From: Stephen Harrison (SH@stephenharrison.com)
Date: 05/07/00-09:45:48 PM Z
>Jeff Mathias writes:
>I have seen many Pt/Pd prints made from digital negatives that appeared
>fine, although I may not have looked that carefully. I have not seen
>any of those prints along side a print from the original negative. This
>may be that digital negatives are used to enlarge the size of the
>image. I would suggest making a digital negative the same size as the
>original and reproducing the original as close as practical, then
>comparing prints from each. Are there differences in the highlights?
>Is the substance identical? Do the prints breath the same life? These
>are serious questions requiring serious answers.
Jeff: I have demonstrated at the last APIS conference in Sante Fe in 1999
that my 7x17 inch digital images compare very favorably with my continuous
tone digital images. Recall my images taken in India of Tibetans living in
exile which I photographed with a 7x17 inch Canham camera and can be viewed
at www.talismanpress.com If you recall, they are all digital images
scanned on a drum scanner with film made on an image setter and printed
from the resulting digital negative. I defy anyone, independent of their
level of photographic expertise, to tell which is the digital image and
which is the continuous tone platinum/ palladium image. I will place them
side by side and can guarantee that without a loupe, it is impossible to
discern the digital imposter except to say that the test is unfair in that
one may be subconsciously inclined to the digital because of the increased
control and the life that can exist both in the shadow detail and
highlights because of curves and that the " life breathed into the image"
of which you speak is no problem in today's age. I will demonstrate this at
the next APIS in Sante Fe with my Alaskan Landscape Series next year.
Stephen Harrison
>
>--
>Jeffrey D. Mathias
>http://home.att.net/~jeffrey.d.mathias/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 06/13/00-03:10:17 PM Z CST