The PPW (Picture Postcard Workflow)

[alajuela]

Just heard back from her: Dan Margulis is my friend's brother.

I was reasonably facile in Photoshop some years ago, facile enough to teach courses in it, but I've since simplified and realized my best work comes more directly from concentrating on my subject and getting exposure right in the camera. Holds true even for raw capture. So since 2006, I've moved more and more to using exclusively Lightroom and eschewing the kinds of elaborate image processing work that I used to do in Photoshop, to the point where nowadays I open PS once in a while at most to do some edge-case thing that Lightroom doesn't yet support. I haven't updated PSCS since v5.1 and kind of doubt I ever will. I'm happier, I spend less time in image processing and more time in considering what to shoot and how to shoot it.

Whatever gives you the results you want is how to get there.

I will endeavor to find a way to chat with DM at some point, now that I know there is a connection to be made. I've now read a little of his stuff and it sounds bears some relation so the late, great Bruce Fraser's work in image adjustment theory at the beginning of the digital age about a decade ago. It is interesting to make this connection now.

G

Hi Godfrey

Small world, If DM and his sister are anything alike - you have good taste in friends
Should come as no surprise, I am a fan of DM and his attitude and approach.
I was also sad when Bruce Frazier departed. He was one of my first introductions to raw files and color management.
I agree with you in getting right in the camera, I am not charitable on content, exposure or sloppy framing, especially in my own images :banghead:

For me - I always liked the darkroom and printing process, and that was my goal when I decided to go to digital.

Truth be told, there is so much to do and experiment with - that we seem to find an aspect which fascinates us, and gives us something to explore, to help express ourselves. This is a great thing, to keep trying and practicing, keep trying to surprise ourselves. Hopefully along the way, we raise our skill level :angel:

This being a PPW thread, I end this post with a :salute: to DM and my fellow travelers :chug:
Best

Phil

 

[Finbar258]

I agreed what is said above!

The methods he uses demand more expertise in PS than most have. They are not books for beginners by any means. He runs a color theory forum where many of the members are international experts in the field. It seems to be a rarified group, in a sense, of color and retouching experts.

Certain two facts on this post unequivocally the best we have all had. He operates a color concept community where many of the members are worldwide professionals in the field.

 

[Georg Baumann]

I read the canyon conundrum and others a few years back, but I am not so certain anymore if such treatments are really required today. I worked in LAB myself for some time, but if I look at the possibilitites and control that I have now in LR with HSL, shadows and highlights, and perhaps in combination with a dose of NIK brushed into Photoshop layers, I do not think that such workflow has bigger advantages anymore, except perhaps for those who work exclusively in photoshop and have a different method and tools for asset management.

 

[scatesmd]

Hi Georg,

That is the question for me. Given the tools we have, is the PPW workflow still superior? I know Margulis feels it is, but I don't know if comparisons to the results with Nik etc are still being done as the products evolve. I have not seen much about plugins on the color theory forum.

Thanks, Steve

 

[Georg Baumann]

For me it all comes down to print. So in a way it is easy to evaluate, try it with LR/NIK/Photoshop and compare with Dan's workflow in the print result. I would think with the NIk and LR workflow, I can get pretty much the same results.

His actions like the hammer probably make also use of micro contrast settings that would be equally achievable with brushing clarity and contrast settings.

I must say though, I have not made the above comparison, and I am not too concerend about the speed of workflow. That of course looks different for those who have to work speedily or those who do prodiuct photography with pantone settings etc. Not too sure how you would handle the latter in LR at all.

 

[NotXorc]

Since the thread is nearing a year old and I haven't had much to say through it's development, I thought it would be fun to post an update.

I have stayed with the PPW, investing little time in other methods. There are some great alternatives and specialist tools out there, but I have found very few images to which the PPW is not relevant. If I had more time to dabble, I'm sure I would find additional PS tools that would improve my work in the PPW further, or that could serve as substitutes for portions of it.

Most assuredly, it has taken an investment of time to gain better proficiency, and the speed has improved with practice. The PPW challenged my comfort zone in color, and has never been 100% failproof for me. However, I often find images, even the flagship images of some professional photographers, that I compulsively process using the workflow, just so that I can see the potential in the image realized. Sounds forceful, I know. Believe me, is not my great skill, but the synergy between the PPW panel and knowledge in how to employ the actions tastefully that makes all the difference.

I think the greatest endorsement that I can give of the workflow is that I am now teaching it to others. After my 17 high school students get an introduction to basic camera operations, lens work, and digital capture, they are introduced to RawTherapee. Their early voyages in PS help them understand the basics of curves and layers ... and then comes the PPW. It is my first time teaching it, but I am excited and optimistic that young people can learn the steps and attain at least a basic mastery with this tool.

 

[NotXorc]

In addition, I do print my work and use that as a litmus test for the effectiveness of a workflow. A recent print show was well received.

 

[scatesmd]

I have also stayed with the PPW and am trying to teach it to others now. I have found that my eye for color casts alone is much better. That, along with learning about Lab, has been worth the time easily.

Steve

 

[GlenC]

In addition, I do print my work and use that as a litmus test for the effectiveness of a workflow. A recent print show was well received.

:worthless:


It would be great to see one of your photos that was processed using the PPW method and also processed in LR to show the differences.

Glen

 

[NotXorc]

Harumph! Well, it has been doing all right until now without pics.
When I have some time, I'll consider posting an example.

 

[alajuela]

:worthless:


It would be great to see one of your photos that was processed using the PPW method and also processed in LR to show the differences.

Glen

Harumph! Well, it has been doing all right until now without pics.
When I have some time, I'll consider posting an example.

I agree with NotXorc
Personally I think people posting "compare pics" on post processing is a waste of time. Also missing the entire point. Dan Margulis is teaching a concept, either understand and buy into it or decide it is not for you.

As you read the entire post, it is mentioned that even the shots in the book are weak, it terms of showing the effects.

This is not Nik software (which I use and have been since 2004 and will continue to use)

I guess you must be open to color theory and understand that contrast and color are two entirely separate issues that are related.
Also feel comfortable checking color and understanding channels in different color spaces.

Personally I put him up there with Ansel Adams third book "The Print" which I still find relevant.

YMMV

Phil

 

[Georg Baumann]

Personally I put him up there with Ansel Adams third book "The Print" which I still find relevant.

Wow, these are heavy accusations Phil! ....chuckle

Well, you guys triggered my curiousity, when I am all setup again, I will have a closer look at his PPW concept.

Now, I wonder about Dan's relationship with Adobe. Jeff Schewe's sharpening tool made it into LR permanently. So, assuming Dan's concept to be of similiar generic value for post processing, I would want this to become equally part of LR. Then again, I must look in more detail what's exactly on offer there, besides the LAB/curves workflow.