer a much greater ability to crop an inter-

esting portion of a picture for presentation. A printed

picture though, requires greater photographic skill and

astuteness to capture a properly sized image. What can

be done about increasing the resolution of emitted dis-

plays? Well, it will require much greater resolution for

digital projectors and concomitantly greater demands on

our computers. This is happening, but it will be a few

years until this technological progress is readily availa-

ble.

Now, why do prints appear differently when examined

during judging and when looked at afterwards? It seems

that the answer lies in the nature of the light that we see.

We display our pictures at the MGNCC in two ways;

either through prints mounted in a light box, or by digi-

tal projection onto a screen. These represent two differ-

ent ways of deriving light from our pictures; for digital

projection it’s emitted light and for prints it’s reflected

light.

Emitted light, where colors are formed additively from

the R G B channels, is solely dependent on the color

temperature of the emitter; ambient light plays little or

no role in our perception of the image. A capable and

calibrated digital projector will produce much the same

image detail, tone and color regardless of the surround-

ings, and the image will closely (but, unfortunately, not

always) match the computer monitor on which the pic-

ture was edited.

A print, on the other hand, is solely dependent on the

ambient, reflective light of its surroundings. A subtrac-

tive process is used for printing, where the light is re-

flected from the background medium (the ground color,

usually white) and colored dots. It uses the C M Y K

(Cyan, Magenta, Yellow, Black ) complementary color

scheme for the colored inks used in printing the multiple

dots that make up the pixels (black was optional on early

printers as C M Y mixed in equal proportions creates

black).

And there, then, is the difference between seeing the

print during judging or after the meeting—a print exam-

ined in a light box is seen differently than in the ambient

light of the meeting room. During editing on a monitor,

it is seen in emitted light. It is the judgment of the pho-

tographer to adjust the final print to the anticipated dis-

play lighting.

The judgement of a print then is dependent on the light

under which it’s examined. The reflective characteristics

of the paper or medium; it’s gloss, weave, ink absorben-

cy, and whiteness influence the appearance of the print.

Add to this considerations of the ink pigments or dyes,

and their color pallet, and you see that there are many

variables that all effect the reflection of light.

What one of our judges suggested is that for competi-

tion, or any display for that matter, you need to know the

characteristics of the ambient light. It’s usually bright

and hard for judging in order to bring out the detail of

the print. For a gloss finished print this may highlight

bright areas disproportionality. He suggested that very

light areas be stopped-down so as not to appear blown

out or exaggerated.

The takeaway from this is that prints have greater detail,

tonal and color gradation that digital projections. That

there is a very basic difference between emitted and re-

flected light: the perception of emitted images is not in-

fluenced by ambient light, reflective print images, are.

Also, for practicality for competition, stop-down high-

lights.

My congratulations and admiration for those photogra-

phers at the MGNCC who excel with prints. Let me

know what you think at: [email protected].


Do Not Disturb

by Allen Michelson

Pan Lake Durant by Carl Friedman


Frau Blaucher by John Bruno waiting for dad2 by Anita Greenhut

Israeli White Flower by Peter Franzoni Sunset at the bridge by Kevin Burke


Royal

by Bob Ebenau

Asylum Cabinet

by BARABA FIELD

Walk in the Woods by

Colomba Spigner

”To consult the rules of composition

before making a picture is a little like

consulting the law of gravitation be-

fore going for a walk.”

I see something special and show

it to the camera. The moment is

held until someone sees it.

