rlord reports

Observations on digital photography in graphic design
By David Gerratt, Principal, DG Communications
www.NonprofitDesign.com

In the 25-plus years of my work as a print (and now web) designer in the nonprofit and education sectors, I have worked with photography whose quality has ranged from cutting-edge professional (from artists such as Richard) to dreadful point-and-shoot (from somebody's Uncle Ned). You might imagine that I've learned a lot over the years about how to feature gorgeous photography, and how to hide or disguise Uncle Ned's work.

Let's cut to the chase: I have found that, in most cases, when you can afford to purchase high quality photography, it pays for itself. My job as a designer is to create impact. The photographer Walker Evans reminds us that "the eye traffics in feelings, not in thoughts." In working primarily with the nonprofit sector, I design publications and websites to educate the reader, of course, but also to provide a picture - metaphoric and literal - of the achievements of the organizations for which I work. Ultimately, one of the measures of my success is the degree to which people contribute to the continued success of the organization. Thus, my first order of business is to "make them look." And the best tool for that task is, nearly always, a genuinely compelling photograph.

Tools for effective communication

I have built my career as a communications specialist in a time of enormous technological
innovation. The fact that I can operate a successful design and communications business from my home office is testament to that. Without the Internet, high-speed computing, and a variety of design software, what I do would be impossible. An analogous revolution has happened in photography. With the invention of constantly improving digital cameras, photography has become more accessible to the public. A common mistake made by this public is to think that these wonderful tools replace skill and artistry. Uncle Ned can teach himself to use these tools, just as I can cook a meal. My kitchen is well equipped and I can follow a recipe, but try as I may, I can't begin to create what a fine chef can produce. We may begin with the same ingredients, but skill and vision and an experienced aesthetic set me and Uncle Ned apart from the chef and the professional photographer.

Though digital technology levels the field in some respects, such tools are put to best use in the hands of people who have not only the skills to use them, but also the artistry to do so. Anyone can take a snapshot with a digital camera. But an artist captures the essence of a moment. An artist shapes our experience using light and framing in ways that would never occur to most of us. An artist sees, understands, and transcribes so that we viewers can also understand.

About digital processing

All photos taken on a digital camera must be processed in PhotoShop before they can be evaluated or disseminated. This is the equivalent of what photo labs do with film. Every photo will require resizing and reformatting. Virtually every photo must be adjusted in a professional PhotoShop product before it can be incorporated in print or electronic media.

If the images that you provide to a designer have not been processed and adjusted by a PhotoShop technician, the designer will have to do them. And that will be expensive. The learning curve for PhotoShop is extremely high. To equal the efficiency with which a professional photographer or designer can perform the necessary adjustments is a skill that cannot be obtained by taking a PhotoShop class nor reading a book.

About digital photography

Digital photography has evolved such that many people can now afford cameras that provide images digitally large enough to meet the requirements of offset printing. For most reproduction uses, low-resolution images are sufficient. For virtually all media in which an image is projected rather than printed, low-resolution (72dpi, or dots per inch) images are sufficient. For all home or office inkjet and laser printers, 72dpi images reproduce well. Offset printing, on the other hand, requires images that are 300dpi (roughly four times as large) or higher.

A four- or five-mega pixel camera, set at its highest resolution, can provide photos that are large enough to reproduce a good-sized image on the printed page. A seven- or eight-mega pixel camera (or better) can provide images large enough to fill a standard 8.5 x 11 sheet. One caveat: a higher mega pixel count does not necessarily make one camera better than another; a cheap, 7-megapixel camera won't produce better images than a high-quality 5-megapixel camera, because the quality of the optics and sensors in the camera greatly affects the clarity and color fidelity of the images.

