From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 05/21/00-01:53:53 PM Z
On Sun, 21 May 2000, Jeffrey D. Mathias wrote:
> > ... I also have a Stouffer strip but I never use it as I don't like a set of
> > reducing rectangles on the bottom of the print. ...
Really, Randall, you're putting us on. You don't expose the step tablet on
the print; that's yucky. When you coat the paper, you coat a small extra
piece of the same -- about one inch by 6 inches is plenty. Then expose at
the same time -- or sequentially.
The advantage of this also is that you can give the separate strip a
standard test exposure and development time,to compare with other
"standards," so it's not just an isolated example without context or
referents. Obviously, a particular print often requires different exposure
and/or development, depending on negative, layer, aesthetic, etc. etc.,
which may not apply generally.
There's also little point in a 21-step for a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th layer, since
those precise conditions probably don't repeat. I myself test mostly new
materials or procedures, or when a puzzle of some kind is driving me to it
-- with a standard test exposure (for gum) of 3 min. with a one-hour soak.
Then, assuming you keep any kind of record at all, you have this example
to staple into the notebook. Even if not, you can clearly see what the
combo does, how it prints, and compare on an absolute scale to others,
absent the vagaries of a particular negative.
>... photographers (as do others) look for shortcuts at the risk of
> sacrificing the art. Only does a master come to a realization of the
> truth. So ponder how one becomes a master.
Well, shucks Jeffrey....you tempt me to say something indiscreet about
"masters." I'm also not sure that "pondering" has much to do with it, or
that "truth" gets you to great art, tho often facts are their own reward.
But "great art" is often conspiciously *lacking* in so-called "mastery,"
or certainly not vaunting it. No doubt, hwoever, the grand scheme of
things 'tis better to be crude by choice than necessity, probably.
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 : 06/13/00-03:10:20 PM Z CST