FotoDave@aol.com
Tue, 12 Jan 1999 14:28:59 -0500 (EST)
>>> On Mon, 11 Jan 1999 FotoDave@aol.com wrote:
>>> I know some of you are probably thinking that this fotodave must be crazy
> wallen@boulder.nist.gov writes:
> Nah, we already know this to be true <VERY BIG GRIN>.
Great! Now I feel more relaxed when I write/post. :)
> In general doubt that all of these assumptions are met.
>I'm wondering if
> in practice, you wouldn't get results that lie somewhere intermediate
> between the purely binary structure you describe, and a true continuous
> tone?
I agree and thank you for your explanation, and I feel excited that we are
getting into such detailed technical level. I did know (and have seen) the
effect of this intermediate characteristic, but I still think that for digital
negatives, the characteristic is closer to the pure binary model whereas in
silver the characteristic is closer to the pure continous-tone model.
But I admit that I was thinking more about coarser-dots negatives where the
dots were readily visible even under, say, a 8x loupe. For very small dots,
the characteristic might move more toward continous-tone. Hmmm..... should go
out and make a digital neg. with the highest resolution they can give me.
>> Or perhaps we need to refine your model <grin>.
Ok. refined!
Thanks and Best Regards,
Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:41