> why be obsessively
> technical and avoid the use of contrast control altogether as Terry King
> has mentioned at length.
A few succinct comments now and again but not at length.
And David said:
>>
Stephen, Then main problem with trying to create contrast lies in the obvious
"grain" that is created with the addition of any amount of solution B. Your
right about whatever works for the image is the way to go. I for one am no
fan of the Ansel Adams school of photgraphy...but I do find the "grain" to be
a problem and am looking for a way to increase the contrast without it.
David
When I first explored platinum printing I compared modern prints with those
produced a hundred years ago to establish a bench mark.
I found that too high a proportion of modern platinum prints were muddy and
grainy to the extent that the defects appeared to be the result of inadequate
technique rather than artistic intention.
As most one hunded year old platinum prints were produced on proprietary
prepared papers it was clear that the best prints depended upon the best
negatives. This may be because nobody kept the muddy ones.
I also found it disconcerting that many of the producers of modern prints with
muddy gradation had never seen a good platinum print by which to judge their own
work.
As to the Ansel Adams point, as communication of one's intention must be
paramount obviously one relates one's intention to the technique but it is also
true that inadquate technique can get in the way of communication.
Varying the proportion of pt to pd acts as a more than adequate contrast control
without graininess and muddiness.
Terry King