[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: development for alt-process
Shannon,
In Sam's earlier message he pointed out that your densitometer numbers--were
they something like .85 to 2.35?--indicated over-exposure and fairly correct
development for Pd. That assumes that you were shooting a 'normal' scene
with highlights and shadows that should be rendered as very bright and very
dark in the print. At least a stop less exposure would be indicated, with
the same development.
However, there is no one aim point for densitmeter readings from real world
negatives. First off, the probe can't read single values unless the subject
has big broad planes of even tone, like a gray card test. The probe is
always averaging tones in real subjects, and you aren't likely to find a
near-black (Zone I) value that's easy to read with the probe.
On another front, I've been doing a lot of snow scenes recently, and many of
them read out about like the "too dense" negative you described--in fact the
thinnest areas are sometimes over 1.00 and densest areas around 2.10 to
2.20. They print beautifully. There are no "blacks" in the print which is
perfectly appropriate for the subject. The huge masses of white and near
white are nuanced and lovely. Those densities were "correct" for those
subjects, whatever nominal ei the meter was set for. A different subject,
say a white building in sunlight surrounded by a pine forest, might meter
out with the white paint somewhere around 2.00 and the shadows under the
pines at .20 to .40 to print nicely in palladium with a full range in the
print from near maxiumum black to delicate near-white.
---Carl
--
Web site with workshop information and
**NEW PICTURE GALLERIES**
http://home.earthlink.net/~cweese/