> I suppose perceptions of 'perfect' are subjective and context sensitive but as
> it is possible to get the full brightness range that we are able to perceive
> onto film and from the film onto platinum/palladium sensitised paper, ie eight
> stops, I would like to know what kind of perfection I am missing out on.
>
> Is my perception of the meaning of 'brightness range' wrong?
>
> Terry king
It is impossible to get the full brightness range we can perceive onto film - as
you can confirm by the simple experiment of photographing a sunlit scene
containing areas of deep shadow and comparing the print (or negative) with the
original. Or you might like to use your spot meter to take readings of the
lightest and darkest points of such a scene.
This is of course dealt with fully in many of the standard texts - such as the
Ansel Adams series no doubt on your bookshelf!
One of the points that I have made before is that when you print a step wedge
the steps on the print no longer have the same density difference. Eight .3
steps on a wedge may correspond to a density range of only 1.4 on a platinum
print. This may well give a successful print as the different tones will remain
different, but the result will be quite different to a print that distributes
those same eight steps over a density range of 1.8 (or a glossy b/w silver print
hitting 2.1). Bigger isn't necessarily better (but different). There are plenty
of very fine photographs with density range of less than 1.0, though in some
ways a long scale gives you more to play with.
Peter Marshall
Family Album/Gay Pride - http://www.dragonfire.net/~gallery/index.html
Also on Fixing Shadows: ----------- http://fermi.clas.virginia.edu/~ds8s
Future Press and elsewhere... E-Mail: petermarshall@cix.compulink.co.uk