Then it is theirs


A Bit of Color by Eric Alliger

Thirsty Bear by Rosann Michelson

Majestic Mt Torres del Paine in Patagonia

by Jackson Lum

Nutzy by Irwin Zuckerman

DIGITAL COLOR SCORES

DIGITAL B&W SCORES (all class A)


TOTALED SCORE

# OF ENTRIES NAME

35.0 4 BRUNO, JOHN

34.0 4 NOVELLO, GEORGE

33.5 4 APPEL, GERALD

33.0 4 MICHELSON, ALLEN

32.0 4 PANDELAKIS, GEORGE

31.5 4 EBENAU, ROBERT

31.5 4 HACHADOORIAN, RONNY

31.5 4 LANCETTA, ARLENE

31.0 4 HALPERN, MONROE

31.0 4 HEANEY, LORRAINE

30.5 4 SPIGNER, COLOMBA

30.5 4 GOODFRIEND, PHYLLIS

30.0 4 GLASSER, SANDY

30.0 4 TRACEY, ROSE

29.0 4 TUJAK, LEO

28.0 4 FRIEDMAN, CARL

25.0 3 RUSSO, LINDA

24.0 3 HACHADOORIAN, HAIG R.

21.5 3 FIELD, BARBARA

16.0 2 STERNEMANN, PHYLLIS

14.0 2 WEISSMAN, JULIE

Class TOTALED

SCORE # OF ENTRIES NAME

A 33.0 4 FRANZONI, PETER

A 32.5 4 SPIGNER, COLOMBA

A 31.5 4 ALLIGER, ERIC

A 31.0 4 HALPERN, RICHARD

A 31.0 4 PANDELAKIS, GEORGE

A 30.5 4 MICHELSON, ROSEANN

A 29.5 4 ZUCKERMAN, IRWIN

B 31.5 4 GREENHUT, ANITA

B 31.5 4 LUM, JACKSON

B 31.0 4 SUSIN, JANET

B 30.5 4 FRIEDMAN, CARL

B 30.0 4 BURKE, KEVIN

B 30.0 4 HACHADOORIAN, RONNY

B 30.0 4 HEANEY, LORRAINE

B 29.5 4 TRACEY, ROSE

B 29.5 4 EBENAU, ROBERT

B 28.5 4 GLASSER, SANDY

B 28.0 4 REINHARDT, SY

B 28.0 4 TUJAK, LEO

B 15.5 2 STERNEMANN, PHYLLIS

B 15.0 2 WEISSMAN, JULIE

B 7.0 1 HALPERN, SUSAN

S 33.0 4 GOODFRIEND, PHYLLIS

S 32.5 4 BRUNO, JOHN

S 31.5 4 MICHELSON, ALLEN

S 31.0 4 HALPERN, MONROE

S 31.0 4 LANCETTA, ARLENE

S 30.5 4 NOVELLO, GEORGE

S 30.5 4 FIELD, BARBARA

S 30.0 4 APPEL, GERALD

S 25.5 3 RUSSO, LINDA


B&W PRINT SCORES

COLOR PRINT SCORES

PRINT CATEGORY CLASS TOTAL SCORE NAME # OF ENTRIES

BW A 32.50 APPEL, GERALD 4

BW A 31.50 SAGERMAN, RONALD 4

BW A 30.50 LANCETTA, ARLENE 4

BW A 29.50 GLASSER, SANDY 4

BW A 29.00 LEFF, MURRAY 4

BW A 16.50 FRIEDMAN, CARL 2

PRINT CATEGORY CLASS TOTAL SCORE NAME # OF ENTRIES

CP A 31.50 APPEL, GERALD 4

CP A 30.50 LEVINE, HARVEY 4

CP A 30.00 LANCETTA, ARLENE 4

CP A 29.00 LEFF, MURRAY 4

CP B 29.50 GLASSER, SANDY 4

CP B 16.50 FRIEDMAN, CARL 2

CP B 14.50 MANKOWITZ, NAOMI 2

We’d like to invite you to send a

750 x 750 pixel digital image of your prints to

[email protected]

for reproduction in the ColorWheel

Include your name, category, and your picture’s title

PFLI Scores for Manhasset-Great Neck for October

Judges: Mike DiRenzo - Jim Grant - Bob Schmitz

(continued on next page)