Digital photography has been a huge help to some of the small organizations with which I work. Pricing on digital cameras continues to decline as quality increases. This has created incredible opportunities for organizations working on shoestring budgets. But this digital revolution has brought its share of problems, as well. Many of my clients send me third-party photos, shot at low resolution, that are virtually unusable. Much of the photography I receive requires a lot of photo editing due to poor lighting and framing, and I am forever removing inappropriate objects from images. Though my digital enhancements make the use of these photos possible, the quality of these images rarely compares with photo work I receive from professionals. There is a difference between documenting or providing information about an event, person, or place, and making viewers feel or understand something about what they are seeing.

About digital technology

Although I always prefer to work with photography from professionals, there are situations in which that is impractical. I think money is well spent on a photographer when image building is paramount. But some situations simply require a reasonable photo of an individual or event. In that instance, a staff person with some understanding of photography, and enough knowledge to make best use of the camera at his or her disposal, can get the job done.

I know of several organizations that have invested serious money in very good digital cameras for their staff members. The expectation was that good cameras would produce good photos. No doubt the better cameras help, but the results are often disappointing. What good are bells and whistles without the skill and seasoning to use them effectively?

When I ask such folks about the resolution at which they are shooting, they often don't know how to answer. When I ask about whether they have considered shooting "raw" files, they draw a blank. When I ask what they do to frame photos, or what they altered within view of the viewfinder, most often, they don't really understand the question.

If using a professional photographer isn't in the cards due to budget limitations, the following tips may help you improve the quality of your digital photography.

Some things to consider

1. For best results, shoot "raw" format (sometimes called "digital negatives"). When shooting in raw format, the camera processes the image only minimally before storing it, so a greater range of color and detail is saved. (In fact, there is more detail than can be printed or viewed on a monitor.)
Opening a raw file in a program such as Photoshop activates controls that allows for very fine adjustment of a multitude of parameters such as exposure, clarity, vibrance, white balance, tint, etc. - parameters that are automatically applied by the camera's built-in settings when you save the photo as a jpeg. By using raw files, photos can be visually preprocessed to pull out the exact details and colors wanted before they get saved for printing or displayed on the web.

2. Alternately, shoot jpegs but set your camera to the highest resolution and least amount of compression possible. Jpeg compression is what's called "lossy" compression. In other words, to make file sizes smaller, the jpeg format discards detail from the image. The greater the amount of compression, the more detail is thrown out, and when you open the file, your image processing software will have to recreate the missing detail by "guessing" what should be there. Zoom in and take a look at the edges of objects in a jpeg file and you'll see pixilated areas of color around the edges where there should just be smooth color. These are the "artifacts" of jpeg compression. If the resolution is high and the image is going to go on the web, then scaling the image down to size can reduce or eliminate these artifacts. Printing is a different matter; you'll see these pixilated areas in their full glory.

Good times

Living, as we do, in a time of perpetual innovation, we would do well to embrace it in ways that enhance connection and understanding. I am awed by each technological leap and am ever thankful that I am able to serve my clients better as a result. I love that advances in photographic technology have allowed so many of my clients to provide reasonable images (at affordable cost) for their publications and websites. But we should never forget that technology is simply a tool and can never replace skill, craftsmanship, and artistic vision. Wrought by a master, a photograph has the power to include us in a moment. A great photograph can transport us from this reality to another, help us see or feel something about people and places beyond our reach, or remind us of what transcends or unites all moments.

About the author

David Gerratt, principal of DG Communications in Acton, Massachusetts, is a print and web communications consultant and graphic designer to the nonprofit, education, and cooperative sectors. For more than 25 years, he has been "promoting the good work of others by helping them look good."

David was ably assisted on this article by Michael Snow of Snow Creative. Michael has collaborated with David on more than 40 websites and many print projects. Michael has many years of experience working on the technical side of image processing and website coding, as well as in website and book design.

David extends editorial thanks to Debra Simes, an editor and writer working with clients who want their written products to reflect the care with which they do their own work; want to maintain their organizational voice in the editorial process - or find one; and look to improve the world.