From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 05/10/00-10:05:28 AM Z
On Wed, 10 May 2000 Kerik717@aol.com wrote:
> Nick,
>
> > I was dismayed to see the the shadow detail
> > did not compare favorably.
>
> I suspect that your negatives may need a bit more exposure. If your
> shadows are too thin, those low values can merge and lose separation
> in a platinum print. Hard to say without seeing your negs, though.
> What is your film/developer/time/temp/ASA combination?
>
Tho I normally would not presume to suggest anything to pt-pd printer,
this does strike me as a prime case for the white-card test. A quick way
to find out if the fault is in the match of process and negative is to
print a 21-step by the method & on the paper you're using, than with 2
white cards with holes punched in them on a light table, match the
shadows-to-highlight range (as explained at length with illustrations and
examples in P-F #1).
Even better, perhaps, you can match the utmost possible range of the
emulsion (with different papers and/or print strategies) against that of
RC paper...
Judy
.................................................................
| Judy Seigel, Editor >
| World Journal of Post-Factory Photography > "HOW-TO and WHY"
| info@post-factory.org >
| <http://rmp.opusis.com/postfactory/postfactory.html>
.................................................................
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 06/13/00-03:10:18 PM Z CST