BWA MURRAY LEFF Forest Falls 20

BWA ARLENE LANCETTA Footprints 21

BWA GERALD APPEL Cuban Young Woman 22

BWA RONALD SAGERMAN Ready To Go 22

BWA GERALD APPEL Long Peek 24

Total 109

BWB SANDY GLASSER South African Penquin 21

BWB SANDY GLASSER Take My Photo 21

Total 42

CPA ARLENE LANCETTA Ominous 21

CPA MURRAY LEFF Rain Shower 22

CPA GERALD APPEL Norwegian Damsel 22

CPA GERALD APPEL Soft Rear 24

CPA HARVEY LEVINE Young Gorilla 24

Total 113

CPB SANDY GLASSER Grazing Zebra 21

CPB SANDY GLASSER Malay Grandma 21

Total 42

DPA GERALD APPEL OLD BOAT 21

DPA BARBARA FIELD Princess 22

DPA MONROE HALPERN Intimate Lily 22

DPA PETER FRANZONI Isrealie Flower 23

DPA ERIC ALLIGER Cardinal 24

Total 112


PFLI Scores for Manhasset-Great Neck for October

Judges: Mike DiRenzo - Jim Grant - Bob Schmitz

(continued from previous page)

DPAI I RICHARD HALPERN NYC Skyline 21

DPAI I ROSEANN MICHELSON Red Flower #1 21

DPAI I ARLENE LANCETTA LOLA 22

DPAI I ALLEN MICHELSON The Puffin 23

DPAI I PHYLLIS GOODFRIEND Sunflower 25

Total 112

DPAI II IRWIN ZUCKERMAN 0yster Catcher 21

DPAI II COLOMBA SPIGNER Rose 21

DPAI II GEORGE PANDELAKIS Iittle-Girl 21

DPAI II GEORGE NOVELLO Red & Yellow 24

DPAI II JOHN BRUNO The Anchorage 24

Total 111

DPB SANDY GLASSER Elands 21

DPB RONNY HACHADOORIAN Out for a Swim 21

DPB KEVIN BURKE tulip in the rain 21

DPB ROBERT EBENAU Last Lilly 23

DPB ANITA GREENHUT coconut 23

Total 109

DPBI I JANET SUSIN Trolley car vista 21

DPBI I REINHARDT SY TENTS 22

DPBI I LORRAINE HEANEY SAILBOAT 22

DPBI I SUSAN HALPERN MARKEN 22

DPBI I JACKSON LUM Grand Mosque of Abu Dhabi 24

Total 111

DPBI II LEO TUJAK Vases Street Luxembourg 20

DPBI II JULIE WEISSMAN water color 21

DPBI II ROSE TRACEY SPIDERY 23

Total 64


With the warmest of greetings

from the members of the MGNCC:

Send us your Birthday month at

[email protected]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY

RONNY HACHADOORIAN

HAPPY BIRTHDAY

JOHN BRUNO

HAPPY BIRTHDAY

SANDY GLASSER


2015-2016 Executive Board

President George Novello

Vice President Monroe Halpern

Editorial Vice President Bob Ebenau

Vice President of Library Affairs James Pelzer

Treasurer Allen Michelson

Recording Secretary Rose Tracey

Member at large Gerald Appel

Board of Directors

Program Chair George Novello

Rules Committee Co-Chairs George Novello

Monroe Halpern

Competition Chair Monroe Halpern

Hospitality Chair Dawn Steinberg

Membership Chair Rose Tracey

PFLI Delegates Suzan Goldstein,

Dale Goldstein

Field Trip Coordinators Phyllis Goodfriend

Harvey Levine

James Pelzer

Webmaster Janina Krach

1st Immediate Past President Haig Hachadoorian

2nd Immediate Past President Monroe Halpern

3rd Immediate Past President George Novello

Fellows Of The Manhasset Great Neck

Camera Club

*Eric Kahn, APSA, APFLI

*Herbert Goldschmidt

Jim Pion, AMC, FMC

*Joseph Boverman

*Sidney Goldstein, FPSA, FPFLI

Gerald Appel

* Deceased

the Editor’s Proof Sheet · After our competition meetings, I’ve frequently looked ... picture...

Documents

Transcript of the Editor’s Proof Sheet · After our competition meetings, I’ve frequently looked ... picture...