Wonderful results. In fact, I had to do a double take… I thought it was Matt’s version.
Patricia.
1 Like
Terri,
You are really good at this. Both the bee and peppers are wonderful.
Patricia.
1 Like
So beautiful!! 
keep posting your work!
1 Like
Hello Terri @robichon , very nice. That one is on my list to do. I have a question for you and others who wish to comment. The photos of your work here generally look very good. How do you get the photos not to show every spec if white paper showing through?
Here lately I have been very pleased with the outcome of my artwork. However, not so much with the photos I take of the artwork. Maybe it is the resolution of my Samsung phone camera or the drawings are not as good as my eyes see it or I need to take everything to the point that the paper fails totally. My photos always seem to pick up every white spec on the paper even if the paper is covered in graphite, color or otherwise. I have done the piece, taken a photo, see a lot of white specs, gone back to the arwork, reworked the areas or whole piece, taken another photo, and all the white areas still show through somehow. They may be toned a little more, but show through none the less.
My phone camera has a much higher resolution than my older digital camera (which will only get to 720p resolution). Could that be the problem, too high of a resolution? Lighting? Camera angle? Closeness to the artwork? Just my eyesight, although I don’t think that is it because I can see two different products between artwork and photo. I’m at a total loss. When I share artwork, I want it to be truly representational of the drawing, but always makes me feel like I have to put it into Photoshop (which I don’t have) and add a light blur to before sharing. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Thanks
Lenet
Hi Lenet -
I understand the frustration. The photo above this group of comments was actually “scanned”. I have a multi-purpose printer / copy machine / scanner from Epson with flat bed capabilities of 11 x 17. I got it initially because I was doing a LOT of family ancestry work. I borrowed really old photos from family members, scanned them and then mailed them back to the owners. I actually used this scanner so much that I wore the machine out and had to order another one. I’m about to order my third one, but the model I have been using has been discontinued, so I have to research what models are currently made with that size of a scanning bed. Standard letter size is not big enough for my needs. I’m sure whatever I get will be an Epson because I really like their printers. (I have three printers right now including one that will print 13" wide high-quality photographs and digital scrapbook pages that are 12 x 12 - and I’m on my 4th one of those because of my high volume of use.) Anyway, when I scan I can preview the image and make some adjustments if it is not looking quite right.
I also have a cheaper version of Photoshop called “Photoshop Elements”. I have been using it for years because of my passion for digital scrapbooking. (I make a 2-page digital scrapbook layout every week to document our life and put it in a yearly book called “52 weeks”. I’ve made these since 2011 and it is the single most important creative thing I do without fail. The thing I like about “Elements” is that you buy the license (which you can put on two separate computers with the one license, if you want). There is NO MONTHLY FEE. The current version is 2024 and costs $99.99 (but I watch for sales, especially around holidays, and buy mine at a reduced price). My current version is from 2022. It will work forever, and I don’t need the cloud or internet access to use it. My previous versions (which I still have loaded and are functional) are version 7, 11 and 15 all from before they started coming up with new ones every year. This software does 85% of what the full version of Photoshop will do for a fraction of the cost, and if you are not a professional photographer or someone like Matt using it for other professional purposes, Adobe Photoshop Elements has the capability of doing pretty much everything you need. The thing is that there is definitely a learning curve if you really want to know how to use it. I took on-line lessons and regular practice to get proficient for it to meet my specific needs. But be aware that the commands in Elements are slightly different than in the full version of Photoshop. For instance: I don’t have a “camera raw filter” which Matt uses all the time, but I can do the same things in other ways. By the way, the full version of Adobe Photoshop is currently $22.99 / month (or $263.88 if you prepay on an annual basis) and I guarantee it will continue to go up since it started at $9.99 per month. The moment you quit paying your access is cut off. With Elements I own it forever on my own computer with no monthly fees. I usually go an average of 5 years before I buy a newer version, and I really wouldn’t have to do that.
I do all my “cropping” and “straightening” and color correction in Adobe Photoshop Elements. I also pre-plan my composition there, usually trying to figure out size of reference photos so that they will fit in standard size frames. Then I print my final reference photos (always including one to “trace my preliminary drawing from” and one to use as I create my artwork. I prefer to work from paper references rather than from a monitor or screen.
Crap, I know this is getting to be a long response, but I will continue. I usually can’t scan things I am currently working on because they are taped down to a larger surface. I have finally found a place in my house where I can prop those items for photographing them. I have an apple iPhone 11 which is my go to solution. By moving farther away from the image and then using the phones capability to zoom in, I can usually get an image that serves my purposes. If I’m really struggling to get something I’m happy with, I will switch to my big mirrorless camera (but I will tell you it is an expensive camera because I’ve done a lot of amateur photography of birds and other wildlife). Not to be a snob, the better the equipment, the more likely you are to get a better image (if you know how to use the equipment).
Lenet, I hope there is something in all this information that will be useful.
Terri Robichon
1 Like
Wow Terri that’s vibrant 
1 Like
Thanks Terri @robichon , I guess I wasn’t even thinking about the scanning process, since my printer/scanner is old and only do 8.5x11 size. I definitely appreciate the info especially on the printer/scanners since I do have that on my wish list. I am basically familar with Photoshop but usually had someone from marketing do my photoshop work for me at work. But since I recently retired a few months ago I don’t have that luxury of access to marketing or Photoshop for that fact right now. I use the free version of Sketchbook for my digital drawings but it doesn’t have near the capability of Photoshop or Elements.
I did reduce the resolution on my phone camera and that helped some. I will also try the distance and zoom trick until I can get proper scanning equipment. After really playing with settings, lower resolution and others settings, I realized that it was more of the paper texture being picked up than actual missed coverage. Part if my frustration comes when I photo the artwork, then display on my 70" TV, and flaws really show up. Helps me fix problems, but now have to work on the reproduction portion.
Thanks for the helpful information. I knew I could count on you for good information!
Lenet
1 Like
Glad I could help, at least a little.
Terri Robichon
Wow wow wow 
love this. So beautiful Terri
1 Like