I've been thinking a lot about proofs lately, as I've been working on the image selection for an upcoming exhibition at ViewPoint Galley.
Proofs have always been part of my creative process, initially with
film images, and now with digital. While working on the upcoming show, I
came across a great example of the difference between proofs and
finished images.
 |
| Digital infrared original, 18 frame stitch |
Above
is a proof of a photograph of Andre I made in 2008. To even see the
image I needed to do a fair amount of processing as it is stitched
together from 18 frames; that being said, there was no "interpretation"
of the image - it was processed with all the other photos from the day
to a base standard (a bright white with detail, a rich black with
detail, and good contrast). In the end, it was one of the photographs
that made the cut; after renaming the original RAW files, and the proof
image to reflect the source files, the proof image was added to my
catalogue, along with proofs of every other image from the session.
 |
| Digital infrared original, 18 frame stitch |
The
finished image has a very different tone from the proof; instead of
being processed as one photograph of many, when finishing an image, the
entire focus is on strengthening the photograph; shifting the emphasis
from one place to another, removing distractions and ensuring all the
elements in the photograph support the same message. In this case, in
addition to some minor cropping, more than a dozen local adjustments
were made, the most obvious one is the treatment of Andre's hair.
When
looking between the proof and the finished image, I see one of the most
effective examples from my own work of the value of proofing (to permit
quick evaluation of an image with a minimum of investment) and the
worth of a finished image (to permit the realization of the potential of
a photograph).
